10 Comments

Well done Peter. We are so far down the Orwellian hill it will be a difficult and long climb back up.

Expand full comment

The apathetic public strikes again…..

Expand full comment

If you've ever had to deal with the ghastly and devastating aftermath of an accident caused by a drunk driver then you can understand why you would want to put safeguards in place. However, I have seen no evidence that we have tech which can do it effectively. Passing a law doesn't mean that it will work in practice.

Expand full comment

Would you favor putting a speed limiter on all cars? To, say, 25MPH? That would prevent most of the annual 40K road fatalities.

Expand full comment

Some risk is inherent in driving and a speed governor limited to 25 mph would effectively defeat the purpose of having a car. The same cannot be said of a safety feature. But as I have already said, I am not aware of any effective tech for monitoring a driver's alcohol impairment.

Expand full comment

Makes me even gladder that we decided several years ago to keep our 2008 and 2014 Ford Expeditions running til we're in our graves!

Expand full comment

The government has taken it upon themselves to save us from ourselves.

Expand full comment

There is so much unconstitutional orwellianism so deeply embedded in government at all levels, I’m not sure how we return to being the land of liberty our founding fathers sought to bequeath to us.

Expand full comment

That which took decades to create will probably take decades to unwind.

Expand full comment

Like you said, we could all list various problems with this, but there's one huge problem I'd like to lay out. Depending on what technology this would entail, if it monitored erratic driving, that could be detrimental for someone if they were driving to a hospital while transporting an ill person. Or someone racing to the hospital (say, a doctor). Another perfect example of "Stupid shit our government does to try and 'protect' us plebs"

Expand full comment