Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks
Gerry Schneider
driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
(surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
the best way to defeat it?
Regards,
Gerry
Jim Thompson
Gerry Schneider <ger...@sympatico.ca>,
In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
Article: <3E160F0D...@sympatico.ca>,
Entitled: "Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
Wrote the following:
Two corks... one up your ass and one down your throat. Then ignite
you to burn off the alcohol ;-)
I love my wine, but I think DUI's should be executed.
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| Jim-T@analog_innovations.com Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_"
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
John Fields
---
"Blow" into it through a moist rag with a hair dryer?
---
John Fields
Professional circuit designer
http://www.austininstruments.com
Anthony Q. Bachler
thats the catch, an intelligent person wont need to defeat the interlock.
Ive been completely hammered on hundreds of occasions, and Ive never been
both physically able to attempt to drive, and not mentally aware enough to
not drive. People that blame alchohol for making them drive drunk are just
making excuses for their own lack of brains. Its just so simple, if you
take a drink, take a cab or take a walk.
--
The american people did to themselves
what Osama bin Laden could never do,
took away our freedoms in exchange for
a false sense of security.
"Gerry Schneider" <ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3E160F0D...@sympatico.ca...
Spehro Pefhany
Fields) wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 14:30:38 -0800, Gerry Schneider
><ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
>>driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
>>car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
>>(surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
>>the best way to defeat it?
>---
>"Blow" into it through a moist rag with a hair dryer?
You keep a hair dryer in your car?
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Rene Tschaggelar
Don't drink and drive, is it really that hard ?
It could be you you're running over.
Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net
Jim Thompson
Spehro Pefhany <sp...@interlog.com>,
In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
Article: <4rub1vs657s3d5l16...@4ax.com>,
Entitled: "Re: Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
Wrote the following:
|On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 20:46:42 GMT, the renowned jfi...@texas.net (John
|Fields) wrote:
|
|>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 14:30:38 -0800, Gerry Schneider
|><ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
|>
|>>The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
|>>driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
|>>car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
|>>(surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
|>>the best way to defeat it?
|>---
|>"Blow" into it through a moist rag with a hair dryer?
|
|You keep a hair dryer in your car?
|
|Best regards,
|Spehro Pefhany
Just blow a fart into it ?:-)
Jim Yanik
The best way to defeat it is to call a cab,and leave your car until you
sober up.
These interlocks are only installed after a person has been convicted a few
times in court,for repeated drunk driving.
WHY IN THE WORLD DO YOU WANT TO BYPASS SUCH A DEVICE FOR SUCH A PERSON?
Is there something wrong with you?
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
remove X to contact me
Jim Thompson
Jim Yanik <jya...@kua.net>,
In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
Article: <Xns92F8A78198C...@204.117.192.21>,
Entitled: "Re: Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
Wrote the following:
|Gerry Schneider <ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote in
A judge just ruled in Phoenix, in response to an appeal by a person
who was arrested for DUI when found sleeping it off in their car:
If you're behind the wheel, with the keys in the ignition, but stopped
and parked, it's still DUI.
The judge elaborated... to sleep it off without risk of arrest, remove
keys from ignition and get in back seat ;-)
Frank Bemelman
news:qbvb1vkvvfc3gn418...@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 21:07:13 GMT,
> Spehro Pefhany <sp...@interlog.com>,
> In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
> Article: <4rub1vs657s3d5l16...@4ax.com>,
> Entitled: "Re: Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
> Wrote the following:
>
> |On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 20:46:42 GMT, the renowned jfi...@texas.net (John
> |Fields) wrote:
> |
> |>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 14:30:38 -0800, Gerry Schneider
> |><ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
> |>
> |>>The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
> |>>driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
> |>>car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
> |>>(surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
> |>>the best way to defeat it?
> |>---
> |>"Blow" into it through a moist rag with a hair dryer?
> |
> |You keep a hair dryer in your car?
> |
> |Best regards,
> |Spehro Pefhany
>
> Just blow a fart into it ?:-)
Then you will have a problem the day after the party ;-)
--
Thanks,
Frank Bemelman
(remove 'x' & .invalid when sending email)
John Fields
>You keep a hair dryer in your car?
---
How else am I going to be able to drive?^)
Spehro Pefhany
Fields) wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 21:07:13 GMT, Spehro Pefhany
><sp...@interlog.com> wrote:
>
>
>>You keep a hair dryer in your car?
>
>---
>How else am I going to be able to drive?^)
I'm not even going to ask about the damp cloth.
John Fields
<sp...@interlog.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 22:25:27 GMT, the renowned jfi...@texas.net (John
>Fields) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 21:07:13 GMT, Spehro Pefhany
>><sp...@interlog.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>You keep a hair dryer in your car?
>>
>>---
>>How else am I going to be able to drive?^)
>
>I'm not even going to ask about the damp cloth.
---
_That_ way would also keep it from starting.
It _has_ to be from clean ice cubes.
Sir Charles W. Shults III
when they have been drinking should get the death penalty for intentional
reckless endangerment.
Cheers!
Chip Shults
My robotics, space and CGI web page - http://home.cfl.rr.com/aichip
Mike Page
>On Fri, 3 Jan 2003 21:27:07 +0000 (UTC),
>Jim Yanik <jya...@kua.net>,
>In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
>Article: <Xns92F8A78198C...@204.117.192.21>,
>Entitled: "Re: Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
>Wrote the following:
>
>
>
>A judge just ruled in Phoenix, in response to an appeal by a person
>who was arrested for DUI when found sleeping it off in their car:
>
>If you're behind the wheel, with the keys in the ignition, but stopped
>and parked, it's still DUI.
>
>The judge elaborated... to sleep it off without risk of arrest, remove
>keys from ignition and get in back seat ;-)
>
> ...Jim Thompson
>
>
More so in the UK. You have to physically hand the keys over to someone
else. Even throwing them out the window is no good (you're still capable
of getting them, and therefore still "drunk in charge of a vehicle"). I
guess it depends on the police's attitude as much as the actual law.
Then again, isn't it better to *plan* your life a little, and stick to
your plan ?
Regards,
Mike.
--
============================================================
Mike Page mi...@eclectic-web.co.uk
BEng(Hons) MIEE www.eclectic-web.co.uk
A fanatic is someone who can't their mind and won't
change the subject - Winston Churchill.
Looking for a consultant ? Try www.buckman-hardy.co.uk
============================================================
Frank Bemelman
news:9zoR9.6018$Sa3.2...@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
> In my opinion, anyone who defeats a breathalyzer lockout so they can
drive
> when they have been drinking should get the death penalty for intentional
> reckless endangerment.
Yes, I assume these breathalyzers have a reasonable treshold,
before signaling a 'positive'.
NoBodyInParticular
someone in an accident you face a murder charge. On a side
note, I always hear reps from MADD talking about 20,000+
people killed in "alcohol related accidents". What the hell
is an "alcohol related accident"? If we have 20,000+ being
killed by drunk drivers, then say so!
Jim Backus
What is one supposed to do if the car has no back seat? (eg MX5)
--
Jim Backus
bona fide replies to jimb(at)jita(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk
http://www.jita.demon.co.uk
Michael Culley
forward so the wheel is over the keys. This trick was probably thought up
before the invention of remote entry.
--
Michael Culley
"Mike Page" <mi...@eclectic-web.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3E161B6D...@eclectic-web.co.uk...
Frank Bemelman
news:3E161FF0...@goofball.net...
> Kentucky did something similar, drive drunk and kill
> someone in an accident you face a murder charge. On a side
> note, I always hear reps from MADD talking about 20,000+
> people killed in "alcohol related accidents". What the hell
> is an "alcohol related accident"? If we have 20,000+ being
> killed by drunk drivers, then say so!
I guess you can also fall of the stairs, when drunk, causing
an "alcohol related accident".
BTW, most are killed by sober drivers.
Mike Page
> I've heard the trick is to put the keys on the ground and roll the car
> forward so the wheel is over the keys. This trick was probably thought up
> before the invention of remote entry.
So the keys can't be found by Plod ?
Mike.
