Should all vehicles have mandatory breathalyzers installed?

I don't drink. why should I be compelled by the state to blow into some device before being electronically "approved" to start my own truck?

Fundamentally, what you're advocating is for a free "society" to ultimately descend to humanity's lowest common denominator via "preemptive" state mandates. Everyone guilty until proven innocent....everyone incapable of managing their lives without some threat of fines or incarceration to "steer" them towards an outcome..... collective punishment for the sins of a few.

that's authoritarian, Hobbesian, "common good" state collectivism......which, once breached, is absolutely bottomless......as NSA's covert, probable causeless, domestic to domestic spying and private communication data storage proves.

With such views, you're unwittingly? shoveling more coal under the frog pot....I'd cannot advise against that strenuously enough.

 

Do you really think this is the same thing at all? For one, you're targeting only those who are frequenting those sites, and on the other you target everyone. Secondly, in the case of the sting, the police usually have created the website, with breathalyzers you're telling manufacturers what to produce. Third, unlike molesting kids not everyone who has a level of impairment will do harm. Molestation always causes harm. Fourth, BAC is arbitrary and not everyone is affected in the same way. Child molestation not so.

Not all people who drink and drive will harm someone, nor do they intend to harm someone. All child predators engaging children to meet them would harm that child and they actively seek to do so.

If you want to discuss this with a different more relative analogy I'll be happy to do so, but the one you provided doesn't work.

 

(and somehow... my "blanket banning so called "assault" rifles" was an invalid analogy)

 

Wouldn't it be easier and less invasive to get rid of parking lots at bars?

 

And it would take the average knuckle head about an hour to find a work around. About the only thing you'd likely accomplish is raising the cost of being a drunk drive which is already prohibitive for the drunk as well as the rest of us.

 

Absolutely. Or maybe we should simply ban cars altogether, since so many people drive drunk.

 

Actually, it has no ignition system...my truck is diesel.

 

how about if we just govern all cars to go no faster than 35? almost no one dies at that speed and it would save tons on fuel!

 

Try to stay on topic.

 

So, what's to keep a sober person from having a drunk enemy breath into the tube? Locking them out of the car late at night, stranded in a desolate area, and they've got a pressing need to leave town by midnight or else. Think about it.

 

Why should I be presumed guilty until I prove myself innocent?

Breathalyzers aren't free, and require maintenance. IIRC, they are about $1500. Let's just harshly punish drunk driving instead of taxing every car owner by $1500.

 

The function of government should be to actually stop crimes, not create crimes to punish people. There are enough pedophiles that can be captured that have actually contacted children. Go after them, instead of attracting more.