New Socialist French Nanny State Mandates Breathalyzers in All Cars - Polidicks

Now in addition to the manslaughter and DUI charge, you will also receive a 14 euro fine for failing to have a breathalyzer in your motor vehicle following a horrific accident. [I]PROGRESS.[/I]

[QUOTE=Lankist;36597396]That's like telling people to buy their own handcuffs just in case they get arrested. [B]Motherfuckers will tamper with them.[/B] [editline]2nd July 2012[/editline] You guys need to come up with a consensus on what you think this is supposed to do.[/QUOTE] Tampering won't help when you're swerving all over the road, the police will get you to use yours, then if it says you're not clean with use their own.

[QUOTE=Sgt-NiallR;36601145]Tampering won't help when you're swerving all over the road, the police will get you to use yours, then if it says you're not clean with use their own.[/QUOTE] Then what the fuck is the point of this? If the police need to use the exact same methods, if the civilian tests are unreliable and the police will still have to use their own to prove anything, what the hell does this accomplish exactly? It is perhaps the most useless, ineffectual, feigned attempt at curbing drunk driving that anyone could possibly undertake. The only reason it got passed was because anyone who fought it was met with "if you've done nothing wrong" fallacies.

Right, I'm advocating alcolocks (mentioning above somewhere). Didn't know there was a difference, and I didn't deduce the difference since it seemed too pointless to just carry a device like that around. I agree that just making it law for drivers to carry breathalyzers is a waste of time and money (I believe I stated this earlier) and will not accomplish much. A (final?) note about alcolocks is that I hope one days cars will come with those integrated into the ignition by factory default, and that passing alco tests will become another routine just like seatbelts became once they became mandatory through legislation. [QUOTE="Lankist"]... feigned attempt at curbing drunk driving...[/QUOTE] You might be onto something here

[QUOTE=Lankist;36593327]Nope we must fight crime by treating everyone like a criminal. [editline]2nd July 2012[/editline] That isn't the point. That's the same kind of logic that got the TSA put in place here in the US. "It's not that much trouble, and if you've done nothing wrong then you have nothing to worry about!" It doesn't work out that way in practice. Treating everyone like suspects in a crime that hasn't even been committed yet [I]never[/I] works. The whole convenience argument is inherently flawed, too. Just because it's convenient when it's implemented does not mean it's going to [I]stay[/I] convenient.[/QUOTE] The whole difference being that this is at a completely different level than the TSA and other things of the like. They are not going to watch over people constantly or be able to arrest them for suspicion of being drunk at the wheel, they are just making breath analyzers mandatory. I don't agree with the whole thing too because the breath analyzers aren't even connected to the car (so they are pretty much pointless as they are now), but I think a few people have been throwing this WAY out of proportion. They did not install a camera watching your face while you drive, they just made mandatory the possession of a single piece of equipment that is supposedly going to prevent drunk driving (while it's obviously not gonna happen, unless the breath analyzer is electronic and locks the car if positive). The only case where this could come in handy is if the driver is drunk, has to fill the thing, then doesn't throw it out and drives then gets arrested by the cops who would check for the used, positive test and slap a fine on the guy. And even then it's massively pointless because the police has their own breath analyzers and they usually work better than the one sold to everyone. So yeah, I disagree with the whole thing (only viable solution would be to have electronic ones linked to the car) but I think people are going way overboard with their interpretation of things. It's like someone lit a match and everyone sees a burning city.

[QUOTE=GunFox;36600747]Now in addition to the manslaughter and DUI charge, you will also receive a 14 euro fine for failing to have a breathalyzer in your motor vehicle following a horrific accident. [I]PROGRESS.[/I][/QUOTE] 14 Euros is the least of your problems if you just killed someone.

[QUOTE=Kljunas;36593006]This won't solve the problem at all. And what about responsible persons who don't drink at all when they have to drive afterwards? Why should they buy this?[/QUOTE] Because these things cost only a couple of bucks, and you need four at most, depending on how many passengers you take. There's a good chance you'll never have to actually use it, either. So it's just a small price to pay to combat drunk driving. Those evil, evil socialists, taking away our freedom to drive intoxicated. But wait, this thing didn't actually come out of the blue. It's been worked on for over a year, before the socialists even came to power. I know you've been brainwashed by your government, and as such it's kinda dickish to say these things, but maybe you should put some research into your posts before you hit that 'post thread' button? This thread is retardedly silly now for people who actually know the deal. It's nothing more than a misguided stab at socialism.

I like this, it's a real reminder of "don't drink and drive".

[QUOTE=Lankist;36593295]So are you in favor of DRM in games? Because this is the same tactic as DRM. Everyone is a suspect and everyone must abide, regardless of whether or not they're innocent or guilty. It's treating people who've never had a drop of alcohol in their lives the same as raging alcoholics, just as paying customers are treated like pirates.[/QUOTE] That was the worst attempt at a straw man argument I've read in a really long time. The correlation between corporations implementing software limitations which are designed to ensure that the illegal distribution of software is discouraged and attempting to lower the number of times a person with no control slams his 2,000 lb vehicle into a brick wall is negligible at best. When the harm caused is 1/3 of all roadway fatalities being due to drinking and driving, slightly more drastic and intrusive measures are justified.