Jim Yanik
news:vdCZ2p92dNiH-pn2-bc8fYIdP5t7c@localhost:
Call a cab or a sober friend.Walk.Take the bus.
Michael Culley
--
Michael Culley
"Mike Page" <mi...@eclectic-web.co.uk> wrote in message
news:104163918...@iris.uk.clara.net...
Michael Culley
--
Michael Culley
"Jim Backus" <J...@jita.nospam.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:vdCZ2p92dNiH-pn2-bc8fYIdP5t7c@localhost...
Boris Mohar
>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 20:46:42 GMT, the renowned jfi...@texas.net (John
>Fields) wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 14:30:38 -0800, Gerry Schneider
>><ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>>
>>>The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
>>>driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
>>>car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
>>>(surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
>>>the best way to defeat it?
>>---
>>"Blow" into it through a moist rag with a hair dryer?
>
>You keep a hair dryer in your car?
>
>Best regards,
>Spehro Pefhany
It for the inflatable chick. She can blow.
Boris Mohar
Jim Thompson
Boris Mohar <bor...@sympatico.ca>,
In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
Article: <jifc1vgrvlb4aj0co...@4ax.com>,
Entitled: "Re: Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
Wrote the following:
|On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 21:07:13 GMT, Spehro Pefhany <sp...@interlog.com>
ROTFLMAO!
Michael F. Coyle
"Michael Culley" <mcu...@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3e163795$0$27995$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> Sleep in the boot ;-)
Have you ever seen the trunk on a Miata? There's barely room for you
wallet, let alone the rest of you :)
- Michael
Anthony Q. Bachler
--
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France [Jacques Anatole Thibault] (1844-1924)
"John Fields" <jfi...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:3e15f642...@news.texas.net...
Anthony Q. Bachler
saying oh I was just gonna sleep it off.
--
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France [Jacques Anatole Thibault] (1844-1924)
"Jim Thompson" <Jim-T@analog_innovations.com> wrote in message
news:8q0c1vcke3htqhkvu...@4ax.com...
Anthony Q. Bachler
key on you.
--
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France [Jacques Anatole Thibault] (1844-1924)
"Michael Culley" <mcu...@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3e1624b4$0$27998$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
Anthony Q. Bachler
--
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France [Jacques Anatole Thibault] (1844-1924)
"Michael F. Coyle" <mNOfSP...@erolsPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:agrR9.237525$a8.2...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net...
Fred Bloggs
Gerry Schneider wrote:
> The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
> driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
> car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
> (surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
> the best way to defeat it?
>
> Regards,
>
> Gerry
>
I am not sure about the particular sensor but you should be able to
defeat it with a blast of air from a plastic bulb, like a baking syringe
or a certain other kind of unmentionable you might find in a drugstore.
And this is nowhere at the loftiness of a "crusade." It is a common
criminal rip-off from top to bottom. The NHTSA's own statistics show no
statistically significant increase of probability of accident for BAC's
less than 0.12, and the states with threshold at 0.08 show no
significant decrease of traffic accidents, so that the newest
legislation mandating 0.08 nationwide is hopelessly unscientific and
abusive. The entire issue is REALLY about making lobbyists and PAC's
rich, and getting politicians elected, who otherwise wouldn't have a
platform. You can see from the other responses that the indoctrination
of the masses is complete- God help us! Some of them ought to take a
look at their own driving habits- like reckless driving, which is the
same grade of criminal misdemeanor as DUI as well THE predominant
causation of automobile accidents.:-)
Here are some links to ignition interlock manufacturers:
http://www.guardianinterlock.com/
The Guardian seems the most sophisticated- but none of these seem to be
analyzing for a typical exhalation gas content- may need a solenoid
actuated defeat for some the Guardian gymnastics.
Fred Bloggs
Anthony Q. Bachler wrote:
> Yes, that is to prevent excuse makers that get caught about to drive from
> saying oh I was just gonna sleep it off.
That's not what it's about. It's about an outlaw member of the judiciary
who is saying "Yeah- I don't give a damn if it's a bad ruling and it
eventually gets overturned, what I'm all about is burning your ass with
$25,000 in legal expenses going through the entire appeals process."
That trash-heap should be impeached, and you sound more and more like an
alcoholic into his little repentance act- did you get caught driving at
0.5 BAC there, Rudolph-the-rednose-drunk-and-a-half?
Michael Culley
least 15 years and you get booked *at* 05 not above it.
--
Michael Culley
"Fred Bloggs" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3E165F6...@nospam.com...
Fred Bloggs
Gerry Schneider
Thank you, Fred, for a technical answer to a technical question. For
everybody else - if I'd wanted a sermon on drinking and driving, I'd have
posted in alt.bleeding.hearts or alt.dont.think.for.yourself. Like you, I
feel that drunk drivers are among the lowest level of scum, but agree
totally with Fred that the whole issue has become an excuse to not think
rationally and to allow profit-driven private corporations to pitch their
wares to Big Brother at the expense of individual freedoms. Example - except
for the highest priced Guardian model, the common technology seems to be
based on the Taguchi sensor, which reacts to lots of other "oxidizable"
elements like tobacco smoke, car exhaust, etc. $1300 (Canadian) per year
maintenance fee for a product based on a $10 sensor? The more expensive
products are based on fuel cell technology which is alcohol-specific, but
Canada is talking about setting the BAC level to .02!!! Try rushing your kid
to a hospital a few hours after having one beer at supper and your car won't
start? Or having your car stall in a snowstorm and you can't restart it
because your BAC rose from negligible to minor while you were driving? How
soon before interlocks are standard equipment on new cars? After all, if it
saves just one life... Now how about a discussion of the technology? Or
would you rather keep answering questions about how to connect an LED to a
battery?
Cheers,
Gerry
Spehro Pefhany
<nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>I am not sure about the particular sensor but you should be able to
>defeat it with a blast of air from a plastic bulb, like a baking syringe
>or a certain other kind of unmentionable you might find in a drugstore.
You mean something like this?
http://www.ortho-mcneil.com/products/pi/pdfs/sultrin.pdf
If they work like the police breathalyzer I "tested" a couple of
years ago the required volume of air is MUCH greater than a regular
syringe carries. I passed easily, BTW.
>And this is nowhere at the loftiness of a "crusade." It is a common
>criminal rip-off from top to bottom. The NHTSA's own statistics show no
>statistically significant increase of probability of accident for BAC's
>less than 0.12, and the states with threshold at 0.08 show no
>significant decrease of traffic accidents, so that the newest
>legislation mandating 0.08 nationwide is hopelessly unscientific and
>abusive.
It does seem pretty punitive. Here's Ontario's rules:
http://www.newswire.ca/government/ontario/english/releases/December2001/21/c9140.html
Note that a *first* offence (over 0.08) leads to a 1-year mandatory
licence suspension (and education programs, which the offender must
pay for) followed by a 1-year interlock (user pay) requirement.
I imagine that might be a bit of a problem when the user tries
to rent a car, not to mention the crimnal record and insurance
increases. Those three or four beers could turn out to be
VERY expensive. So, like, don't do it, eh?
Michael Painter
"NoBodyInParticular" <go...@goofball.net> wrote in message
news:3E161FF0...@goofball.net...
> Kentucky did something similar, drive drunk and kill
> someone in an accident you face a murder charge. On a side
> note, I always hear reps from MADD talking about 20,000+
> people killed in "alcohol related accidents". What the hell
> is an "alcohol related accident"? If we have 20,000+ being
> killed by drunk drivers, then say so!
>
and not be legally drunk.
Recent studies show that any alcohol impairs judgment.
Many adult drowning have alcohol involvement. The statistics say about 50%
but my experience says it is a lot higher.
Spehro Pefhany
<nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>I hear it's 0.02 in Finland!
It was ZERO in East Germany, IIRC. Any alcohol on your
breath and you're toast.
Anthony Q. Bachler
have, so I have nothing to repent. But based on your hot-under-the-collar
post It appears that you have. The rules are quite clear, dont drink and
drive. What part of that is too complex for you to understand? Do you
imagine that this law was made purely to 'keep a brutha down'? Do you not
understand the extremely deadly consequences of drinking and driving? Do
you honestly expect us to believe that you were going to sleep it off in the
front seat with the keys in the ignition? Bullshit, you got caught and are
just pissed. Go sell your sob story to someone that gives a flying rats
ass.
