Toyota Creating In-Vehicle Alcohol Detection System

srizah writes "Toyota is developing an Alcohol Detection System that can detect drunken drivers and would immobilize the car when it detects excessive alcohol consumption. From the article: 'Cars fitted with the detection system will not start if sweat sensors in the driving wheel detect high levels of alcohol in the driver's bloodstream, according to a report carried by the mass-circulation daily, Asahi Shimbun. The system could also kick in if the sensors detect abnormal steering, or if a special camera shows that the driver's pupils are not in focus. The car is then slowed to a halt, the report said.'"

Re:Ob

[Aladrin]

Bzzzt. Ah, sorry, thanks for playing though.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0062622/quotes [imdb.com]
"I'm sorry Dave, I'm afraid I can't do that. "

Re:Ob

[flimnap]

"I'm sorry, Dave, but you're drunk and I won't allow you to start operating a heavy metal object which could kill many people if you're not alert." Not quite as catchy, I suppose.

These are already used in Australia, anyway. If you're convicted of a drink-driving offence, then your car must be fitted with an alcohol interlock [vic.gov.au] for at least six months.

Re:Dangerous

[Mogster]

I'd personally add automatic transmission to that list. A clutch allowing driver controlled engine braking gives far more control over the vehicle than an auto.

Re:Software Glitch

[Nephilium]

Hmmm... ever wonder what the term "alcohol related accidents" actually means? Here's some of the meanings:

1.) A measurable amount of alcohol means anything above .00 percent, up to and including a sip of beer or cough medicine.

2.) Drivers impaired by drugs, be it aspirin, cough syrup, crack or heroin, are often counted as drunk drivers.

3.) If a pedestrian is involved and has a measurable amount of alcohol it is considered alcohol-related.

4.) If a passenger has alcohol in his system, it is considered alcohol related.

5.) If the accident is a sober driver's fault (i.e. a sober driver runs a red light and crashes into a driver who had a beer after work) it is alcohol-related.

6.) If the residual presence of alcohol is found (an empty beer can) it is considered alcohol related, even if tests prove no one has any alcohol in their systems.

7.) The NHTSA arbitrarily adds 9% to all the alcohol-related statistics it receives from the states. Why? Because they feel like it.

8.) To further inflate the numbers, The NHTSA just started using what they call the Multiple Imputation Method to inflate alcohol-related statistics even more. The method automatically assumes that anyone involved in an accident who was not tested for BAC (probably because they were obviously sober) could actually have been drunk, and the numbers are jacked up by a set percentage.

Kind of changes the numbers a bit, doesn't it? Numbers are meaningless unless you know what they mean. But continue pushing for prohibition if you wish... but be honest at least...

All material taken from the article Fighting Madd [drunkard.com].

Nephilium

A man who doesn't drink is not, in my opinion, fully a man. -- Anton Pavlovich Chekhov, Russian author

Re:Ob

[Beuno]

Well, if you're drunk you might not be that smart...

Re:FUCK YOU, spin-master.

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Also... look into the actual statements of MADD, and look what they're fighting for... and look into a nobody named Candy Lightner, and check into her current job, and why she is currently doing it.

Cliff notes for the lazy:

• Candy Lightener started MADD, succeeded in her mission, and was forced out my a bunch of fanatics
• MADD is currently working to stigmatize alcohol consumption and enact defacto prohibition

Re:Ob

[x2A]

I've always found it easier to recognise when someone's stoned than coked up, but the thing is, when stoned, people tend to compensate and drive slower and put more attention into it, often to the extent that they're actually more careful, safer drivers while stoned, then while straight. But then the effects of green are somewhat different, the biggest danger is that you'd forget where you're going and end up somewhere else *lol*

"and most who use coke don't do it while drinking (it would be a waste)"

That's completely untrue. "When there is alcohol and cocaine present in the blood stream, as is usually the case, the two form an even more potent stimulant - cocaethylene, an ethyl homologue of cocaine" (see 1 [ic.ac.uk], 2 [wikipedia.org])

expense

[sir 8ed]

I am not sure how Toyota's interlock will work, but the ones that they use here for multiple offenders (here in MA, with Melanie's law) require monthly calibrations which are said to cost $60-80.

Re:Ob

[CastrTroy]

In Canada, the law says they can arrest you for being in "Care and Control" of a vehicle while drunk. I think they can arrest you for just starting the car, so as to stop you before you cause damage. So technically if your car detected you were drunk, then you could already be in trouble. If they see you pulled over on the side of the road, they may have cause to arrest you. Maybe this isn't such a bad idea. I think that cars are dangerous enough without having drunken people driving them. Personally, if I know i'm going to be driving, I try not to drink at all, or at most have 1 or 2. I don't want my reaction time any slower than it has to be with all the other idiots (drunken or not) on the road.

Re:Ob

[jafiwam]

Depending on the state, yes.

In some states it's illegal to drive drunk on private property. (Like being in your driveway.) For example, that Mythbusters episode on the subject of drunk vs. cell phone, the cops wouldn't let them drive on a private lot. In WI, you can get blasted, and drive around your back 40 all you want.

On the other hand, getting out of a bar, realizing you are too drunk, and sleeping it off in your own back seat in the bar parking lot will also get you arrested for driving drunk.

Those fucking MADD people have lost their way, and are actively pushing all these draconian laws. They want to ban any sort of alcohol completely, not just make the roads safer. Their original founder thinks they are whack now even....

http://www2.potsdam.edu/hansondj/InTheNews/Drinkin gAndDriving/1059064892.html [potsdam.edu]