MADD campaingning to erradicate drunk driving entirely

[Vic]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Please answer my question.

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
having it my car doesn't really help any if the next guy doesn't have it in his does it?

Why not? It's stopping you from from driving drunk and killing someone.

"Most people mistake their own faults for those of society, and then try to fix society because they don't know how to fix themselves." -- Isaac Asimov

He may or may not answer me. I don't blame him, I've been heckling pretty badly. (I hope he doesn't go Kramer on me)

Where I was going with that whole line of questioning was that it's going to come down to "But it's not me that's the problem. We need to stop other people from driving drunk, not me." That was the inevitable conclusion based on his answer of "It's worthless unless everyone does it." In reality, he's saying "People don't need protection from me, I need protection from them."

But then, why can't everyone else who thinks like him that they're not the problem get that same self exemption from presumed guilt? He's shown his true colors. He's an elitist bastard who thinks everyone else is the problem. So yeah, your quote pretty much nailed it.

No dude my whole argument was for it to be mandatory for all. not just me. If its mandatory for me then there are still going to be thousands killed each year and many thousands more injured. not every opposing view of your own comes down to the other person being elitist in their view.

You don't even understand logic, so I give up. You are hopeless.

IMO he pulled some self-pwnage there.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Please answer my question.

Originally posted by: BoberFett

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim
having it my car doesn't really help any if the next guy doesn't have it in his does it?

Why not? It's stopping you from from driving drunk and killing someone.

"Most people mistake their own faults for those of society, and then try to fix society because they don't know how to fix themselves." -- Isaac Asimov

He may or may not answer me. I don't blame him, I've been heckling pretty badly. (I hope he doesn't go Kramer on me)

Where I was going with that whole line of questioning was that it's going to come down to "But it's not me that's the problem. We need to stop other people from driving drunk, not me." That was the inevitable conclusion based on his answer of "It's worthless unless everyone does it." In reality, he's saying "People don't need protection from me, I need protection from them."

But then, why can't everyone else who thinks like him that they're not the problem get that same self exemption from presumed guilt? He's shown his true colors. He's an elitist bastard who thinks everyone else is the problem. So yeah, your quote pretty much nailed it.

No dude my whole argument was for it to be mandatory for all. not just me. If its mandatory for me then there are still going to be thousands killed each year and many thousands more injured. not every opposing view of your own comes down to the other person being elitist in their view.

You don't even understand logic, so I give up. You are hopeless.

no if anything im an extremist. Either have a free for all with drinking n driving or do what is necessary so that it can't happen. This in between crap solves nothing.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

I have a problem with people making stupid threads in ATOT. I think everyone should be required to pass an IQ test before they can post here.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteven
I have a problem with people making stupid threads in ATOT. I think everyone should be required to pass an IQ test before they can post here.

most intelligent post ever!!! A++++++ my IQ skyrocketed after reading!!!! will read again!!!

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

They wear gloves, genius. By the way, they said "northern states," not "north east."

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteven

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

They wear gloves, genius. By the way, they said "northern states," not "north east."

yeah it would probably take them forever to figure out that they had to take a glove off for a few seconds before they started it. I'm actually fairly certain they could incorporate this technology on to a key chain for remote starters. its really not complicated as sending a man into outer space.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material (or whatever the hell they're thinking of) on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteven

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

They wear gloves, genius. By the way, they said "northern states," not "north east."

yeah it would probably take them forever to figure out that they had to take a glove off for a few seconds before they started it. I'm actually fairly certain they could incorporate this technology on to a key chain for remote starters. its really not complicated as sending a man into outer space.

That depends if it requires the sober person to maintain constant contact between their hand and the wheel. It's too damned cold where I live to drive without gloves on during most of the Winter.

 

[Gooberlx2]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Feldenak
No way would I be good with that crap being installed in my car. I'm not a criminal and will not be treated as one.

I'm sure you don't have a meth lab either but the pharmacy is still going to limit your sudafed purchases.

Yeah, because it's such an inconvenience that eh can't buy thousands of sudafed pills at one time. One might consider it to be inconvenient if they can't get home from dinner because they had one desert wine.

if one drink or 1000 drinks gives you more than the legal limit then you shouldn't be driving. end of story.

Well guess what, one drink doesn't put me over the legal limit, but since alchohol vapors would still be present in my mouth (in this case), a breathalyzer would fail.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

You seem to assume the technology is flawless, why can't he assume it is faulty?

 

[sswingle]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

Too bad you need to start the car to warm it.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Feldenak
No way would I be good with that crap being installed in my car. I'm not a criminal and will not be treated as one.

