Toyota developing blood alcohol sensor in steering wheels

[Looger]

Originally Posted by jar_e

Just as I said in the post before...that assumption is as valid as me assuming it won't happen.

it is in danger of happening based entirely on what people in this thread have already said:

it makes us safer.

[calf]

Originally Posted by Looger

this is actions against ALL drivers, until code written on a chip decides what to do with that data, based on what agenda wrote the paycheque of the firmware developer.

how is it an action against all drivers? I seriously want to know...because I don't really see how you're getting from steering wheel sensors to police state tracking our every move...

[Looger]

Originally Posted by calf

how is it an action against all drivers?

as stated before, it is the collection of data on our BAC, something that the police need to have a reason to collect.

EDIT: no ill will here, but i keep answering the same questions. i'm out.

[algernon]

Maybe the up side of this could include stopping the average dude from making a mistake and losing his licence. Maybe a scientific way to measure your BAC regularly could lead to a change in habits, leading to an overall (voluntarily) decrease in drunks on the road. Every drunkdriver says ' I'm not that drunk...'

[calf]

Originally Posted by Looger

as stated before, it is the collection of data on our BAC, something that the police need to have a reason to collect.

EDIT: no ill will here, but i keep answering the same questions. i'm out.

sorry - no ill will either...I'm just trying to get a clearer understanding of where you're coming from...asking clarifying questions is a part of a decent discussion, imo.

AFAIK, police cannot collect evidence from you until they have sufficient reason to collect such information from you. I too see them collecting information with no basis as an attack on civil liberties, but there's no indication, in my opinion, that this is where this invention leads. It leads to a device that acts like a governor if you're drunk - which is good, imo. It doesn't allow police to collect information from you with no basis, which is also good....and I don't think anyone else would really stand for that...which is why your link to the police state doesn't make sense to me.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by calf

It doesn't allow police to collect information from you with no basis, which is also good....and I don't think anyone else would really stand for that...which is why your link to the police state doesn't make sense to me.

the information that is traded without our knowledge, is staggering.

as stated above, this technology by itself isn't what i'm worried aboot.

what worries me is when the other tracking and logging technologies, already in some rental cars and fleet cars, are combined with things like this and entire profiles are assembled on us, available for download when we blast through the gate on the toll highway.

[ratech]

He's not talking about the now. He has clearly stated that this will help the government, and more importantly the money brokers, to monitor our every step in the future, as they are using existing technology now. It has nothing to do with drinking and driving, which I'm sure he is against, but about the way technology enhancements make it easier for the man to overwhem us.
Peace out.

[Flames0910]

what worries me is when the other tracking and logging technologies, already in some rental cars and fleet cars, are combined with things like this and entire profiles are assembled on us, available for download when we blast through the gate on the toll highway.

paranoid much? the governer in your car doesn't send a message with gps info about your speeding and location to the cops so they can give you a ticket and neither would this

[moon]

Originally Posted by Looger

the information that is traded without our knowledge, is staggering.

Everyone is out to get us. The sky is falling.

How do we manage to get by in the world with all the shady conspiracies going on in the world today.

People can trade all the info on me they need to. Go wild with it.

[Looger]

Originally Posted by TanguayFan

paranoid much? the governer in your car doesn't send a message with gps info about your speeding and location to the cops so they can give you a ticket and neither would this

Big Brother is Driving You
Controversial and creepy technology, which lets car rental agencies track whether drivers are speeding, finally has its day in court. Privacy loses.
New Haven Advocate | June 3 2004
It took a jury of six Connecticut residents only about 40 minutes to decide that ultimately, Big Brother can ride shotgun.
On Tuesday, May 25, the case involving Acme Rent-a-Car--the notorious New Haven rental car company that used a satellite tracking device to catch customers speeding--finally came to a speedy and eerily quiet close.

However, the decision in the case of Turner v. American Car Rental may open dangerous doors.
James Turner sued Acme (American Car Rental) in New Haven Superior Court for invasion of privacy and violating the state's Unfair Trade Practices Act, after Acme--automatically and without permission--withdrew $450 from his bank account for speeding in an Acme minivan. The Whalley Avenue agency had equipped its vehicles with a global positioning device, which tracks customers' locations and driving habits.

how long before this information is used against us when we insure a vehicle or get a new license etc.?

information is traded all the time, and as soon as a government can chase people for this (money), they will.

[moon]

Originally Posted by Looger

as stated before, it is the collection of data on our BAC, something that the police need to have a reason to collect.

EDIT: no ill will here, but i keep answering the same questions. i'm out.

The reason is that you are operating a motor vehicle. I see nowhere that they will require a chip to walk down the street or sit at home.

