Safe Speed Forums

There was a bit of news yesterday about "alco-locks". It stemmed from this DfT PR:

www.dft.gov.uk/pns/DisplayPN.cgi?pn_id=2004_0109

The idea is that an electronic breathalyser won't allow the car to be driven unless an alcohol-free breath sample is provided by the driver. I'd be delighted to see a reduction in impaired driving, but is this going to work?

It seems to me that it would be absolutely trivial to defeat and as such is little better than pointless. For example:

You could wire around it - with or without a hidden defeat switch.

You could use a plastic bag to blow into the thing - squash the bag and provide a clean air sample.

You could use an air bed inflator to blow into the thing, or even the output of a face level vent.

You could get someone else to blow into the thing.

You could leave the engine running.

You could drink after you had started the car.

You could drive someone else's car.

You could drive your other car.

So that's another useless road safety initiative then. Isn't it?

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

I think it could shame some people into not driving whilst over the limit. Probably the ones that are just over but convince themselves they're alright. But are they the ones causing accidents, or are drink-related accidents mostly down to people well-over the limit who really don't give a damn. In any case this can only be a long term thing as most cars will remain without this gadget for years yet.

ad

_________________
DO NOT PANIC

i listened to an article n the radio last night about this.

It's worth noting that the manufacturer/inventor only claims that it reduces the likelyhood of people driving under the influence of alcohol. This will have been found through a study on a sample of people.

There were calls by some yesterday to have them fitted to every vehicle. these calls were dismissed as it would be "too expensive".

I think as a device, it may work on some people. However, it won't work on others! There are some people (namely those who will drink and drive in the first place) who will re-offend. If these people want to drive, they will drive and they will use one of the methods described by SS to evade the alco-lock device. All that will be achieved for these people is that their driving ban is reduced if the have one of these locks fitted!

There's no doubt that they will server a purpose if it does reduce fatalitis through drink driving, but it's another example of the athorities attacking the symptom, not the cause. The cause here is the attitude and personality of those willing the get behind the wheel drunk. You're not going to stop them with a lock of this kind.

To be fair, I think this scheme is only intended for existing offenders who find it difficult to stop themselves offending – it’s not intended to become a general fitment on cars.

Of course it doesn’t stop them driving other cars illegally, but it does give them a legal alternative.

Someone who would go to the trouble of sabotaging the device would probably have no qualms about driving illegally anyway – it will only appeal to people with a strong motivation to “go straight”.

As I understand it there would be a sensor in the system to detect the use of stale air – it would expect a certain level of warmth and moistness in the sample.

And the scenario of a drunk driver getting a child or a sober friend to blow into the nozzle before starting the car isn’t in my view very likely.

Whether someone would feel it worthwhile fitting the device at their own expense in return for a few months’ reduction of a ban (say 12 months to 9, or 3 years to 2½) is perhaps doubtful, but it could appeal to some people in rural areas who need to drive to earn a living.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Presumably they could get in through a passenger door, as well. Unless we're going to ban all drunk people from travelling in cars now. So obviously it's not a foolproof system, but as Paul says, maybe it would make people realise that they perhaps shouldn't be driving after drinking. Although it swings the other way too, because if you're very marginal on being legal to drive, or over the limit and the system gives a false reading, it will give a false sense of confidence (as if you'd need that after alcohol!) which might just possibly increase the risk of an accident.

_________________
-mike[F]
Caught in the rush of the crowd, lost in a wall of sound..

As I understand it, this system will apply a cut-off well below the UK legal limit so there is no question of it allowing marginally legal drivers to get behind the wheel.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Playing Devil's Advocate a little here ... I'm waiting for someone to stall at a set of lights and the car refuse to restart or take so long to restart that an accident occurs.

_________________
Will

Hi all,

Is there not a device in experimental stage that is fitted into the car's electronic system and is like a black box that calculates all the driving characteristics and decides that the person driving is:

(a) Sleeping

(b) Drunk/drugs

(c) Dangerous driving

(d) Speeding

(e) Not otherwise capable of driving i.e. Under age, no licence

Again, sounds good in theory but as Paul stated regarding the breathalyser there is so many what if's to be ironed out.

Andrew

Sort of off topic, but I can't wait for this to be introduced!

Whilst we're waiting for the aftermarket version to be released, is there anything we CAN do to stop drivers we know to be over the alcohol limit?

Just yesterday, my stepfather took my sister to a football game. He returned almost 8 hours after the game had finnished, having driven home steaming drunk with my sister in the car. What respect can he say he has for her life if he can drive home in a dangerous condition whilst she's in the car and still sleep/look at her
Drivers like this disgust me. The fact that he's my stepfather disgusts me even more.

The police have to stop him whilst he's driving, After that we've run out of ideas.

Sorry to bring this here, but any ideas, anyone?

If there's a regular pattern to this behaviour then you can call Crimestoppers and the police should stop and test him. They publicise these schemes at Christmas but they operate all year round.

http://www.crimestoppers-uk.org/

0800 555 111

I take it reasoning with him is not likely to be effective

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

I have done this and it is completely anonymous. Bibs pulled him two nights later and made it look like a routine stop. He was twice the legal limit. As far as I was concerned it was a blessed relief as it had played on my conscious. I'd watched him leave the pub after 5 or 6 pints and drive home every night for several weeks before I decided it couldn't go on.
He has his licence back now, and I haven't seen his car at the pub since.