--
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France [Jacques Anatole Thibault] (1844-1924)
"Fred Bloggs" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3E1665B8...@nospam.com...
Anthony Q. Bachler
because noones brakes were failing and killing people like when the
inspections were implemented.
Sun Tzu once said that the doctor that stops a disease in its first victim
is known as a competent doctor, but the doctor that stops a plague after it
kills a million people is seen as a national hero.
--
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France [Jacques Anatole Thibault] (1844-1924)
"Fred Bloggs" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3E165F6...@nospam.com...
Anthony Q. Bachler
his 'good buddies' system, then yes, Ill answer nothing but questions about
connecting batteries to led's for the rest of my life if thats what it
takes.
--
"If a million people say a foolish thing, it is still a foolish thing."
Anatole France [Jacques Anatole Thibault] (1844-1924)
"Gerry Schneider" <ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3E1697B6...@sympatico.ca...
Da Man
> Jim Yanik <jya...@kua.net>,
> In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
> Article: <Xns92F8A78198C...@204.117.192.21>,
> Entitled: "Re: Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
> Wrote the following:
>
> |
> |> The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
> |> driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
> |> car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
> |> (surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
> |> the best way to defeat it?
> |>
> |> Regards,
> |>
> |> Gerry
> |>
> |
> |sober up.
> |
> |These interlocks are only installed after a person has been convicted a
few
> |times in court,for repeated drunk driving.
> |WHY IN THE WORLD DO YOU WANT TO BYPASS SUCH A DEVICE FOR SUCH A PERSON?
> |Is there something wrong with you?
>
> who was arrested for DUI when found sleeping it off in their car:
>
> If you're behind the wheel, with the keys in the ignition, but stopped
> and parked, it's still DUI.
A friend of mine got plastered in a bar once a couple of years back, and at
closing time he went in his truck and went to sleep. An hour or two later a
cop woke him up and gave him the breathalizer. He failed. The truck engine
was cold. Lucky he called a lawer, which delayed the second breath test by
about 2 more hours for the lawer to get to the police station, and he passed
that one.
>
> The judge elaborated... to sleep it off without risk of arrest, remove
> keys from ignition and get in back seat ;-)
I guess they never saw my micro back seats.
Frank Bemelman
news:t7wR9.13818$9N5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> If it saves even one life because some socially retarded moron didnt
defeat
> his 'good buddies' system, then yes, Ill answer nothing but questions
about
> connecting batteries to led's for the rest of my life if thats what it
> takes.
While we need to draw the line somewhere, it doesn't help to draw
them rigidly.
For instance, the profile on your tires, when new, is about 7mm.
Here in the Netherlands, you can get a fine if the profile gets
below 2mm. Below this depth, we consider the tyres too risky,
car may skid, or tyres may burst spontaneously.
Every mm less profile increase the chance of aqua-planing, skidding,
causing (more) lethal accidents.
Do you replace your tyres, every 3 months ?
You can ask the same questions regarding maximum allowed speed.
For each percent off, you save a life. Even if the maximum
speed was 3km/hour, there would still be deadly accidents to
report.
Even the guy that drives drunk is a 'product' of our own
society.
Rene Tschaggelar
> In my opinion, anyone who defeats a breathalyzer lockout
> so they can drive when they have been drinking should get
> the death penalty for intentional reckless endangerment.
These devices should at least have a cheat detector which
blows the engine.
Rene
--
Ing.Buero R.Tschaggelar - http://www.ibrtses.com
& commercial newsgroups - http://www.talkto.net
Ed Price
"John Fields" <jfi...@texas.net> wrote in message
news:3e15f642...@news.texas.net...
> On Fri, 03 Jan 2003 14:30:38 -0800, Gerry Schneider
> <ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> >driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
> >car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
> >(surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
> >the best way to defeat it?
> "Blow" into it through a moist rag with a hair dryer?
> ---
Little can of compressed air?
Ed
Michael Culley
> statistically significant increase of probability of accident for BAC's
> less than 0.12,
This doesn't sound right to me, I was under the impression that even a
reading of 0.05 would double your chances of having an accident. I know from
using the breath test machines at the pub that it takes quite alot of drinks
to get to 0.12, it doesn't sound like alot but 0.12 is reasonable drunk.
> and the states with threshold at 0.08 show no
> significant decrease of traffic accidents,
Maybe people are ignoring the law :-)
--
Michael Culley
"Fred Bloggs" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3E165F6...@nospam.com...
>
>
John Woodgate
<go...@goofball.net> wrote (in <3E161FF0...@goofball.net>) about
'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks', on Fri, 3 Jan 2003:
> On a side
>note, I always hear reps from MADD talking about 20,000+
>people killed in "alcohol related accidents". What the hell
>is an "alcohol related accident"? If we have 20,000+ being
>killed by drunk drivers, then say so!
It's called 'weasel wording', and the police and road safety people do
it in UK as well. If a drunken pedestrian falls in front of your car,
that's an 'alcohol-related accident'.
It's the same with 'accidents in which speed was a factor'. This applies
to ALL accidents - stationary vehicles don't collide with each other or
with stationary people. But the *implication* is 'speed in excess of the
speed limit'.
--
Regards, John Woodgate, OOO - Own Opinions Only. http://www.jmwa.demon.co.uk
Interested in professional sound reinforcement and distribution? Then go to
http://www.isce.org.uk
PLEASE do NOT copy news posts to me by E-MAIL!
Frank Bemelman
news:3e16b628$0$27992$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > The NHTSA's own statistics show no
> > statistically significant increase of probability of accident for BAC's
> > less than 0.12,
>
> This doesn't sound right to me, I was under the impression that even a
> reading of 0.05 would double your chances of having an accident. I know
from
> using the breath test machines at the pub that it takes quite alot of
drinks
> to get to 0.12, it doesn't sound like alot but 0.12 is reasonable drunk.
That's nice, doing the test in the pub. In 1993 I got my first
Windows-PC and didn't know a thing about how to program for
windows. As a first try, I wrote a reactiontime measuring program,
and I tested it sober, half drunk, and completely drunk.
The interesting thing was, there was no noticable difference.
I found the old program. There is a small help-box, explaining
the rules. I just ran it, 0.98 seconds. It still runs on win98se,
don't know about XP or 2000.
BTW, my address in the 'about' box is not valid anymore.
Here is the program:
http://www.euronet.nl/~fbemel/Files/
Nick
> defeat it with a blast of air from a plastic bulb, like a baking syringe
> or a certain other kind of unmentionable you might find in a drugstore.
> And this is nowhere at the loftiness of a "crusade." It is a common
A common or garden party ballooon will hold more than a lungful of air. Just
make sure you're sober when you blow it up ;o)
- Nick
[just for the record, anti-DUI]
Michael Culley
Seeing the machine is at the pub and physically bolted to the wall I didn't
have alot of choice. :-) I'm more than happy to repeat the test, although
I'm not sure I could convince my other half that I need to go to the pub and
get sloshed for scientific reasons. :-)
> As a first try, I wrote a reactiontime measuring program,
> and I tested it sober, half drunk, and completely drunk.
The results could be different if you are not expecting the event.
--
Michael Culley
"Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
news:3e16bc7f$0$37194$1b62...@news.euronet.nl...
Frank Bemelman
> > That's nice, doing the test in the pub.
>
> Seeing the machine is at the pub and physically bolted to the wall I
didn't
> have alot of choice. :-) I'm more than happy to repeat the test, although
> I'm not sure I could convince my other half that I need to go to the pub
and
> get sloshed for scientific reasons. :-)
>
> > As a first try, I wrote a reactiontime measuring program,
> > and I tested it sober, half drunk, and completely drunk.
>
> The results could be different if you are not expecting the event.
IMO part of the danger is falling half asleep, dozing off.
As happens to a lot of sober drivers as well. People that drive
more than 30.000 KM per year know what that is.
