It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Nissan Turns to Technology to Stop Drunk Driving

page: 2
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:15 AM
link   
I wonder if any of those who support this would also like speed limiting devices installed, so you can't exceed the speed limit? We have the technology to make this happen, so why not? [/sarcasm]




posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by keeb333
I wonder if any of those who support this would also like speed limiting devices installed, so you can't exceed the speed limit? We have the technology to make this happen, so why not? [/sarcasm]


Many production cars and motorcycles have them already, and have for a while now. They limit the high end to something deemed by the manufacturer to be safe.

Is that bad?



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:33 AM
link   

Originally posted by keeb333
I wonder if any of those who support this would also like speed limiting devices installed, so you can't exceed the speed limit? We have the technology to make this happen, so why not? [/sarcasm]


Considering that speed limits are very different not only around the world but in countries
themselves that would be pretty useless for anything but high speeds like 120+ MPH.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 08:41 AM
link   
If this devises become the same as the black boxes in cars, they have been shoved to consumers without consumers asking for them.

The devices are good for people that are repeater offenders of drunk driving, but I be darned If I allowed any of them in my own car.

Every time I see the ready compliant of my own fellow Americans to the invasion of privacy under the same old same if I don't do anything wrong It doesn't bother me it just makes my skin crawl.

Is obvious that the police state is wining it s way among my fellow Americans.

BTW thsi devices will be added as extras on your car tag as anything else already.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 09:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei
Considering that speed limits are very different not only around the world but in countries
themselves that would be pretty useless for anything but high speeds like 120+ MPH.


Actually, I'm envisioning something more along the lines of a speed limiter that is interfaced with a GPS or map system. The speed limit for a road could easily be included in the map data. Or, maybe they could embed RFID tags in the asphalt that tell the car the speed limit for that road. There could be many ways of doing this, but the point is, who would want it?

Why is the government constantly trying to push more and more regulation upon us? Wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to stop making laws to protect stupid people from themselves?

Back on topic, I think that a drunk driver detector would be great. Just not installed in my car by government mandate.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 09:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by keeb333
Actually, I'm envisioning something more along the lines of a speed limiter that is interfaced with a GPS or map system. The speed limit for a road could easily be included in the map data. Or, maybe they could embed RFID tags in the asphalt that tell the car the speed limit for that road. There could be many ways of doing this, but the point is, who would want it?


That would be cumbersome and cost billions of dollars to do, so I don't see it being feasible.




Why is the government constantly trying to push more and more regulation upon us? Wouldn't it be in everyone's best interest to stop making laws to protect stupid people from themselves?


The government's job is to protect the people, and a drunk driver is a threat not
just themselves, but to anyone within the vicinity of them.



posted on Aug, 8 2007 @ 10:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by iori_komei

The government's job is to protect the people, and a drunk driver is a threat not
just themselves, but to anyone within the vicinity of them.


Right, which is why there are already laws against drunk driving. Why do we need more regulation? Or, why not just outlaw alcohol if it's so bad? I don't feel very protected right now...help me Big Brother



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 04:18 AM
link   

Originally posted by proteus33
next your car will be giving u dui ticket for sitting in car drunk and your house will give u a ticket for engaging in sex without a procreation license.
then come the three sea shells in the bath room. but seriously this is too
invasive. what if technology fails or breaks and you can't get to hospital or evacuatee from hurricane.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 04:20 AM
link   
whoops lol...well thats why they have 911 and im sure if you know a hurricane is coming youll not be dumb enough to get loaded and worry bout your family or yourself

I myself support it....think about how many lives it would save



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 04:30 AM
link   


...or evacuatee from hurricane.


Just to more or less add, since I had'nt realized this had been said until the previous
poster responded..