[QUOTE=brainmaster;36616726]I like this, it's a real reminder of "don't drink and drive".[/QUOTE] Except if you're piss drunk I doubt you'll really care about a breath analyzer that's not even linked to your car in any way.

[QUOTE=Ganerumo;36619306]Except if you're piss drunk I doubt you'll really care about a breath analyzer that's not even linked to your car in any way.[/QUOTE] If you're piss drunk you wouldn't be able to walk.

everyone opposed to this are, to put it simply, wrong

[QUOTE=Pantz76;36592930]I don't know what purpose these are going to serve anyway. Are you supposed to test yourself every time? Who/how will they enforce this?[/QUOTE] "I indeed am drunk as shit, glad that's sorted. Time to drive to the local bar!" I can't see how this will reduce anything. If the breathalyzer doesn't do anything else than just tells the driver that he's drunk it's pointless. If the breathalyzer would make it impossible to even start the car if the driver was over the limit it would be a whole another story.

[QUOTE=Hullu V3;36630711]"I indeed am drunk as shit, glad that's sorted. Time to drive to the local bar!" I can't see how this will reduce anything. If the breathalyzer doesn't do anything else than just tells the driver that he's drunk it's pointless. If the breathalyzer would make it impossible to even start the car if the driver was over the limit it would be a whole another story.[/QUOTE] For me, it would be more like "Alright. Had a bit to drink, better check myself before I drive off. Oops, I am indeed drunk. Better stay in." Because I am a [i]responsible person[/i], and so is a lot of other people.

Could also help people decide if they are sober enough to drive after drinking the night before.

[QUOTE=V12US;36616496]Because these things cost only a couple of bucks, and you need four at most, depending on how many passengers you take. There's a good chance you'll never have to actually use it, either. So it's just a small price to pay to combat drunk driving.[/QUOTE] How does it combat anything if it isn't used? Even if it is cheap it isn't a reason to force people to buy them. It's like if there was a law that said everyone should buy some gun safety guide. There are people who already know safety rules, people who don't have a gun and dumb people who have one but won't read the guide even if they buy it. Why would you want the first two categories of people to buy the guide? And a big part of the problems would stay since reading the guide isn't technically required to use a gun. Same with alcohol. Some drivers drink moderately, others don't drink at all, others drink excessively and won't use their breathalyzer... And I'm not a breathalyzer expert, but intoxication level and breathalyzer aren't precise science. At least I doubt these are more precise than knowing how much you've drunk. They are useful when they are used by the police but not really when someone use them on themselves imo. If someone isn't sure about monitoring their alcohol consumption nothing stops them to buy a breathalyzer, it just shouldn't be an obligation.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36593295]So are you in favor of DRM in games? Because this is the same tactic as DRM. Everyone is a suspect and everyone must abide, regardless of whether or not they're innocent or guilty. It's treating people who've never had a drop of alcohol in their lives the same as raging alcoholics, just as paying customers are treated like pirates.[/QUOTE] Is this a troll post? Piracy doesn't cause 1/3 fatal traffic collisions. One could argue that piracy does no harm at all. Let's not compare apples and oranges. The ones who haven't had a drop of alcohol in their life should be glad steps are being taken to prevent drunk driving, instead of allowing it and punishing those who are caught or, worse, kill people and/or cause severe property damage. Everyone who is opposed to this would be singing a different tune if someone they knew or loved was struck by a drunk driver. Is it really that invasive? Blow, start car if you're sober, go. Big deal. I am terrified on the road sometimes because I see a guy swerving all over the place, going into the wrong lane, etc. Do you complain about wearing your seat belt? That was implemented to save lives as well and I'm sure people felt similarly about them. Cars used to come without them, now it's illegal not to wear them, and all it took was countless deaths and injuries as a result of their absence before it was implemented. --- If they're NOT connected to the ignition system, then this is all pointless. Drunken idiots will drive anyway and more often than not kill someone else instead of themselves. In that case, they SHOULD be in bars and nightclubs and it should be mandatory before anyone leaves. They really should be installed in a car's ignition system to be most effective however.

[QUOTE=Virtanen;36630590]everyone opposed to this are, to put it simply, wrong[/QUOTE] You should inform yourself a bit more. All this is going to do is cost a bunch of euros to people and it won't do shit because the people it's supposed to be addressed to (drunk drivers) are not going to suddenly change their mind about drunk driving because they have a little piece of equipment they won't use anyway. It's not an electronic breath-analyzer that locks the car down if not used or positive, it's not even linked to the car at all. And all you risk for not having it is 40 bucks.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36593295]So are you in favor of DRM in games? Because this is the same tactic as DRM. Everyone is a suspect and everyone must abide, regardless of whether or not they're innocent or guilty. It's treating people who've never had a drop of alcohol in their lives the same as raging alcoholics, just as paying customers are treated like pirates.[/QUOTE] Games don't kill people, moron.

[QUOTE=Negrul1;36636749]Games don't kill people, moron.[/QUOTE] ITT people who don't read the whole thread.

[QUOTE=Lankist;36636759]ITT people who don't read the whole thread.[/QUOTE] ITT yes I did and it was still as dumb a post when I went back to it?

ITT Lankist gonna Lankist