Ethylotest in disposable car: an absurd law?

Christophe · by **Christophe** » 07/03/12, 09:57

Hihihih it's true it's not in the right place: in the pinard ray or mugs it would be better ...

What disturbs me but really is that it is implemented as soon as the idea before the law is passed ...

There are some who doubt nothing when it comes to abusing the consumer ...

chatelot16 · by **chatelot16** » 07/03/12, 12:20

what I was criticizing was the requirement to have an unused breathalyzer in the car, and a law that discourages you from using it

but it is obviously a good thing to have cheap ethylostest readily available commercially

the breathalyzer is not useful in the car ... when you are in the car the decision to drive is already taken, and even if it exceeds the limit you have to go home

the breathalyzer is much more useful in the middle of a family meal, to check who already has his account, or who can still drive ... check a few hours later if it has improved or if it is better to sleep on the spot

the fact that breathalyzers sell well proves that people see the usefulness of it, and that there was no need for this law

bamboo · by **bamboo** » 27/03/12, 11:07

gegyx wrote:I wonder the validity of an alcohol meter (already in possession) for this use?
Reusable, but not necessarily up to the standard of the manufacturer's boyfriend "made in France".

according to the site below, as long as the breathalyzer is NF or CE, it is valid, even if it is electronic, and even if it was purchased before

http://www.actupresse.fr/category/automobile-transport

an electronic breathalyzer which can be used indefinitely and if the breathalyzer is of NF or CE standard it is then compatible with the law.

Christophe · by **Christophe** » 27/03/12, 11:11

Small remark: one does not say breathalyzer for an electronic breathalyzer?

(test = single use "all or nothing", meter = more precise measurement)

bamboo · by **bamboo** » 27/03/12, 11:17

Christophe wrote:Small remark: one does not say breathalyzer for an electronic breathalyzer?

(test = single use "all or nothing", meter = more precise measurement)

I asked myself the same question, and said to myself:
If the device gives an encrypted measurement, it must be a breathalyzer and if it simply displays a green / orange / red LED, then it would be a breathalyzer.
But this is only an opinion, I have no proof!

Gaston · by **Gaston** » 27/03/12, 11:19

Christophe wrote:* what happens one evening if after having self-tested negative there is more ethylotest to present to the constabulary?

Again, we are being imposed a law whose objectives are (rather) good, but without any thought on how to enforce it : roll:

More and more laws are being drafted in such a way that those who are controlled without being guilty find themselves unable to demonstrate their innocence.

bamboo · by **bamboo** » 27/03/12, 11:21

http://www.motoservices.com/enquetes/Et ... k11011.htm wrote :Breathalyzers are the only instruments authorized by law to measure the concentration of alcohol in the respiratory tract for legal proceedings. They are used by the police. Reliable and precise.
[...]
Breathalyzers are screening instruments
[...]
Electronic breathalysers are classified into two classes:
1. Class I = breathalyzers of very high quality and very high costs, they must meet very strict requirements in their use.
2. Class II = breathalyzers of the same metrological quality as a chemical breathalyzer. Reliable and precise for the general public. Breathalyzers display the values of the blood alcohol level and only up to the value of the contravention threshold.

chatelot16 · by **chatelot16** » 27/03/12, 22:02

Christophe wrote:* what happens one evening if after having self-tested negative there is more ethylotest to present to the constabulary?

here is the solution!
have a negative used breathalyzer

If we stopped we say I blew in it was good I went!

what's the point of having a breathalyzer and not using it

mieuieu the agent I look drunk ... but no I blew in this breathalyzer CE marked by the Chinese and it did not turn ... if you want to accuse me of being drunk , I am the victim of a mandatory breathalyzer test which clearly assured me that I was in good standing

gegyx · by **gegyx** » 27/03/12, 22:22

Last month in my supermarket (too close), a sign indicated that it became mandatory from June to have 2 ...

Were offered packages of 2, 2,20 €, with an expiration for February 2014.

Did67 · by **Did67** » 17/08/12, 15:05

The fateful date is approaching (fines). I started to look into the question:

a) It is A standard appliance, not used, which must be presented.
Here is the decree: http://www.legifrance.gouv.fr/affichTex ... rieLien=id

b) It therefore makes sense to buy TWO! You ate well / had a drink. You are in doubt. You test yourself. Positive: you are not driving. Negative: you are driving. A breathalyzer is used! You are being checked: you must present ONE non-used breathalyzer with standards. So you needed TWO at the start! CQFD.

c) electronic devices require annual calibration (or after 300 to 500 uses - whichever comes first). So they are not that practical!

Or :

1) In the above scenario: you test yourself with the electronic device, even if it is not calibrated; if you are positive or if you are near the limit, you abstain ...

And you have a non-used breathalyzer in reserve that you never use! To present in order not to have the fine.

Unfortunately I do not know the possible "drift" of the electronic device, as and when it is used !!! So the margin of error to be imposed by prudence!

Join an algorithmic censorship-free community of enthusiasts, technicians, scientists or engineers. Ads removed after registration.

Ethylotest in disposable car: an absurd law?

Who is online ?

Do a in-depth textual research ou look for an image, a drawing, a graphic on the forum

Explanations on the image search by Google or Qwant or other.