John Fields
<c-wh...@nospam.earthlink.net> wrote:
>I hope when he kills someone that its just you.
---
Frankly, from the level of intellect displayed in your post the only
reply of equal magnitude and maturity that I can consider worthy of
your amazing linguistic talents is:
"You're a fucking idiot."
Tom MacIntyre
>Gerry Schneider <ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote in
>news:3E160F0D...@sympatico.ca:
>
>> The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
>> driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
>> car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
>> (surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
>> the best way to defeat it?
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gerry
>>
>
>The best way to defeat it is to call a cab,and leave your car until you
>sober up.
Call a cab with 2 drivers, one to drive your car home for you. It
costs a bit more, but actually may end up costing a lot less in the
end.
Tom
Nick
way to defeat it is to call a cab,and leave your car until you
> >sober up.
>
> Call a cab with 2 drivers, one to drive your car home for you. It
> costs a bit more, but actually may end up costing a lot less in the
> end.
There are schemes here in the UK where you can call a get-me-home service: a
guy turns up on a foldable mini-scooter, puts the scooter in the back of
your car, drives you home then retrieves the scooter and buzzes off back to
base.
Bill Sloman
"Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
> "NoBodyInParticular" <go...@goofball.net> schreef in bericht
> news:3E161FF0...@goofball.net...
> > Kentucky did something similar, drive drunk and kill
> > note, I always hear reps from MADD talking about 20,000+
> > people killed in "alcohol related accidents". What the hell
> > is an "alcohol related accident"? If we have 20,000+ being
> > killed by drunk drivers, then say so!
>
> an "alcohol related accident".
>
> BTW, most are killed by sober drivers.
Are you sure? In the state of Victoria in Australia in the 1960's, the
police surgeon John Birrell, put together the statistics on the blood
alcohol levels of road accident victims as measured at autopsy, and found
that something like a third of the victims had levels that would leave a
social drinker incapable of walking, let alone driving. Heavy drinkers
(alcoholics) can function ostensibly normally at these sorts of blood
alcohols levels, and are heavily over-represented amongst road accident
victims.
Birrell is an interesting man - see page 9 of this document
http://www.vifp.monash.edu.au/pubs/newsletter/informed_mar99.pdf
He wasn't allowed to publish his results for some reason, but was allowed to
give private lectures to groups and associations. I heard him tell his tale
to a large group of Melbourne University students - some 500 - while I was a
student. He gave a lot of these lectures and had quite an effect on public
opinion.
He (with his brother) was also a pioneer in publicising the problem of
child-bashing, and the clinical signs of persistent child abuse.
IIRR he also carried out an - at the time wholly illegal - abortion on a
girl who had been made pregnant while being raped, which produced a lot of
useful controversy.
------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
John Woodgate
shome.com.au> wrote (in <3e16b628$0$27992$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au>
) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks', on Sat, 4 Jan
2003:
>This doesn't sound right to me, I was under the impression that even a
>reading of 0.05 would double your chances of having an accident.
It's pretty certain that results reported by some 'authorities' have
been munged to make political points. Demos on TV of the effects of
alcohol on the driving of simulators are fatally flawed in that all the
parameters of the simulator are under the control of the demonstrators,
who can ensure that 'crashes' occur when they want them by paralysing or
reversing the steering.
Note also the Machiavellian trick of accusing everyone who criticizes
the false or suspect propaganda of 'being in favour of drunk drivers'.
No-one is prepared to take the political risk of dealing with those
drivers who, through long reaction times and/or short attention spans,
are dangerous when stone-cold sober. I didn't believe the 'short
attention span' thing until I was driven by one who had it, happily
driving past roadworks signs, speed limit signs, lane closure signs etc.
until the converging traffic cones forced sudden awareness and violent
braking. If he'd hit another car whose driver was obeying all the signs
but was one point over the limit, guess who would be blamed.
Frank Bemelman
"Bill Sloman" <bill....@ieee.org> schreef in bericht
news:av6s96$4o5$1...@reader11.wxs.nl...
>
> "Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
> >
> > an "alcohol related accident".
> >
> > BTW, most are killed by sober drivers.
>
> Are you sure? In the state of Victoria in Australia in the 1960's, the
> police surgeon John Birrell, put together the statistics on the blood
> alcohol levels of road accident victims as measured at autopsy, and found
> that something like a third of the victims had levels that would leave a
> social drinker incapable of walking, let alone driving. Heavy drinkers
> (alcoholics) can function ostensibly normally at these sorts of blood
> alcohols levels, and are heavily over-represented amongst road accident
> victims.
Not sure, but I can hardly believe it's the other way around. The times
I went through the eye of the needle, and the times I didn't succeed
that, I was sober ;)
Perhaps I am misled by myself. The last 25 years are good for a total
of 1 million kilometers, and I have not seen 1 accident in that time
with deadly injured, at least not that it was obvious.
> Birrell is an interesting man - see page 9 of this document
>
> http://www.vifp.monash.edu.au/pubs/newsletter/informed_mar99.pdf
>
> He wasn't allowed to publish his results for some reason, but was allowed
to
> give private lectures to groups and associations. I heard him tell his
tale
> to a large group of Melbourne University students - some 500 - while I was
a
> student. He gave a lot of these lectures and had quite an effect on public
> opinion.
Perhaps the situation in 1960 was different.
[snip]
John Woodgate
wrote (in <av6s96$4o5$1...@reader11.wxs.nl>) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer
Ignition Interlocks', on Sat, 4 Jan 2003:
>He wasn't allowed to publish his results for some reason,
Could it be that there were too many drunk *pedestrians* in the results
for them to be used to demonize drink-drivers?
It's so easy to slip into the frame of mind that says, 'It doesn't
matter how we manipulate the data, it's all in a good cause.'
John Woodgate
<beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote (in <3e16bc7f$0$37194$1b62eedf@news
.euronet.nl>) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks', on
Sat, 4 Jan 2003:
>The interesting thing was, there was no noticable difference.
The obvious conclusion of the road safety crusaders would be that you
are not safe to drive even when sober!
Some people are driving about sober with reaction times in the
Stegosaurus range. (;-)
Dave Holford
Gerry Schneider wrote:
........................................
> Thank you, Fred, for a technical answer to a technical question. For
> everybody else - if I'd wanted a sermon on drinking and driving, I'd have
> posted in alt.bleeding.hearts or alt.dont.think.for.yourself. Like you, I
> feel that drunk drivers are among the lowest level of scum, but agree
> totally with Fred that the whole issue has become an excuse to not think
> rationally and to allow profit-driven private corporations to pitch their
> wares to Big Brother at the expense of individual freedoms. Example - except
> for the highest priced Guardian model, the common technology seems to be
> based on the Taguchi sensor, which reacts to lots of other "oxidizable"
> elements like tobacco smoke, car exhaust, etc. $1300 (Canadian) per year
> maintenance fee for a product based on a $10 sensor? The more expensive
> products are based on fuel cell technology which is alcohol-specific, but
> Canada is talking about setting the BAC level to .02!!! Try rushing your kid
> to a hospital a few hours after having one beer at supper and your car won't
> start? Or having your car stall in a snowstorm and you can't restart it
> because your BAC rose from negligible to minor while you were driving? How
> soon before interlocks are standard equipment on new cars? After all, if it
> saves just one life... Now how about a discussion of the technology? Or
> would you rather keep answering questions about how to connect an LED to a
> battery?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Gerry
Simple,
Don't drive drunk and then you won't have to have one in your car!
