Double Mocha Man

Touche. On the "no" voter thing. But like I said... feeding the sharks. I'm trying to find a middle ground for you guys but it seems like human lives come in second place to your need for total accuracy and fear of inconvenience.

No. They're going to look for you, maybe pull you over and ONLY arrest you if you blow over .08. The best part of that idea being that if you know you're drunk and you choose to drive anyway you're an easy target for law enforcement. I think it would deter a lot of people.

I hate to feed the sharks, but here goes. This is the elephant in the room (car) and nobody has noticed it yet. THC, meth, cocaine... other stuff; people are driving with this in their systems. And they're killing people. This new technology doesn't even account for that. It's close but they still haven't come up with a breathalyzer to detect THC levels in your system and most states haven't yet settled on an amount in your system that impairs driving. It's not like measuring alcohol. Though I'm still on board with your car testing you for impairment levels of alcohol. And here's an idea... instead of the system bricking your car how about if it shows you register above the legal limit then that info is forwarded to the local police and state patrol along with your plate number and your GPS location. That way only the truly guilty are caught and Pretzel can get out of that Denver parking garage... with a newer car of course, not diesel so his injectors and fuel lines clog with diesel gel. P.S. I drove that same 240D for years, though a one year older model.

I play all winter long. As mentioned earlier, wind (too strong) makes it a no-go. But otherwise, I have the rain gear, cold weather gear and hopefully the right attitude. Oh, and a flask with the right single-malt scotch. I walk, which keeps me warmer than riding into the wind in a cart. This snow day did not deter me. Local rules for that day were to remove your ball from any snow drifts, no penalty. But of course, no closer to the snow-covered green.

Well, that's a hell of a lot of drunk drivers on the road at any given time. Over 330 per hour, per state.

Whew Dead! Not sure if your statistics jive with this: Each day, people drive drunk more than 300,000 times, but only about 3200 are arrested. Arrest data: Federal Bureau of Investigation, “Crime in the United States: 2014” https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/tables/table-29 Incidence data: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Alcohol-Impaired Driving Among Adults — United States, 2012.” Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. August 7, 2015 / 64(30);814-817. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6430a2.htm

Disagree. I feel, in reading the article, they are trying to come up with a reasonable solution. Guessing your reasonable isn't my reasonable. Banning all cars would be like banning all golfers, to put an end to shanks. It's a joke. It's a joke. I'm required to use smiley faces these days because my humor is too subtle.😀😊😊😀

What if a device such as this reduced the alcohol related deaths to 3000, from 10,000? Too many alcohol related driving deaths are not the driver... but an innocent person being on the road at the wrong time. And sometimes the driver, let's say my sister Beth, a good person (not a habitual drunk driver) had one too many at her 10 year high school reunion. This device would keep her off the road too... if she had a newer car. And for her 30th reunion it would definitely keep her off the road, new car or old.

I'm for that. But if I'm running late to the golf course please allow me 5 over the speed limit... 😊

Up to this point the discussion has referred to "bricking" the car as meaning shutting it off while in the driving mode. If you fail the test (before any tires are rolling) you are probably over the limit in terms of alcohol in your system. With all due respect it comes down to this: Many of you are saying you'd rather people die than you personally having to give up a small right/convenience. I am sorry to say that but look closely at your arguments. I do like this site and wish to continue posting on it so I hope this statement doesn't get me banned. I think a lot of good folks in this excellent forum are reaching at straws to try to support their position. If you don't like having someone tell you what to do just say so... don't trump up weak arguments.

The "less intrusive" has already been laid out in your article... steering wheel, stop/start button. The IID has a hand held device with a long cable you pull from a holster on the dash. And the camera. And hell, our cars don't even work without fail, like our golf swings! But as I've researched and shared info with the forum the IID will not brick the car. And my bet would be the same with this new device.

I think the device we are discussing will be a lot less intrusive.

Already happening in most states.

Just some further info regarding Ignition Interlock Devices, which, in part will supply some of the technology for this new, pre-installed device: 1. The device only affects the car starter. 2. There is no documented information claiming it ever shut down or bricked a car while it was driving. 3. The device has a random re-test mode that asks you to stop at the next safe area to retest your breath. ('Cause I suppose you could be sipping from that bottle next to you while driving?) It will not stop the car on its own. But if you fail to retest that info is forwarded to the company that installed the device via internet and they are obligated to report it to the state and your term of probation will be extended and you may be fined. As an aside I am sure you can wear gloves to keep your hands warm... just needing to remove them for the brief moment of testing. And again, personally, I will accept the inconvenience and related costs to keep the road safer than it is now... for me, my loved ones and everyone on this forum. Oh, and it is something, like other safety devices, that will be phased in over the years. So if you have an older car you'll be exempt. But over 15 years a very high percentage of cars need to be replaced. Like seat belts, eventually they showed up on most cars, except classics.

I read the article too. This is the statement: "Another possible solution are sensors to monitor a driver's eye movement and breath." It said nothing about the car moving. It was part of the paragraph that was speaking to solutions before you could even start the car. This is what Pretzel said about laws... "The majority of them don't do anything to inconvenience or endanger those that follow the law in any way throughout their daily lives." I agree with that. But I do hate using my turn signal when I'm on a country road and there's no vehicle within a half-mile of me. 😊 And for the record, I am fine with laws that inconvenience me if they are going to save lives, especially mine.