Buy stock in straw companies.
As you, I have absolutely no idea what you are referring to. I never mentioned any DWI family story. Back to straws I guess. Whatever. A little black coffee?
The comment was entered as a reply to the post about a DWI who was ordered by the judge to visit the family of his victim. I donāt know why it was posted to you.
Except that, as was noted a number of times by posters, the likelihood of such devices ever appearing on vehicles is slim to none.
That was @ok4450 from Oklahoma. Nothing to do with me. All I will say is watch your blood pressure. There are serious things to get upset about instead.
It was posted as a reply to him, as I said. (Is English your first language? Second?). Iām not upset, your posts are funny, keep them coming.
I donāt even like the idea of GPS monitors that report your āsafeā driving to your insurance company for lower rates. My fear is not that the insurance company will discover that I drive dangerously, but they will discover just how much I drive.
1 Like
Gott in Himmel. Go back and read the responses. Nothing to do with me. Give it up and go to bed.
Obviously you were responding to post # 20 about the Oklahoma DWI case, it is a shame you had to explain that.
Itās a shame I had to explain it twice to Bing, who, as we can see above, still doesnāt get it.
Well obviously if you go back to 19 and 20 it had nothing to do with me so why ask me for a citation? Of course thinking every local court decision in small towns across the country are in Google. Canāt find it in Google, didnāt happen.
Well, weāve wandered far afield from cars, havenāt we?
All this complaining about the āintrusionā of technology into our cars and lives brings up something that gets overlooked. Why do you think Google āgivesā you such a useful service? Or all the map apps? Or Siri or Alexa or whatever? All these services, including this CarTalk app, are based on good old capitalism. They are making money, enormous amounts of money, off of you. You are paying for all these services by generously allowing these companies to gather massive amounts of info about you. Do you like using the voice commands on your smart TV? You do understand that means the TV has to be listening to you all the time, waiting for your next command? While itās waiting itās also listening to everything else you say, itās noting what you like to watch, which commercials you mute and which you watch, when youāre home, how late you stay up, etc.
If you are offended by this stuff you can choose to not use it. Turn off the computer and the smart phone, turn off the safety features on your car, turn off location on everything, use a landline and your 1985 F-150, use an antenna on your TV, dump the internet altogether.
1 Like
Since Remazz chose to bash me a little I will address a couple of his comments.
The story about the DWI/pay the family a dollar per week was in the Daily Oklahoma newspaper. Iām simply relating what they published 20 years ago. Iām not going to spend hours poring over the internet to dredge up old news stories. Feel free to contact the Daily Oklahoman. Maybe they can helpā¦
As for the cars sensing sugar/salt intake I got that from a good long time friend who lives in MO. He is a lifetime GM and Chrysler tech and like me heās attended countless service schools.
He was at a GM school in Kansas City and the instructor at that school told them about the sensors they were experimenting with to detect things like that. My friend is rock solid honest and I doubt the instructor is a liar.
That being said, these things were experimental. I never said they were on the production line.
3 Likes
Medtronic is a rock solid Minnesota company too.
What if we enforce the laws we have about DUII instead?
And that SHOULD affect your insurance rate.
Itās not going to happen. The bill requires passive monitoring of alcohol levels. A breathalyzer that you blow into is active monitoring. Passive monitoring of only the driver is impossible. Sure, you could put alcohol sensors in the headliner, but how will they differentiate between a drunk driver and drunk passengers?
And in fact the authors obviously knew this because right after the passive monitoring section is a section that says when the trans-sec determines itās impossible, he/she can extend the deadline, and explain to congress how stupid this idea is. 
Iām guessing the MADD idiots got some congresscritter to refuse to sign on without an anti-DWI clause in there, so they stuck this in there to make them happy. Itās not going to happen because it canāt.
The most that will come of this is that if the car detects that youāre weaving all over the place, it will pull over and stop. And Iām fine with that, because regardless of why youāre driving like an idiot, Iām happy with any reasonable measure to stop you from driving like an idiot.
5 Likes
So wait until someone drives impaired instead of trying to prevent it in the first place. Got it.
+1
or what about a sick passenger using an elixir based cough syrup (which also contains alcohol)??
2 Likes