Dave
Fred Bloggs
heavy duty equipment used to remove the bodies from the wreckage. Most
of the accidents involving intoxicated individuals were single car
accidents and the only person killed was the drunk. The vast majority of
accidents occur in broad daylight between completely sober individuals
who are not paying attention. The drunk driving statistics are a
complete sham and fraud. The goddammed cops never go near administering
first aid or any other useful service- the maggots always pretended to
be directing traffic and waited until we got there. They also allowed us
to drive the emergency vehicles way up into reckless driving territory
when the law is clear that these vehicles have no exemption whatsoever
and must obey all traffic regulations just like any other vehicle. I am
in complete agreement with the seat belt publicity- I have seen many a
corpse who would be alive today if they had the seat belt fastened- the
collision would have been minor. But the DUI propaganda is a total sham
and this is evidenced by the totally fraudulent pictures of children who
supposedly were killed by drunk drivers. Did they omit the fact that the
child was riding in the car driven by some brain-dead housewife in a
sugar coma and totally distracted by the diet amphetamines? -Yep- think
so. Take your f__k__g moron-made rules and go shove them up your
emaciated ass. You're a do-nothing, inactive, ignorant, little parasite
low-life, weakling, shirker, loud mouth.
Fred Bloggs
Michael Culley wrote:
>> The NHTSA's own statistics show no statistically significant
>> increase of probability of accident for BAC's less than 0.12,
>
>
> This doesn't sound right to me, I was under the impression that even
> a reading of 0.05 would double your chances of having an accident.
Nah- the 0.12 statistic is the basis for the legal threshold being at
the 0.1 level in most states.
> I know from using the breath test machines at the pub that it takes
> quite alot of drinks to get to 0.12, it doesn't sound like alot but
> 0.12 is reasonable drunk.
Right- and that's where the I in DUI comes in- physical impairment.
>
>
>> and the states with threshold at 0.08 show no significant decrease
>> of traffic accidents,
>
>
> Maybe people are ignoring the law :-)
If the actual law is total prohibition then you're right.
Even the idiots at MADD over-guesstimate that the nationwide standard of
0.08 will prevent only 500 deaths annually. And this is so simple-minded
too because they mean prevent traffic deaths where the unreliable
"alcohol related" fiction is applied. Prohibition and money is at the
core of it- it has nothing to do with traffic safety.
Jim Weir
There are times when I wish newsgroup and email clients had some sort of
mechanism like this on the 'puter
{;-)
Jim
Fred Bloggs <nos...@nospam.com>
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:
->
->
->Gerry Schneider wrote:
->> The newest "weapon" in the crusade against drinking and
->> driving - breathalayzer type ignition interlocks for the
->> car. Anybody know what the screening technology is based on
->> (surely something better than the Taguchi gas sensor!), and
->> the best way to defeat it?
Fred Bloggs
Bill Sloman wrote:
>
> Are you sure? In the state of Victoria in Australia in the 1960's, the
> police surgeon John Birrell, put together the statistics on the blood
> alcohol levels of road accident victims as measured at autopsy, and found
> that something like a third of the victims had levels that would leave a
> social drinker incapable of walking, let alone driving. Heavy drinkers
> (alcoholics) can function ostensibly normally at these sorts of blood
> alcohols levels, and are heavily over-represented amongst road accident
> victims.
>
And that is precisely why the law is ineffective. These hard-core
alcoholics will not be put off by the law- they will continue to drive
anyway- they are almost never less than a 0.2.
Fred Bloggs
sense of the word. I very rarely will down a pint or two on special
occasion. But you're right- forget the D.U.I. and lets talk about P.U.I.
and keyboard interlocks - much more pertinent to this forum.:--)
Frank Bemelman
news:ayUz6CBR...@jmwa.demon.co.uk...
> I read in sci.electronics.design that Frank Bemelman
> <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote (in <3e16bc7f$0$37194$1b62eedf@news
> .euronet.nl>) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks', on
> Sat, 4 Jan 2003:
>
> >The interesting thing was, there was no noticable difference.
>
> The obvious conclusion of the road safety crusaders would be that you
> are not safe to drive even when sober!
Some people get really upset if one drop of alcohol is in the
game. Nobody talks about medicines, fatigue, lack of sleep,
tires with no profile, lousy brakes.
Let's try to upset 'them' a bit more. Suppose that of all accidents
made by sober drivers, 20% is just a matter of bad luck. We all know
about these stupid accidents, they simply happened.
Having said that, I'd say that drunk drivers are allowed the same
percentage of silly accidents.
> Some people are driving about sober with reaction times in the
> Stegosaurus range. (;-)
Funny that you say that. I recall having a reactiontime of 0.85
with this testprogram, ten years ago. This seems long, but there
is a little task involved, that explains the longer times. This
morning I scored 0.98 seconds. Now I tried it again, after 0.3
liter of 'Apfelkorn' which contains 18% alcohol. Now my score is
0.99 seconds, about the same. However, it seems that at the age of
36 (I'm 46 now) I was 0.15 seconds faster. Or is it my wireless
keyboard that causes an unforeseen delay ;)
I'd like to invite some candidates to this reaction test, so here
is the location of the program again:
http://www.euronet.nl/~fbemel/Files/
10 yr old software, but should run on most windowsversions.
Jim Yanik
news:3e16c36b$0$27993$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au:
Last night on FOX35(WOFL-TV Orlando)news,they demonstrated a handheld
pocket breath analyzer sold in Eckerd's drug stores for $15 US,that they
compared to a police breathalyzer.The low cost unit only had green GO and
red NO-GO LEDs,but was accurate compared to the police unit.Set for a .08
level for NO-GO,I believe.
--
Jim Yanik,NRA member
remove X to contact me
Jim Yanik
You don't have any friends who would take you back to your car the next
day?
Jim Yanik
news:av6q1n$4s7$1...@venus.btinternet.com:
> There are schemes here in the UK where you can call a get-me-home
> service: a guy turns up on a foldable mini-scooter, puts the scooter
> in the back of your car, drives you home then retrieves the scooter
> and buzzes off back to base.
>
>
Or the next 'customer'.
Now that's neat! I have an electric scooter of this type,but it doesn't
have the range or speed for this job.
And they generally are not allowed on public roads. ;-(
Fred Bloggs
Spehro Pefhany wrote:
> On Sat, 04 Jan 2003 04:13:50 GMT, the renowned Fred Bloggs
> <nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>
>>I am not sure about the particular sensor but you should be able to
>>defeat it with a blast of air from a plastic bulb, like a baking syringe
>>or a certain other kind of unmentionable you might find in a drugstore.
>
>
> You mean something like this?
> http://www.ortho-mcneil.com/products/pi/pdfs/sultrin.pdf
>
> If they work like the police breathalyzer I "tested" a couple of
> years ago the required volume of air is MUCH greater than a regular
> syringe carries. I passed easily, BTW.
Right- there are "deep lung" air samplers and the preliminary types. The
preliminary types can be defeated with a bulb- the deep lung samplers
will require a small pump.
>
>
>>And this is nowhere at the loftiness of a "crusade." It is a common
>>criminal rip-off from top to bottom. The NHTSA's own statistics show no
>>statistically significant increase of probability of accident for BAC's
>>less than 0.12, and the states with threshold at 0.08 show no
>>significant decrease of traffic accidents, so that the newest
>>legislation mandating 0.08 nationwide is hopelessly unscientific and
>>abusive.
>
>
> It does seem pretty punitive. Here's Ontario's rules:
>
> http://www.newswire.ca/government/ontario/english/releases/December2001/21/c9140.html
>
> Note that a *first* offence (over 0.08) leads to a 1-year mandatory
> licence suspension (and education programs, which the offender must
> pay for) followed by a 1-year interlock (user pay) requirement.
> I imagine that might be a bit of a problem when the user tries
> to rent a car, not to mention the crimnal record and insurance
> increases. Those three or four beers could turn out to be
> VERY expensive. So, like, don't do it, eh?
Three or four beers over even a one hour period should not put you near
any reasonable limit. Also, even though the offense has been elevated to
the level of misdemeanor, it is still in the category of traffic offense
which is traditionally classified as a public disorder. The second
offense WILL be upgraded to a low end felony in some jurisdictions, and,
depending on the BAC, could result in PRISON time versus just jail time.
Jim Yanik
> And that is precisely why the law is ineffective. These hard-core
> alcoholics will not be put off by the law- they will continue to drive
> anyway- they are almost never less than a 0.2.
