4 ms·

How about they test for actual impairment before legally declaring you impaired?

by russh 7y ago

rudedogg 7y ago
This would actually be an easy technical solution, if laws could be passed to allow it. Basically a driving simulator with a handful of reasonable surprises. If you avoid them you’re declared not impaired.
- beefman 7y ago
  Any reasonable device of this kind would fail a nonzero perccentage of sober drivers and pass a nonzero percentage of intoxicated drivers. And not just because of noise -- some people drive worse sober than others do high. So don't hold your breath waiting for laws to allow it.
  - rudedogg 7y ago
    I thought about this a bit, and here's how I imagine it would work (based on how my state works currently): 1. You turn 16. You drive on the simulator - if you pass, you do a real drive with a human tester. 2. In 5 years when you renew your license, you go on the simulator again. If you pass, you get to renew your license. No human-in-car test required. ------------------------------------ The advantages: - This covers things we can't currently test for: - Marijuana - Spice and unknown drugs - Sleep deprivation - Deterioration due to age (afraid to bring this up, but it's an issue) - It's exact - there is no interpretation by a person. - It's an actual impairment/ability test. Rather than putting a number on how much {x} you consumed - it measures what matters. -------------------------------- For accessibility issues, traditional driving tests (and blood tests for impairment) would have to be used. If your vision doesn't allow you to test on the simulator - you take a physical driving test with a person. Simulator tests can't be used for impairment. Other interesting ideas: - Insurance rates based on your score in the simulator (not sure if this would be fair, or could be abused - but thought it was an interesting idea). - We could have data for how your driving ability degrades with age. - It should maybe be codified that equipment changes (new simulators, etc.) are not allowed between a test and impairment test. So the state would need to keep old equipment around for 5 years for migration. > Any reasonable device of this kind would fail a nonzero perccentage of sober drivers and pass a nonzero percentage of intoxicated drivers. And not just because of noise -- some people drive worse sober than others do high. So don't hold your breath waiting for laws to allow it. Yeah I agree that people will take issue with that. I personally don't care what someone did 15 minutes before getting into their car, so long as they can safely drive. Anyway, I thought this was fun to think about. It seems like a really nice solution. I'd love to hear some more reasons why it wouldn't work!
  - davinic 7y ago
    But if the whole point is road safety and fewer accidents then those sober drivers should fail.

How about they test for actual impairment before legally declaring you impaired?

by russh 7y ago

How about they test for actual impairment before legally declaring you impaired?

This would actually be an easy technical solution, if laws could be passed to allow it. Basically a driving simulator with a handful of reasonable surprises. If you avoid them you’re declared not impaired.

beefman 7y ago
Any reasonable device of this kind would fail a nonzero perccentage of sober drivers and pass a nonzero percentage of intoxicated drivers. And not just because of noise -- some people drive worse sober than others do high. So don't hold your breath waiting for laws to allow it.
- rudedogg 7y ago
  I thought about this a bit, and here's how I imagine it would work (based on how my state works currently): 1. You turn 16. You drive on the simulator - if you pass, you do a real drive with a human tester. 2. In 5 years when you renew your license, you go on the simulator again. If you pass, you get to renew your license. No human-in-car test required. ------------------------------------ The advantages: - This covers things we can't currently test for: - Marijuana - Spice and unknown drugs - Sleep deprivation - Deterioration due to age (afraid to bring this up, but it's an issue) - It's exact - there is no interpretation by a person. - It's an actual impairment/ability test. Rather than putting a number on how much {x} you consumed - it measures what matters. -------------------------------- For accessibility issues, traditional driving tests (and blood tests for impairment) would have to be used. If your vision doesn't allow you to test on the simulator - you take a physical driving test with a person. Simulator tests can't be used for impairment. Other interesting ideas: - Insurance rates based on your score in the simulator (not sure if this would be fair, or could be abused - but thought it was an interesting idea). - We could have data for how your driving ability degrades with age. - It should maybe be codified that equipment changes (new simulators, etc.) are not allowed between a test and impairment test. So the state would need to keep old equipment around for 5 years for migration. > Any reasonable device of this kind would fail a nonzero perccentage of sober drivers and pass a nonzero percentage of intoxicated drivers. And not just because of noise -- some people drive worse sober than others do high. So don't hold your breath waiting for laws to allow it. Yeah I agree that people will take issue with that. I personally don't care what someone did 15 minutes before getting into their car, so long as they can safely drive. Anyway, I thought this was fun to think about. It seems like a really nice solution. I'd love to hear some more reasons why it wouldn't work!
- davinic 7y ago
  But if the whole point is road safety and fewer accidents then those sober drivers should fail.