I would not hesitate in future before doing it again.
Drink drivers are a menace, whether they be colleagues, friends or family.
They are a tragedy waiting to happen.
DO YOUR BIT TO GET THEM OFF THE ROAD.

I think the alco-lock is largely a gimmick with a very limited application, as discussed previously.

What really interests me is the stuff I've occasionally heard regarding similar devices to detect drivers about to fall asleep.

With the combination of the current political fixation on slowing drivers down all the time and the modern "up all night on t'internet" lifestyle I think driver fatigue may well become the "one third killer" that isn't a lie!

So far the only action we've seen is a hardening of attitudes in courts towards it, which does little to prevent it happening in cases where it wasn't deliberate - ie most cases. Oh and we see signs saying "Don't drive tired" which are equally useful - they might as well just say "Don't crash!" for the amount of useful advice they actually impart!

What we really need is some decent guidelines on what constitutes a dangerous level of tiredness. As an example, most parents with young infants ruining their sleep tend to be tired pretty much all the time (been there done that!), so does that mean they shouldn't drive at all? As a driver how can we be helped to make a reliable judgement on what level of tiredness constitutes an unacceptale risk?

A machine that can accurately warn responsible drivers when their level of fatigue is moving into the danger zone could just deliver the sort of improvement that speed cameras have so spectacularly failed to!

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

One such device is being tested at Alsager - joint venture with Bristol Uni and Manchester Metro Uni.

The prototype is bit bulky - but basic gist is that that the gadget tracks your eye movements via computerised black box and video link. They are working on modifications at moment - but sounds reasonable to me. It is supposed to be able to trace any impairment through fatigue, drink and drugs - apparently your eye movements are give away ... The mad Cats could expain the science better than I can ... The only thing is - if it thinks you are "under par" it either dials 999 for you or stops the car dead... the latter could be just a bit dangerous ....

Basingwerk - of course - will like the 999 option As do I ...

I was hoping for something a bit more subtle, a sort of "tiredness gauge" would be ideal, something like you used to see on Tom and Jerry, when they pulled the eyelids of the sleeping dog back...

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

Yes, most of those things work against this idea. But the idea that you could wire around it can be stopped. I’m just surprised that this isn’t done already, because it is a general problem with high-tech monitoring gadgets in cars, and could be used for other purposes. For example, it can be used as part of a biometric key procedure, and for self-identifying vehicles, which could be monitored by roadside RF.

For this to work, it is necessary for administrators to collude with manufacturers to create a means to make it impossible (or highly difficult) to work around devices by wiring around them. One approach (used in the software industry to prevent insecure transactions) might be as follows. The device could contain an algorithm which uses a (random per device) key to generate a series of (seemingly) random numbers that can only be interpreted as a number from a legal set by a receiving device in the engine control computer that contains the complementary part of the algorithm and a second key to decode the random numbers and compare them to the set of legal values, allowing the engine to run if they do, and refusing if they do not. This carries some similarities to the public/private key encryption services (e.g. RSA), although the technicalities are involved. Other solutions in this area of cryptography, involving digitally signed certificates and so on could bolster this simple scheme. It is, in part, similar to the CHIP and PIN routines that banks are introducing. Needless to say, the devices would not contain an API to allow the algorithms nor keys to be read back from the device. In any case the key distribution service would not be run by the manufactures, but by another organisation, to further limit the effectiveness of leaks.

_________________
I stole this .sig

It's just a shame that any idea like this has to immediately be latched upon as a means of obtaining control over drivers rather than as a source of information for them.

I firmly believe that the best way to improve safety in driving is to devolve more responsibility - and with it of course accountability - to drivers. This is the means by which industry in general has made massive steps forward in safety over the last twenty years, by instilling the belief that safety is everyone's individual responsibility, rather than something that "big brother" will do for us.

It is significant that the more the Government continues to impose external controls upon drivers - such as speed cameras - the worse road safety seems to get.

Lets have systems which help us to make balanced and informed safety decisions (eg my "dogs-eye-sleepometer" ), not systems which attempt to make our decisions for us, which ultimately absolve us of all responsibility.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!

As I've just said elsewhere, the simplest way for a drink driver who intends to re-offend to get round an alco-lock fitted to his car is to go out and buy a throwaway. Why bother trying to wire round the thing when it's a lot easier and probably cheaper to go and get a car that doesn't have one? This is probably happening anyway when a drink driver gets their license back after the ban and finds that they now can't afford the insurance premium. It may work for Mr Welloff-Smythe who would prefer to stop drink driving than give up the comforts of his Jaguar, and he can afford the extra premium. But if the bloke who does his lawn gets an alcolock in his 14 year old Astramax and can't or won't pay the insurance he can just go out and buy another 14 year old Astramax.

_________________
Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler - Einstein

That is what cameras do. You still have control over your speed, but they, as you point out, of course bring accountability to drivers.

_________________
I stole this .sig

That is why systems using biometric key procedures, and self-identifying vehicles, monitored by roadside RF, are attractive. The overlords would know who was driving what, where and when.

_________________
I stole this .sig

No, that is not what cameras do. Cameras devolve responsibility away from the drivers by absolving them from the need to actively decide upon a safe and appropriate speed at which to approach each hazard.

As long as we continue to encourage people to believe that they are driving safely as long as they are obeying a completely arbitrary speed limit, then there is little hope for road safety.

_________________
CSCP Latin for beginners...
Ticketo ergo sum : I scam therefore I am!