>
>
Which is why ignition interlocks were developed,to keep the *repeat* DUI
offender from driving under the influence.(at least in his own car)
Fred Bloggs
Jim Yanik wrote:
> Fred Bloggs <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in
> news:3E17289F...@nospam.com:
>
>
>>And that is precisely why the law is ineffective. These hard-core
>>alcoholics will not be put off by the law- they will continue to drive
>>anyway- they are almost never less than a 0.2.
>>
>>
>
>
> Which is why ignition interlocks were developed,to keep the *repeat* DUI
> offender from driving under the influence.(at least in his own car)
>
Nah- just give it a few years and they will program his Uniform National
Identification photo into the universal electronic surveillance system
to watch for him leaving the house.
Michael Painter
"Fred Bloggs" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:3E1726AB...@nospam.com...
>
> Even the idiots at MADD over-guesstimate that the nationwide standard of
> 0.08 will prevent only 500 deaths annually. And this is so simple-minded
> too because they mean prevent traffic deaths where the unreliable
> "alcohol related" fiction is applied. Prohibition and money is at the
> core of it- it has nothing to do with traffic safety.
Said by somebody who obviously does not spend a lot of time prying people
out of cars.
I see no fiction in the number of times alcohol is involved, especially in
single vehicle accidents.
Tom MacIntyre
<j...@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote:
>I read in sci.electronics.design that Bill Sloman <bill....@ieee.org>
>wrote (in <av6s96$4o5$1...@reader11.wxs.nl>) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer
>Ignition Interlocks', on Sat, 4 Jan 2003:
>
>>He wasn't allowed to publish his results for some reason,
>
>Could it be that there were too many drunk *pedestrians* in the results
>for them to be used to demonize drink-drivers?
>
>It's so easy to slip into the frame of mind that says, 'It doesn't
>matter how we manipulate the data, it's all in a good cause.'
John...you may be getting ahead of things...but Jim Thompson's call
for me to be executed is disisturbing...no...much more...
More details available...
Tom
Goran Larsson
Jim Yanik <jya...@kua.net> wrote:
> These interlocks are only installed after a person has been convicted a few
> times in court,for repeated drunk driving.
At the time, yes. Unfortunately they may be required for ALL cars in the
future if the "safety fundamentalists" can convince the law makers. They
have already started their lobbying here in Sweden.
--
Göran Larsson http://www.mitt-eget.com
Kevin G. Rhoads
>before signaling a 'positive'.
The main trouble with most breathalyzers is falsely reacting
to things other than alcohol. It is much like the early drug
tests, anyone who had a poppy-seed bagel for breakfast
test positive for heroin use. Although the general drug
screening tests now do not falsely react to edible poppy
seeds, the more sensitive tests can still come up with
false positives.
Trouble is the laws are written assuming the test is
infallible. SO one false positive and you are guilty
no chance to prove innocence.
I would *almost* rather that, at the scene of the accident,
you were given a chance to run while the investigating
officer shot at you. You make thirty yards and you
are innocent. Seems to me that it has a better chance
of working right.
--
Kevin G. Rhoads, Ph.D. (Linearity is a convenient fiction.)
kgrhoads@NO_SPAM.alum.mit.edu
Frank Bemelman
news:gtje1vsmakbdkof6t...@4ax.com...
> On Sat, 4 Jan 2003 19:45:34 +0100, "Frank Bemelman"
> <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote:
> >
> >I'd like to invite some candidates to this reaction test, so here
> >is the location of the program again:
> >http://www.euronet.nl/~fbemel/Files/
>
> you but I suspect a touch typist would do better I had to
> spend time remembering where the appropriate keys
> were :)
Thanks for the feedback. I feel much better now, my 0.98 is
perhaps not so bad. Now we need a couple of younger candidates.
And a very old one! So that we have something to interpolate
and/or extrapolate on ;)
[snip]
Jim Backus
<mNOfSP...@erolsPLEASE.com> wrote:
>
> "Michael Culley" <mcu...@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message
> news:3e163795$0$27995$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > Sleep in the boot ;-)
>
Excellent! ... there should have been a smiley on my earlier post.
> Have you ever seen the trunk on a Miata? There's barely room for you
> wallet, let alone the rest of you :)
>
It's a lot bigger than the boot / trunk in a MR-2!
--
Jim Backus
bona fide replies to jimb(at)jita(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk
http://www.jita.demon.co.uk
Michael Culley
stations. They have existed for many years but have not been well advertised
and not be readily available. I think authorities don't want them to be
widely used because it will increase the amount of drinking people do before
driving.
--
Michael Culley
"Jim Yanik" <jya...@kua.net> wrote in message
news:Xns92F98E9BE5...@204.117.192.21...
John Woodgate
<tom__ma...@hotmail.com> wrote (in <fbge1vcolj68i2pk74ebglnvmiei9smb
f...@4ax.com>) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks', on Sat,
4 Jan 2003:
>John...you may be getting ahead of things...but Jim Thompson's call
>for me to be executed is disisturbing...no...much more...
I read his post as a gut reaction to what seemed to be attempts to
defeat a breathalyser lock, which I think most people would agree is not
an acceptable activity.
I certainly didn't see it as an attack on any particular person, not
even Gary, to whom he was directly responding.
>
>More details available...
I think you may be reading more into Jim's post that he ever intended.
John Woodgate
<m.pa...@worldnet.att.net> wrote (in <avHR9.94996$hK4.7707839@bgtnsc05
-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition
Interlocks', on Sat, 4 Jan 2003:
>Said by somebody who obviously does not spend a lot of time prying people
>out of cars.
I don't envy you your job. But you cannot help but have a different
perspective from other people, because you see only the disasters.
>
>I see no fiction in the number of times alcohol is involved, especially in
>single vehicle accidents.
I'm sure that 'alcohol is involved' in a high proportion of SVAs. But
the actual numbers, not percentages, are what really matter. Just to
**grab some numbers out of the air** to show what I mean:
Number of SVAs in your area in a given year: 400 (more than 1 a day)
Number in which driver was legally DUI: 50 (this would be a very high
proportion where I live; it's more likely 20, but YDUIMD)
Number in which driver had taken alcohol in the previous 12 h but was
not legally DUI: 100
Number in which 'alcohol was not a factor': 250
You see three SVAs a week in which 'alcohol was a factor', including one
DUI. But if alcohol suddenly ceased to exist, you'd still see five SVAs
a week.
Those 250 comprise boy racers, driving while asleep and real accidents
like diesel spills and unlucky avoiding actions (I've had a gas tanker
approach me head-on on my side of the road. The temptation to get off
the road without looking for obstructions was quite strong!).
Al Hephy
Fred Bloggs <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message news:3E17289F...@nospam.com...
It's the legislative mindset which thinks every problem can be quickly solved by passing yet another law. Didn't work during prohibition, is not working during war-on-drugs, etc., etc.
Al
Jim Thompson
John Woodgate <j...@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk>,
In Newsgroup: sci.electronics.design,
Article: <pXvvDgC$H1F+...@jmwa.demon.co.uk>,
Entitled: "Re: Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks",
Wrote the following:
|I read in sci.electronics.design that Tom MacIntyre
|<tom__ma...@hotmail.com> wrote (in <fbge1vcolj68i2pk74ebglnvmiei9smb
|f...@4ax.com>) about 'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks', on Sat,
|4 Jan 2003:
|
|>John...you may be getting ahead of things...but Jim Thompson's call
|>for me to be executed is disisturbing...no...much more...
|
|I read his post as a gut reaction to what seemed to be attempts to
|defeat a breathalyser lock, which I think most people would agree is not
|an acceptable activity.
|
|I certainly didn't see it as an attack on any particular person, not
|even Gary, to whom he was directly responding.
|>
|>More details available...
|
|I think you may be reading more into Jim's post that he ever intended.
Smirk (BSEG ;-)
...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, P.E. | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona Voice:(480)460-2350 | |
| Jim-T@analog_innovations.com Fax:(480)460-2142 | Brass Rat |
| http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |
For proper E-mail replies SWAP "-" and "_"
I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.
Bill Sloman
> Ignition Interlocks', on Sat, 4 Jan 2003:
>
>
> Could it be that there were too many drunk *pedestrians* in the results
> for them to be used to demonize drink-drivers?