I'm sure you don't have a meth lab either but the pharmacy is still going to limit your sudafed purchases.

Yeah, because it's such an inconvenience that eh can't buy thousands of sudafed pills at one time. One might consider it to be inconvenient if they can't get home from dinner because they had one desert wine.

if one drink or 1000 drinks gives you more than the legal limit then you shouldn't be driving. end of story.

Well guess what, one drink doesn't put me over the legal limit, but since alchohol vapors would still be present in my mouth (in this case), a breathalyzer would fail.

the steering wheel would not operate on Breathalyzer. One drink can put you over the limit if it contains enough alcohol. Those megamargaritas you can get at some restaurants could certainly wipe you out after 1. a glass of wine.....no. a 12 oz. beer no. it depends WHAT the drink is and how many ounces of alcohol it contains.

 

[sswingle]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

Take the bus whenever it is cold? And you say this isn't inconvenient?

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteven

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

You seem to assume the technology is flawless, why can't he assume it is faulty?

he is pointing out obvious potential flaws. They would need to test the device in whatever climates its going to be used in obviously.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

Take the bus whenever it is cold? And you say this isn't inconvenient?

take your glove off for a couple seconds then.

 

[sswingle]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

Take the bus whenever it is cold? And you say this isn't inconvenient?

take your glove off for a couple seconds then.

You must not have read C up above. Here it is again:

c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

 

[ShotgunSteven]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

Take the bus whenever it is cold? And you say this isn't inconvenient?

take your glove off for a couple seconds then.

If it only required contact to start it, then it would be easy enough to get someone else to do it then wear gloves while driving. Likely they would require you to maintain skin contact while driving, which isn't a realistic option in colder climates.

 

[JS80]

if they found right to killing babies in the constitution, i'm sure they'll find right to drive without this thing in it too.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

Take the bus whenever it is cold? And you say this isn't inconvenient?

take your glove off for a couple seconds then.

You must not have read C up above. Here it is again:

c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

:roll: yeah that would be impossible to work around. surely they could engineer the device to accommodate the warm and cold climates and the issues that arise.

 

[nakedfrog]

Originally posted by: JS80
if they found right to killing babies in the constitution, i'm sure they'll find right to drive without this thing in it too.

Well placed partisan non-sequitur, I applaud you, good sir.

 

[IceBergSLiM]

Originally posted by: ShotgunSteven

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

take your glove off for a couple seconds then.

If it only required contact to start it, then it would be easy enough to get someone else to do it then wear gloves while driving. Likely they would require you to maintain skin contact while driving, which isn't a realistic option in colder climates.

lets face it nobody in this thread has posted any potential pitfalls that a team of engineers couldn't design around. All these things are obvious and would have to be considered in the engineering phase. you are speculating on this device as if it was going to be designed by a room of full of 12 year olds using a Lego set.

 

[sswingle]

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: ScottSwingleComputers

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: IcebergSlim

Originally posted by: Gooberlx2

Originally posted by: TravisT
The technology was said to happen on contact through your skin on the steering wheel. There would be no penalty to having this technology for those that didn't drive intoxicated. I would be in favor of having the technology to know that my safety is being looked after while i'm on the road. Afterall, many cases the drunken driver survives the fatality accident in which they caused.

This isn't about protecting the drunken drivers, because hoenstly, i don't care. I care about my child in the backseat of my car when the intoxicated person steps behind the wheel of a car.

Which won't work in any northern states in the winter.

people in the north east don't have hands in the winter?

a) I said North, not northeast
b) gloves are a necessity at the single digit and lower temperatures
c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

d) if you think I'm gonna wait around for the car to heat and and my hands to get their blood back, and maybe miss work just because you (and other people like you) are trying to steer the system towards assuming I'm guilty before being proven innocent, then you're crazy.

take the bus then. you are assuming faults in a technology based on zero evidence of their validity. Can we start testing windows office 2012 for bugs before its been programmed?

Take the bus whenever it is cold? And you say this isn't inconvenient?

take your glove off for a couple seconds then.

You must not have read C up above. Here it is again:

c) even if we aren't wearing gloves, ever wonder why your fingers turn white in the cold...that's your blood withdrawing into the core of your hand to protect and heat the more important tissues and organs. There likely wouldn't be enough blood material on the surface of your hands to get an accurate reading.

:roll: yeah that would be impossible to work around. surely they could engineer the device to accommodate the warm and cold climates and the issues that arise.

Not enough blood is hard to "work around" You already admit breath wont work. Do you want us to stick our leg up to the wheel instead? How about a urine sample? It can test for other drugs at the same time!