It seems like new cars will be able to detect if a driver is drunk, preventing at least 9,000 car accidents from happening.
The Driver Alcohol Detection Systems for Safety, as it is called, would use touch-based sensors that analyze the driver's breath through their skin; these sensors would either be placed on the steering wheel or the door handle. If the sensor detects that the driver is drunk (at a blood alcohol content of .08), then it would prevent the car from starting. Many believe that this new sensor system will be able to protect lives and prevent drunk driving. However, the system will not be put into new cars for at least 8-10 years as more tests need to be made in order to ensure the accuracy of the system.
There is already opposition to this system as some believe that it will not be very reliable. In addition, a person's blood alcohol content can rise and fall depending on different factors, such as much someone eats and how recently they drank an alcoholic beverage. This system can also prevent sober people from being able to drive their cars; Sarah Longwell, an opponent of this detection system, explains, "It's going to eliminate the ability of people to have a glass of wine with dinner or a beer at a ball game and then drive home, something that is perfectly safe and currently legal in all 50 states."
Trump’s NY Criminal Trial, Day 8 and Open Thread
2 hours ago
3 comments:
'"It's going to eliminate the ability of people to have a glass of wine with dinner or a beer at a ball game and then drive home, something that is perfectly safe and currently legal in all 50 states.'
I dont understand this argument. would one beer or glass of wine really bring your BAC level to .08? Even if it does, I still believe this technology would drastically reduce the number of alcohol related accidents. People need to realize that one drink is not worth the 9000 lives that could be saved annually by employing this system.
I think that these new sensors are a good idea. If not having a glass of wine or beer for dinner means that we can prevent 9,000 car accidents from occurring, I think it's worth it.
Although I don't know if this would be the most effective manner to prevent drunk driving. I watched a news clip about this a while ago and it argued that a drunk driver could technically have a sober person fill in for them to verify soberness, allowing the car to start up and the drunk driver to drive.
Would there be a way for the system to verify that the person being sensed by the sensors is the actual owner of the car and not some fill in?
I think the idea behind this is definitely reasonable and is something that has the potential to prevent drunk driving, which results in thousands of deaths per year. 8-10 years seems plenty of time to make any necessary adjustments to the system, since opposition clearly tells us that there is some. In response to the video that Michelle Yu mentioned, if a sober person is allowing a drunk person to drive in the first place, then that is their fault. Starting up the car and basically initiating that recipe for disaster is idiotic and irresponsible on their side. The sober person should ALWAYS be the driver in those situations.
In any case, I think it should be appreciated that this idea has been pursued at all. It is very clear that many people drink and believe that they won't be one of the unfortunate people who get into an accident - and yet it seems that those people who take those kinds of risks are the ones who almost always are hurt by them. Of course there are going to be some initial faults to the system, but I believe that years of work and effort will lead to a better system that will help teens and adults drive safely.
Post a Comment