This wasn't a large sample of data - I think there were some hundreds
of autopsys a year in Victoria on victims of road accidents, and I
don't think that there were all that many pedestrian victims.
> It's so easy to slip into the frame of mind that says, 'It doesn't
> matter how we manipulate the data, it's all in a good cause.'
Got any other unsubstantiated accusations? You've just libelled a
living Victorian of excellent reputation - much better than Joe
Gutnick's - who could even now be preparing to sue you in the
Victorian courts. You won't get a fair trial there - too many of the
potential jurors will know John Birrell.
Follow up that URL that I posted, about him getting a an Honourary
Doctor of Law from Monash University, while the rest of us roll around
the floor laughing about the hole you have dug for yourself.
-----
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Bill Sloman
Victoria has random breathalyser checks to catch just such people.
Every now and then the police set up shop at a suitable intersection
and pull in every car and get the driver to breath into the gear. You
can expect to be checked once every few years - more often if you are
on the road at times when they expect drunks to be driving.
First time around you lose your driving license for six months or a
year - or get curfewed so you can only drive from 7am to 7pm (as
happened to one of my close relatives - who doesn't seem to be an
alcoholic).
Do it again and you are looking at a prison term - it definitely
affects people's attitudes.
-----
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen
Spehro Pefhany
<nos...@nospam.com> wrote:
>Three or four beers over even a one hour period should not put you near
>any reasonable limit.
Four ordinary 5% beers over an hour will put you close to or over the
0.08 limit unless you're over 200lbs. Three if you're more like
150lbs. Less if you're drinking stronger premium brands, more if it's
light beers.
> Also, even though the offense has been elevated to
>the level of misdemeanor, it is still in the category of traffic offense
>which is traditionally classified as a public disorder. The second
>offense WILL be upgraded to a low end felony in some jurisdictions, and,
> depending on the BAC, could result in PRISON time versus just jail time.
The OP is in Ontario. There it *will* leave you with a criminal record
and out a lot of money. This may prevent the person from being able to
legally enter the US or other countries unless they receive a waiver
from that country or procure an expensive pardon.
http://www.frcentre.net/Communities/Renfrew/DWI_costs_Ont.pdf
Same thing for Americans wanting to travel, here's what the Canadian
rules are:
Criminal Record
Anyone with a criminal record (including a drunk driving conviction)
may be excluded from Canada. Contact the Canadian Embassy or a
Canadian Consulate in the U.S. for more information. A waiver of
exclusion may be issued but several weeks are required and a
processing fee must be paid.
The technology now exists to share this information more fully and
virtually instantaneously.
Best regards,
Spehro Pefhany
--
"it's the network..." "The Journey is the reward"
sp...@interlog.com Info for manufacturers: http://www.trexon.com
Embedded software/hardware/analog Info for designers: http://www.speff.com
Da Man
"Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
> "Anthony Q. Bachler" <c-wh...@nospam.earthlink.net> schreef in bericht
> news:t7wR9.13818$9N5.1...@newsread2.prod.itd.earthlink.net...
> > If it saves even one life because some socially retarded moron didnt
> defeat
> > his 'good buddies' system, then yes, Ill answer nothing but questions
> about
> > connecting batteries to led's for the rest of my life if thats what it
> > takes.
>
> While we need to draw the line somewhere, it doesn't help to draw
> them rigidly.
>
> For instance, the profile on your tires, when new, is about 7mm.
> Here in the Netherlands, you can get a fine if the profile gets
> below 2mm. Below this depth, we consider the tyres too risky,
> car may skid, or tyres may burst spontaneously.
>
> Every mm less profile increase the chance of aqua-planing, skidding,
> causing (more) lethal accidents.
>
> Do you replace your tyres, every 3 months ?
>
> You can ask the same questions regarding maximum allowed speed.
> For each percent off, you save a life. Even if the maximum
> speed was 3km/hour, there would still be deadly accidents to
> report.
That brings up another interesting topic - only 6% of accidents are actually
caused by speed (very excessive in most cases) according to one artical I
read. After all, if the speed limit was reduced to 1 km/h, wouldn't all
accidents be "speed related"? Speeds are lowered so that you comfortably
want to go a little faster, so you get nabbed by a cop, and the goverment
and insurance have a feild day on sucking money out from you. Did you know
if your caught speeding 1 km/h (or 1 MPH) over the insurance companys put
you in the same catagoty as if you were doing 75 km/h or more over?
As for most things the goverment does, it's the $$$$$ that count in the end,
not the people.
>
> Even the guy that drives drunk is a 'product' of our own
> society.
Da Man
new safety feature.
"Dave Holford" <hol...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3E1718BF...@sympatico.ca...
>
>
> Gerry Schneider wrote:
> ........................................
> > Thank you, Fred, for a technical answer to a technical question. For
> > everybody else - if I'd wanted a sermon on drinking and driving, I'd
have
> > posted in alt.bleeding.hearts or alt.dont.think.for.yourself. Like you,
I
> > feel that drunk drivers are among the lowest level of scum, but agree
> > totally with Fred that the whole issue has become an excuse to not think
> > rationally and to allow profit-driven private corporations to pitch
their
> > wares to Big Brother at the expense of individual freedoms. Example -
except
> > for the highest priced Guardian model, the common technology seems to be
> > based on the Taguchi sensor, which reacts to lots of other "oxidizable"
> > elements like tobacco smoke, car exhaust, etc. $1300 (Canadian) per year
> > maintenance fee for a product based on a $10 sensor? The more expensive
> > products are based on fuel cell technology which is alcohol-specific,
but
> > Canada is talking about setting the BAC level to .02!!! Try rushing your
kid
> > to a hospital a few hours after having one beer at supper and your car
won't
> > start? Or having your car stall in a snowstorm and you can't restart it
> > because your BAC rose from negligible to minor while you were driving?
How
> > soon before interlocks are standard equipment on new cars? After all, if
it
> > saves just one life... Now how about a discussion of the technology? Or
> > would you rather keep answering questions about how to connect an LED to
a
> > battery?
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Gerry
>
>
> Simple,
>
> Don't drive drunk and then you won't have to have one in your car!
>
> Dave
Da Man
"Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
> "Michael Culley" <mcu...@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> schreef in bericht
> news:3e16b628$0$27992$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > > The NHTSA's own statistics show no
> > > statistically significant increase of probability of accident for
BAC's
> > > less than 0.12,
> >
> > This doesn't sound right to me, I was under the impression that even a
> > reading of 0.05 would double your chances of having an accident. I know
> from
> > using the breath test machines at the pub that it takes quite alot of
> drinks
> > to get to 0.12, it doesn't sound like alot but 0.12 is reasonable drunk.
>
> That's nice, doing the test in the pub. In 1993 I got my first
> Windows-PC and didn't know a thing about how to program for
> windows. As a first try, I wrote a reactiontime measuring program,
> and I tested it sober, half drunk, and completely drunk.
>
> The interesting thing was, there was no noticable difference.
>
> I found the old program. There is a small help-box, explaining
> the rules. I just ran it, 0.98 seconds. It still runs on win98se,
> don't know about XP or 2000.
It runs here fine on Win 2000 Adv. Server
>
> BTW, my address in the 'about' box is not valid anymore.
>
> Here is the program:
> http://www.euronet.nl/~fbemel/Files/
>
>
Frank Bemelman
"Da Man" <levy...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:AuKR9.4205$Hs3.4...@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
>
> "Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
> > the rules. I just ran it, 0.98 seconds. It still runs on win98se,
> > don't know about XP or 2000.
>
> It runs here fine on Win 2000 Adv. Server
Excellent! Now I want to know your age & score ;)
Da Man
"Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
I fit the young catagory (23). On the third go, I got 0.96. But I am a
crappy typer, and I usually don't use this keyboard (which has several of
the letters now worn off due to other people using my server).
A 4th go gave me 0.85 I can really tell a big differnce between the buttons
I automatically knew where they were and the buttons I had to look for.
