Personally after losing my six year old to drunk driver who drove into my fenced in yard. I find that getting the drunk drivers off the road mandatory. I don’t care if you had one drink or ten. If you drink, you don’t drive. If this technology can prevent someone else’s kid, uncle, aunt, cousin, brother, sister, mother, father or grandparents from getting killed by some irresponsible adult who decided to drink and drive. Then by all means, bring it.

As for the car being an extension of your privacy. No, it is not. According to the law, once your in a car and everyone can see what your doing. At that point you are in the public eye and then a hazard to yourself and the community around you.

It doesn’t matter if it dissipates w/in 2 minutes…if you car is on recirculating air, where is it dissipating to? Um, it is dissipating into the air of the car…and recirculating over and over and over. There’s no where for it to go so the sensor will pick it up for MUCH longer than 2 minutes. More like over an hour.

In addition, intoxicated backseat passengers also set off the sensor.

Oh, and if your windows are down or if the car is on fresh air, the sensor won’t pick alcohol up in the air. Think about it.

I work in auto safety research and am currently working on studying a passive alcohol sensor and trying to understand what it does and does not pick up on. It’s a nice technology and maybe someday will be there…but not yet. I”m quite frustrated by it’s limitations.

Besides the blow tube (which isn’t a passive sensor), I just don’t see how you can have a sensor in a car that will pick up on the driver’s alcohol-laden breath, but not the passengers’, and not non-imbibed substances like mouthwash or hand sanitizer or cologne.

Maybe getting morons to stop drinking and driving – or outfitting cars with a breathalyzer and free alternate rides home – would work better.

Perhaps these sensors combined with some electronics that measure vehicle inputs (like steering wheel motion, brakes, and throttle) could be used to determine if a driver is inebriated. It’s an interesting idea…but as Mickey has pointed out, we already have a system in place for catching drunk drivers that’s much less complicated. Too bad it doesn’t work better. All in all Shawn, great points, great analysis, great comment – keep em’ coming. This is one of my favorite posts.

Mouthwash – unless you use mouthwash as you are walking down your driveway, using mouthwash will not affect your ability to drive your car. It dissapates within 2 minutes. You’ll still be putting your shoes on and grabbing your keys. Worse case scenario if you like to use your mouthwash while sitting in your driveway, you just have to rinse with water afterwards. Might take an additional 7 seconds. But who uses mouthwash in their driveway anyway?

Car is an extension of your home – I don’t even know how to respond to this. In your car, you are on public property sharing the roads with other citizens who are all ordered to follow laws. In your house, you do as you please. At home you can get drunk or walk around naked. In public, you’d be arrested for public intoxication and indecent exposure – so how can anyone argue “your car is an extension of your home”? Once you cross your property line and/or conduct actions that potentially impact the safety of others, the police have every right to do what they do. That’s why we pay taxes.

A passive alcohol detection system is ideal IF IT WORKS. No intrusion. No hassle. No manufacturer has figured it out yet (perfectly), but with any technology, you start with an idea, then prototype, then eventually it makes its way into production. It will be less intrusive that clicking your seatbelt once it’s figured out. 5-10 years until that time though.