Mandatory Breathalyzers Could Soon Be in Every Car If Feds Have Their Way

[TeeYiYi]

John Vibes
September 21, 2015

(ANTIMEDIA) The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers is currently working on a plan to put alcohol detection systems in every vehicle. The plan, called Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS), is still in its early stages, and they have not yet decided exactly how it will be implemented.

Some have suggested a system similar to Interlock, the breath system that people are required to install in their cars after they get a DUI. The device prevents the vehicle from starting unless the driver is able to breathe into the device to prove they are not under the influence of alcohol. However, less complicated equipment is being devised, like sensors that test the alcohol level in the breath of the driver as they sit in the driver’s seat or a touch system that would detect alcohol levels through the skin.

This technology will not just be used for DUI cases, though. The NHTSA is actually hoping to implement this in every vehicle on the road. As it wrote in one of its recent reports:

“While government regulations play an important role in ensuring vehicle safety, voluntary approaches to the design and implementation of vehicle safety systems are increasing in importance as vehicle manufacturers deploy safety systems well in advance of, and even in the absence of, government regulations requiring them. This paper provides an overview of regulatory and non-regulatory approaches to vehicle technology development and deployment, and will describe a new, innovative public/private partnership underway to develop an in-vehicle alcohol detection system.”

The report went on to indicate that these devices would be mandatory...

More: http://theantimedia.org/mandatory-breathalyzers-could-soon-be-in-every-car-if-feds-have-their-way/

TYY

[jberryhill]

1. "The report went on to indicate that these devices would be mandatory"

And does the report indicate that click-baity headline writers are thoroughly ignorant of the Administrative Procedure Act process for implementing stuff like this?

Unlikely.

[TeeYiYi]

4. I left the next paragraph out...

...due to copyright restrictions. Here you go:

The report went on to indicate that these devices would be mandatory:

“In recognition that many alcohol-impaired drivers have not been convicted of DWI, an effort is underway to develop advanced invehicle technologies that could be fitted in vehicles of all drivers to measure driver blood alcohol concentration non-invasively. The Automotive Coalition for Traffic Safety (ACTS, a group funded by vehicle manufacturers) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) have commenced a 5- year cooperative agreement entitled Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) to explore the feasibility of, and the public policy challenges associated with, widespread use of invehicle alcohol detection technology to prevent alcohol-impaired driving.”

TYY

[jberryhill]

5. Yeah, a feasibility study is a long way of from even a proposed regulation of any kind

[TeeYiYi]

6. Hopefully I'll be dead by then.

TYY

[HassleCat]

2. Asking for trouble

Seat belts, air bags, etc. do not prevent you from starting the car or driving it. I think the closet thing we have is that device that prevents you from moving the shift level out of PARK unless your foot is on the brake. The first time somebody dies because the car would not start, there will be trouble.

[ryan_cats]

3. I fully support this

I fully support this.

Those selfie sticks cause far too many injuries and deaths.