Fred
<ger...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>Canada is talking about setting the BAC level to .02!!! Try rushing your kid
>to a hospital a few hours after having one beer at supper and your car won't
>start? Or having your car stall in a snowstorm and you can't restart it
>because your BAC rose from negligible to minor while you were driving? How
>soon before interlocks are standard equipment on new cars? After all, if it
>saves just one life... Now how about a discussion of the technology? Or
>would you rather keep answering questions about how to connect an LED to a
>battery?
>
>Cheers,
>
>Gerry
These devices are forced upon convicted drunks only. I'm not too
concerned about inconveniencing these irresponsible jerks. Anyone
drunks caught circumventing the machines should have their car taken
away for good.
Frank Bemelman
>
> "Frank Bemelman" <beme...@euronet.nl.invalid> wrote in message
> news:3e175736$0$57487$1b62...@news.euronet.nl...
> >
> > perhaps not so bad. Now we need a couple of younger candidates.
> > And a very old one! So that we have something to interpolate
> > and/or extrapolate on ;)
>
> I fit the young catagory (23). On the third go, I got 0.96. But I am a
> crappy typer, and I usually don't use this keyboard (which has several of
> the letters now worn off due to other people using my server).
I like that excuse ;)
> A 4th go gave me 0.85 I can really tell a big differnce between the
buttons
> I automatically knew where they were and the buttons I had to look for.
I had that score ten years ago. Perhaps reactiontime wears with
age. I also feel that counting the beers&wines is easier than
recognizing and finding the letters.
Da Man
"John Woodgate" <j...@jmwa.demon.contraspam.yuk> wrote in message
> I read in sci.electronics.design that NoBodyInParticular
> <go...@goofball.net> wrote (in <3E161FF0...@goofball.net>) about
> 'Defeating Breathalyzer Ignition Interlocks', on Fri, 3 Jan 2003:
> > On a side
> >note, I always hear reps from MADD talking about 20,000+
> >people killed in "alcohol related accidents". What the hell
> >is an "alcohol related accident"? If we have 20,000+ being
> >killed by drunk drivers, then say so!
>
> It's called 'weasel wording', and the police and road safety people do
> it in UK as well. If a drunken pedestrian falls in front of your car,
> that's an 'alcohol-related accident'.
>
> It's the same with 'accidents in which speed was a factor'. This applies
> to ALL accidents - stationary vehicles don't collide with each other or
> with stationary people. But the *implication* is 'speed in excess of the
> speed limit'.
That one really pisses me off too. The Fat lazy cops would rather hide
behind a speed trap, and catch completely safe drivers doing 10 km/h over
the limit on the highway, then to put any effort in all the car break and
enters, vandlism, crack heads, theft, etc, etc, etc. They keep saying that
they are "under staffed". Have something broken into around here and you
will get a responce of "we will investigate it, but we probably won't find
out who did it", and that's exactly what happens - they look at it it for a
bit, look important, and that's the last you ever hear about it. Here in
Canada, speeding tickets alone are a $50 million income, now add the
economics to that that the insurance / scam companys do to your premiuims
and you can clearly see why the goverment insures lot's of speeding tickes
are written by overstaffing the roads with radar guns, and reducing the
maximum speeds at least 20 km/h less then what most motorists (85th
percentile) would find comfortable to drive at (BTW, 4/5 of moving
violations are speeding tickets). Only about 6% of the accidents here are
actually caused from speeding.
The zero tolerance DUI thing is most likely another tax grab - in some way
you can be sure it will benifit the goverment. Huge fines, public relations,
legal expenses, insurance expenses, one less car on the road to cause
traffic, more sales and analysis of monitoring equipment (such as the
interlocks), a reason to monitor people, etc, etc. Having a drink with your
supper, and driving home is totally differnt then getting so hammered that
you can't walk and then driving home (or into what ever) are two totally
differnt things.
The gun laws here in Canada are pretty dumb now too. I don't nor plan on
owning a gun, but even I have to admit those rules are just a little insane,
and a nice huge tax grab.
Michael Culley
> violations are speeding tickets). Only about 6% of the accidents here are
> actually caused from speeding.
I don't like speeding tickets much myself and agree with some of what you
said, but there is a huge gaping hole in this arguement. Maybe this speeding
fines are working?
--
Michael Culley
"Da Man" <levy...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:%cLR9.4245$Hs3.5...@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...
Da Man
"Michael Culley" <mcu...@NOSPAMoptushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:3e1783e3$0$27997$afc3...@news.optusnet.com.au...
> > (BTW, 4/5 of moving
> > violations are speeding tickets). Only about 6% of the accidents here
are
> > actually caused from speeding.
I must also add that "Statistics" say something like 80% of accidents are
"speed related". Well what happens if we lower the speed limit to 1 km/h?
ALL accidents will be speed related.
>
> I don't like speeding tickets much myself and agree with some of what you
> said, but there is a huge gaping hole in this arguement. Maybe this
speeding
> fines are working?
No, I wouldn't say they are working, as most roads (including twinned
highways) are safe for higher speeds. It's the really high speeders that
should be getting the tickets, not the people doing 10 or 15 km/h over (90%
of the tickets written are under 20 km/h over). Speed is not what causes the
accidents in most cases, it's the MORON drivers that reach under the back
seat, looking for the CD they can't find, while swerving all over the road
at 100 km/h or like one moron I saw wondering all over the road, because,
now get this, she was READING A BOOK. There should be lifetime driving bans
(and possibly more) for such stupidity. I saw a cab fly (like 80 km/h or
more through a resdential zone) through a intersection I was sitting at in
another lane, with a red light. The crossing street was completely blind due
to a wooden picket fence and hedge on ether side. The cab driver never
looked or even slowed down.
Real, safe speed limits also change to the driving condtions, not some fixed
limit - you should be going much slower in heavy rain then when you have a
nice sunny warn day with a dry road.
I say speeding tickets are probably 85 - 90 % "tax" grab. A friend having
talked with a local traffic engineer said most of the speed limits that were
calculated safe and had been approved on a new road went up 20 km/h lower
then stated.
Also look at the european countries that have no speed limits. They have
some of the lowest road related fatailties and accidents per capita. The
differnce you ask? It's all in the driving habits. Drivers start young (12
Y.O.?) on small motorcycles/scooters, and have good training and roadsense.
Although when a very high speed screw up (ie in the range of 200 km/h or
more) does happen such as on the Autobahn, which is also very rare, it can
make a mess.
I also like there way of preventing people from running red lights. Here
cops like to watch them. In countries far away from here (aka, I don't
remember where!) the light goes instantly from green to red, no yellow. But
on the other direction, the red light goes from red to yellow, then to
green. So, when the yellow goes to green, the guy at the light is ready to
floor the car. No one in their right mind would try to run the red light
there. Suposidly it works well too.
Jim Yanik
> I really think units like these should be sold in supermarkets and
> service stations. They have existed for many years but have not been
> well advertised and not be readily available. I think authorities
> don't want them to be widely used because it will increase the amount
> of drinking people do before driving.
>
> --
> Michael Culley
>
>
How's that?
Please explain how having a BAC device is going to make people drink more
before driving.
Especially if it only gives a below/above limit indication.You can't use it
to see who gets the most drunk.
Jim Yanik
I rememebr when mandatory seat-belt interlocks were in US autos.People were
very upset after having faulty interlocks prevent them from starting their
cars. They didn't last long. In the US,people would be removing or
disabling them from Day One. ME included. Besides,why should I or anyone
else who does not drink have to bear the expense of interlocks?
Jim Yanik
>> (BTW, 4/5 of moving
>> violations are speeding tickets). Only about 6% of the accidents here
>> are actually caused from speeding.
>
> I don't like speeding tickets much myself and agree with some of what
> you said, but there is a huge gaping hole in this arguement. Maybe
> this speeding fines are working?
>
> --
> Michael Culley
The speeding still occurs.The accidents come more from other causes like
running red lights,inattention to driving,improper lane
changes,tailgating,reckless driving,etc. Some US police departments get the
majority of their budget from speeding tickets.There's one in Ohio that
issues speeding tickets on an Interstate that runs through their town,even
though there's NO entrance or exit IN their town.The size of their police
dept. more then doubled,IIRC,solely to write more speeding tix.