Even if they did who cares if the police knows your BAC?

[moon]

Originally Posted by Looger

how long before this information is used against us when we insure a vehicle or get a new license etc.?

information is traded all the time, and as soon as a government can chase people for this (money), they will.

Then don't speed when you use a rental car. Problem solved. No need to worry about info being used against you.

[jolinar of malkshor]

It comes down to this. Driving is a privilage...NOT a right. So there should be no problems with this kind of restrictions being placed on drivers.

[Burninator]

Interesting thread, I understand what Looger is getting at, and I agree with him. I totally think that curbing drunk driving is a great idea, however I don't agree with the direction Toyota is heading. More rules and restrictions doesn't mean safer imo. This has the possibilty to open the door to more rules and more restrictions on your car or whatever. Next could be speed monitors, then gps, then a camera that watches if you pick your nose, etc. The more restrictions you have the more easily stricter ones can be impossed on you.

Putting blood alcohol sensors in a car is such a reactionary decision. Why don't we invest more money into stopping the causes of drunk driving? Stop the problem before people get drunk and get into their Corolla to discover it won't start. We need to get it into peoples head to not even attempt driving drunk, instead of having the car saying who is drunk or not.

Why do we always have to monitor people? This kind of reminds of England and their huge camera system which did nothing in preventing crime. I would however have no problem if this blood sensoring system was used for people who have been convicted.

[Mango]

Originally Posted by Burninator

Interesting thread, I understand what Looger is getting at, and I agree with him. I totally think that curbing drunk driving is a great idea, however I don't agree with the direction Toyota is heading. More rules and restrictions doesn't mean safer imo. This has the possibilty to open the door to more rules and more restrictions on your car or whatever. Next could be speed monitors, then gps, then a camera that watches if you pick your nose, etc. The more restrictions you have the more easily stricter ones can be impossed on you.

Why do we always have to monitor people?

Your post is valid and in fact made me re-think the whole issue. I guess it is hard sometimes to look at the "big picture" so to speak, because the whole point of such a device is to prevent drunk driving. While I certainly support the prevention of drunk driving, is this the right way to go? It makes me worrisome because many alternatives (eg. with only a small percentage of money actually going to MAAD) aren't as strong as they were presented in the past. Perhaps a harder press for AA? Getting the message out to schools more? So much can be done and I definitely agree prevention is the first step.

[Looger]

man, this whole board is going squirrely, people are agreeing with me!

i should switch names and crank the paranoia and hysteria up a notch, get some spice back into calgarypuck...

[calf]

Originally Posted by Mango

Your post is valid and in fact made me re-think the whole issue. I guess it is hard sometimes to look at the "big picture" so to speak, because the whole point of such a device is to prevent drunk driving. While I certainly support the prevention of drunk driving, is this the right way to go? It makes me worrisome because many alternatives (eg. with only a small percentage of money actually going to MAAD) aren't as strong as they were presented in the past. Perhaps a harder press for AA? Getting the message out to schools more? So much can be done and I definitely agree prevention is the first step.

I too agree...although not to the extremes as Looger, the point has been made & I can totally see & agree with it, to an extent. The only problem being that prevention can only do so much. For me, I've been bombarded with the drunk driving message in school, the media, at home, etc. There are idiots all over the place who won't play by the rules...installation in every car is likely overboard, and putting it in the cars of only those who have a DUI is reactionary to the point where it doesn't really do anyone any good given what may have happened when the DUI occured. Not sure where the happy medium would be to satisfy those that want safer roads and those concerned with where this technology may lead.

[Wookie]

Originally Posted by Looger

if we have to hang disclaimers and addendums on everyday things we take for granted like driving a car, then we are in trouble.

Are you against drivers licenses? Seatbelts? Eye Tests? Traffic Laws? Where does one line stop and the other begin?

Honeslty, I could not care less!

Sure make me blow before I drive! If it saves one life I'm all for it!

Let me know what freedoms I've lost in the 27 years I've been on the planet earth and I'll let you know if I care one bit about any of them!

[Patek23]

what if you have just recently spilled alcohol on your hands but have had nothing to drink?

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Wookie

Are you against drivers licenses? Seatbelts? Eye Tests? Traffic Laws? Where does one line stop and the other begin?

Honeslty, I could not care less!

Sure make me blow before I drive! If it saves one life I'm all for it!

Let me know what freedoms I've lost in the 27 years I've been on the planet earth and I'll let you know if I care one bit about any of them!

This isn't about seatbelts or eyetests, this is a technology that presumes you guilty and you have to prove your innocence. This is backwards to how our system is supposed to run.