Thoughts on 2026+ Models containing “anti drunk driving” technology?

Drinking motorcyclists soon take care of themselves.
What I find interesting is that there is Apple patented technology that disables an iPhone if it senses the user is driving a car, but Apple won't implement it for fear of losing market share, and the government won't require it, which would result in a massive reduction in distracted driving without an added cost to vehicle manufacturers.
Apple Patents Technology to Disable Certain Phone Functions While Driving - MacRumors

 

If it's anything like the one I've mentioned..it won't exist on motorcycles.

I say that because my brother in law has the interlock mandated for his use. He owned a Harley and they can't and/or won't put it on a bike. I surmise that the computerization it requires doesn't exist on a bike, though I know nothing about motorcycles. I also surmise they won't due to the rolling retests needed.

 

Maybe instead of everyone taking on the "guilty until proven innocent" deal every time they want to use their vehicle, we increase the penalty for receiving a DUI. Better yet, lets increase the penalty for ALL crimes while we're at it, instead of giving every one a slap on the wrist. Repeat offenders shouldn't even be a thing, but there's no way asking for more justice and more accountability would work. We can't handle our current prisons.

 

Yeah that's a pretty good approach. If this happens it affects someone like my mother (who I can count on one hand the times I've seen have a sip of wine in my life) just as much as it does me (who hasn't touched it in nearly 2 decades) as much as the hardcore daily drinker. But hey what do I know.

To build on your thought a bit, I would think there should be more jail time in some cases for things..both longer and earlier in the stages. When MA's laws changed (stiffer) in 2003-4 from the 10 year to the lifetime lookback among other things, headlines showed someone getting caught for the 8th time. That person shouldn't be out in the world.

 

"Can't be shut down/forced, hazard to others in the vicinity." Uhh, over 2 million vehicles in the US alone by 2014 had remote vehicle shutdown systems installed... They can't turn the vehicle off when it is in motion due to safety concerns of course but vehicles with these systems installed can be remotely shutdown when they come to a complete stop.

https://www.industryarc.com/Report/19202/remote-vehicle-shutdown-system-market.html#:~:text=The remote vehicle shutdown is,loan are given by lenders.

https://www.globenewswire.com/en/ne...-723-65-Million-By-2026-Reports-And-Data.html

 

"I feel like" the initial person I responded to was acting condescending, when a google search would have taken less time for them to inform themselves than the time it took for them to type out their condescending comment as a result of their individual ignorance.

 

It will be required on all new vehicles produced 2026+, i.e Not optional. Standard equipment that is forced like ABS was in 2012 via FMVSS 126.

https://www.nhtsa.gov/sites/nhtsa.gov/files/fmvss/ESC_FRIA_%2003_2007_0.pdf

 

Ahhh interesting. Thanks for the share..I remember reading about the tracking/interlock for financing but thought it was more a lockout of starting versus a remote shutdown whilst running.

Really not happy about this, I'm all about getting impaired people off the road but this is going to mean everyone has to have this eventually

 

I don't know if auto start stop is mandatory, I guess it is not. Manufacturers are cutting it from models, and some are allowing you to remove it. Due to chip shortages. I don't think the chip shortage will correct itself.

EVs are supposed to become mandatory, that might never happen. The law can always be rewritten to prevent these changes.

I'd opt for prohibition before being in favor of this nonsense.

 

Given those 2 choices I agree at least for myself, though I don't partake so it wouldn't change my life

 

Isn't that the point? Breaking the law is breaking the law; it doesn't matter how many gold stars you got that day - if you drive intoxicated, you're the problem; doesn't matter if it was the first drink you'd had in 3 decades, or the 20th drink you'd had that day; both are equally the issue. Same for all other crimes. Actions have consequences.

 

I detest drunk driving. (true)

I can’t wait until I’m assumed guilty and forced to do a breathalyzer test without cause to prove I’m innocent each time I drive. Or to have some yet invented monitoring system smart enough to distinguish drunk driving from a little tired or maneuvering to avoid road hazards or a road rage maniac. (good luck with that).
For I am a sheeples and need an authoritarian China like nanny state to monitor and control every aspect of my life.

But it was all right, everything was all right, the struggle was finished. He had won the victory over himself. He loved Big Brother.
George Orwell -1984

 

I'm not saying you can or cannot put it on a motorcycle, I'm saying that if you drink and ride, you're going to kill yourself sooner rather than later, and the ramifications of crashing on a motorcycle are far less disastrous to innocents than a drunk driver in a 6,000lb f350.

 

Absolutely agreed, but my point is that the general public should not be subjected to having to prove it every time they get behind the wheel per se.

No doubt. I only mentioned the ability to have it on a bike as I know the situation a little.

 

What's next?

Prove that you've taken all your booster shots? Show me your papers!

This sounds good, "Get drunks off the road!"

But it's not about that.

 

If you have a phone, you're already being tracked and listened to. If people didn't drink and drive, this would not even be an issue, but drunks are the #1 cause of preventable motor vehicle deaths.

 

True, true and true.

But this isn't about any of those 3 points.

This would set a bad precedent, for one. "We already have cars that test for drunkenness!! Why don't we also require that the driver report who he is! We can also remotely disable the car!!!"

What's the worst that can happen?

This sounds good, but it is BAD.

I'm all for seatbelts, airbags, crumple zones, head restraints, but this is extreme overreach. They don't even know how to implement ANY of it, or how ANY of it will work.

 

on glare ice the wheels will not stop; nice if you’re staring at the rear end of an 18 wheeler

 

Same here, there are over 4000 items in that “infrastructure bill”, most having nothing to do with what we traditionally consider infrastructure. Even most of those in congress voting for it didn’t know everything in it when they voted for it lol.

When I post something regarding news I always provide a link to it, and don’t “assume” everyone has read what I have. OP has now added links to his posts, well done.

 

Thank you for clarifying. New ABS are almost seamless, older stuff would sproing and shudder, but they worked.

Un-nerving to me would be hitting some kid who chased his soccer ball into the street. It's easy to get caught up in all the theatrics of the internet. My ex father inlaw used to swear they had not made a good automobile since 1960, my father who was an auto or heavy equipment mechanic his whole told me the ex father in-law did not have his feet planted in reality. I think he just had a mind set that change was a bad thing.