In general, if there's a Hurricane close enough to be something where you have to
throw the family in the car (as in not paying attention to earlier warnings), than the car
really probably is'nt your best bet, unless you have Über 4 wheel drive and plan on
driving on the side of the road or through the wilderness.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 05:50 AM
link   
And exactly how many people are going to buy this specific Nissan car? Are the only people drink driving the people who buy brand new cars? Are they a regular drink driver and suddenly think to themselves 'I must buy this car, it will stop me drinking and then driving'..

I know Nissan are trying to combat a problem, but they're doing it with an absolutely ridiculous idea.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 09:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
And exactly how many people are going to buy this specific Nissan car? Are the only people drink driving the people who buy brand new cars? Are they a regular drink driver and suddenly think to themselves 'I must buy this car, it will stop me drinking and then driving'..

I know Nissan are trying to combat a problem, but they're doing it with an absolutely ridiculous idea.


All ideas have to start somewhere. Your conclusion that drunk drivers would better themselves by purchasing this specific manufacturer is absurd. The concept here, as you've stated, is to combat a problem. However if this technology is useful or successful then other manufacturers might embrace it as well. Could the government impose this is a mandatory part, perhaps, but I think any ideas presented to keep drunken idiots off the road is a positive not a negative.

brill


apc

posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 09:51 AM
link   
It is presently an option which I anticipate will first be purchased by parents of teenagers.

Unfortunately this will merely contribute to the trend of conditioning children as early as possible to be willing subjects under the prying eyes of Government.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 10:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by apc
It is presently an option which I anticipate will first be purchased by parents of teenagers.

Unfortunately this will merely contribute to the trend of conditioning children as early as possible to be willing subjects under the prying eyes of Government.


Good point APC. Actually I look at the increased use now of onboard cameras that parents can view to see how their kids are driving. Would I have wanted such a thing in my younger years....hell no, but now the shoes on the other foot. I do like the fact that there is less of chance of general recklessness occurring but it could be considered a form of conditioning no question. What better way to expand big brother than to showcase the positives. The same could be said for GPS tracking of criminals. This is a tough one but I don't think something that should be mandated. If you break the rules then maybe a review is in order but overall a delicate issue.

brill



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 11:11 AM
link   

Originally posted by brill
All ideas have to start somewhere. Your conclusion that drunk drivers would better themselves by purchasing this specific manufacturer is absurd. The concept here, as you've stated, is to combat a problem. However if this technology is useful or successful then other manufacturers might embrace it as well. Could the government impose this is a mandatory part, perhaps, but I think any ideas presented to keep drunken idiots off the road is a positive not a negative.


Again, not everyone can afford brand new cars. So the only people that are going to be able to physically not drink-drive, are the people who can afford to buy a brand new car. Is it really the well-off people who can afford to buy brand new cars the people that are drink driving? Doubtful.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 04:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
Again, not everyone can afford brand new cars. So the only people that are going to be able to physically not drink-drive, are the people who can afford to buy a brand new car. Is it really the well-off people who can afford to buy brand new cars the people that are drink driving? Doubtful.


But your assuming that this technology could only be installed in new cars. Technology can be retro-fitted rather easily as well, your missing the point completely.

brill



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 05:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by brill
But your assuming that this technology could only be installed in new cars. Technology can be retro-fitted rather easily as well, your missing the point completely.


There's over 30 million cars in the UK, so who's going to fit all of those devices? Who's going to make those 30 million devices? Are people really going to buy these devices? The government could never pass a law saying you have to buy this for your car. You're missing the point that this idea is ridiculous.



posted on Aug, 11 2007 @ 05:49 PM
link   

Originally posted by shaunybaby
There's over 30 million cars in the UK, so who's going to fit all of those devices? Who's going to make those 30 million devices? Are people really going to buy these devices? The government could never pass a law saying you have to buy this for your car. You're missing the point that this idea is ridiculous.


It could be done, I didn't say it was practical but it still could be done if the government chooses to mandate this. The devices could easily be manufactured just like anything else today. I think its safe to say we each have very different perceptions about what might ot might not happen.

brill

[edit on 11-8-2007 by brill]




top topics



 
1
<< 1   >>

log in

join