As soon as someone dares to question that it might be the most sensible approach to break 90 might not be trying to hit the ball as far as you can at the tee box every time, in the words of The Joker, "EVERYONE LOSES THEIR MINDS!!!"
Dang it, two weeks in a row I missed the deadline. I forgot Korea was in a very different time zone (almost wrote "timeline").
I also started Evan Engram in fantasy football last week, so maybe I'm just bad at this whole "set a reasonable lineup" thing.
This is vastly different from a turn signal.
This is a device that will do several things:
Increase the price of all cars manufactured with it
Introduce an extra critical failure point that will literally brick your car if it breaks, with guaranteed costly repairs (car electronics are never cheap)
Introduce the possibility that your car won't work because it thinks you're drunk when you aren't - dangerous in a number of different circumstances
Possibly prevent you from wearing gloves while driving if it requires contact with skin
Possibly cut ignition to your vehicle and cause accidents if it malfunctions while driving - dangerous in a number of different circumstances
All of those are much larger issues than having to lift your finger an inch or two off the steering wheel to press the turn signal stalk. It still wouldn't even necessarily save lives either, because drunk drivers can still drive any car that doesn't have a device installed - of which tens of millions exist in the United States alone. It would impact less than 10% of vehicles on the road and impact less than 0.33% of deaths in the US each year, but it would add major concerns and hassles to the lives of every single person who wants to purchase a new vehicle.