Reckless, Aggressive Drivers: Homegrown Terrorists

On Wed, 20 Feb 2008 21:03:37 -0800, Jack May wrote:
Probably. I think we are talking about a single chip. Since most people
carry a cell phone with them these day with location electronics, maybe the
law requires a transponder capability like the law now require location to
be determined by each cell phone for 911 responses.

Not a likely scenario.

- Objects in the road that weren't expected to end up in the road won't
have transponders. Wild animals. Debris blown into the road by storms.
Things that fall off vehicles. (semi retreads!)

- Who pays for the transponders? Required in every vehicle, every person,
and every domestic animal?

- As Amy suggests, it sure sounds like a golden opportunity for a massive
Denial of Service attack.

- Motorists won't accept it. Police can use the transponders to track
your location. Some don't want the police to know where you are at any
given second - others would simply be unhappy that it would make
enforcement of the speed limit much easier.

(they also won't accept it because it will make it impossible to pull off
stupid, dangerous moves in a bullheaded attempt to continue speeding when
traffic conditions don't permit it...)

(indeed, I think the latter condition will prevent the widespread adoption
of *any* type of autonomous collision avoidance system. A system that
*enforces* minimum safe following and passing distances will make it
impossible for the everyday 80mph speed bully to continue speeding. He'll
never accept it.)

On Feb 23, 7:08*pm, Pat wrote:
On Feb 19, 6:08*pm, donquijote1954
wrote:





I've vowed to fight terrorism... ROAD TERRORISM. It's not even that I
go looking for trouble, trouble looks for me, and sometimes for those
near me.

Anyway, the first "accident" (see book "It's No Accident") happened to
a neighbor of mine who, like me, rides a scooter. Well, she started
from the green light when a car ran the light and... smashed leg and
who knows what else. Beautiful lady, beautiful no more. And she was
lucky it wasn't an SUV with their raised "macho" bumpers... Well, the
guy did stop (wasn't she lucky?) and was very sorry. But chances are
he was speeding, or on the cell phone or trying to beat the light or
everything at once. Everybody does it, right?

Well the second incident was really minor compared to this one, but
happened to my girlfriend with whom I was riding bike on the road...
First thing a car comes real close to her and cuts her off while
turning. I guess people riding bikes are not worth losing a few
seconds, and they are simply ignored. Well sometimes they get
noticed... Second thing she gets yelled at from an SUV, "asshole!"...
and my girlfriend gives her the finger (yes, she does it too) before
doing the smart move (?) and taking the sidewalk.

It would be so easy to put speed cameras on traffic lights and catch
all those terrorists with a License to Kill. And that would take some
politicians who make an issue out of traffic safety... or a revolution
(see below), but that's another issue.

In the meantime here's a debate from the past about terrorists and
speed cameras in civilized places like Germany...

"Red light camera solution?"

"Big Boy" wrote in message

...
: These systems intrigue (and disgust) me.
:
: I was doing a deja.com search and noticed
: that they have them in Arizona. I am
: in Idaho where fortunately we don't have
: **** taking away even more of our
: freedom.

Freedom to speed and run red lights? What is there about "breaking the
law" that you don't understand? Are you against the idea of security
cameras in your place of business to protect you and your property?

Or are you one that figures "if I make it through and don't kill
anyone else I haven't really violated the law"?

The real solution is very simple - obey the law. Then you can drive
with a clear conscience and not have to worry about getting your
picture taken. You can even save the cost of the hair spray...

---
jb3

http://groups.google.com/group/az.ge.../thread/8efbe0...

***

http://atom.smasher.org/streetparty/...l2=the&l3=Bana...

WHY THE BANANA REVOLUTION?http://webspawner.com/users/bananarevolution

For all that you-all hate about cities -- the cars, the people, the
pollution, the SUVs, the lack of places to peddle, road rage and
everything else -- why don't you get the heck out and find yourself
someplace decent to live so that you can enjoy your lives?- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Believe it or not, the cities can be tamed, provided there's the
political will to do it. There's plenty of evidence of it, from
Curitiba (where public transportation was the key taming factor) to
Copenhagen (where bike facilities made all the difference).

Again, if everybody followed your advice you'd lose your paradise
mighty soon.

On Feb 24, 2:16*am, (Bill Z.) wrote:
donquijote1954 writes:
You wouldn't know this if you listen to all the vilification of drunk
drivers, while you see everybody chatting on the cell phone, but the
latter may be just as dangerous as the former. Well, it may just be
that, just as terrorism, they need a scapegoat to keep people off the
real subjects....

Cell phone driving = drunk driving...

snip

Except the article is overstating it: they compared drivers using
cell phones to drivers with a blood alcohol level of 0.08%, which
is just at the lower limit for drunk driving. *It's set low enough
that there is not a serious level of impairment, and it is legal
to drive with a blood alchohol level of 0.079 (in California - the
level may differ from state to state).

The article closes saying...

"This study does not mean people should start driving drunk," said co-
author Frank Drews. "It means that driving while talking on a cell
phone is as bad as or maybe worse than driving drunk, which is
completely unacceptable and cannot be tolerated by society."

I think some people can handle more or less alcohol/cell chatting. The
point is that we as society put up with a high level of hypocrisy,
before saying "no" to both alchohol and cell phones.


Also, there is a difference between chatting away and making a
quick courtesy call telling someone that you'll be late (and
you can, of course, do that while stopped at a red light as
the call is very short).

Hey, pull over and make the call from the shoulder or gas station.

On Feb 23, 9:32*pm, Eric Vey wrote:
Pat wrote:

You-all need to move to someplace sane. *Around here, there's no
relationship between cell phone use and driving.

You live out in the woods or something? If you took the cell phones away
from people here, there would be an open revolt. The President can
commit war crimes and that's okay so long as you don't take away
people's cell phones. Having a cell phone is their God given right, like
owning a gun. I own both, but somehow I suspect that people would give
up their guns before they gave up their cell phones.

A few states don't allow cell phones, and I believe NY is one of them.

On Feb 23, 7:56 pm, Alan Baker wrote:
In article ,

You can go ahead and thank your blessings for
being able to get around in your car. Don't
bother to think about the many people you ignore
and prevent from being so easily able to get around,
and who's personal liberty and quality of life you
steal, by driving your car (pay-off/trade-off.)
I guess they (we plebians) don't matter.

My use of the car doesn't prevent others from getting around without one.

In fact, due to the fact that public transit is subsidized and private
automobile use far overtaxed, my driving makes public transit possible.

You also make safe bicycling impossible. A bicycle revolution is
waiting to have some room to grow and prosper.

This is the end of a great story, where the cyclists finally prevail,
only to be the object of a counter-revolution lead by the polluting
predators...

'Somewhere in a cave in some future time, when, I hope, earth above is
full of flowers and trees and birds and bees and is not a desert, a
group of clandestine worshipers will gather around the last, long-
hidden gas guzzler to dream about tooling down the road and running
cyclists off of the road. They will drink the ritualistic cans of
beer and puff the ritualistic cigarettes and morn the days when men
were men and the law of the jungle gave the right of way to the strong
and the powerful. And they will swear a violent oath: "When I grow
up, I'm never going to let anyone tell me what to do!" Then they will
hurry home before their mothers notice that they still haven't done
their homework.'

http://www.kenkifer.com/bikepages/humor/planet.htm

donquijote1954 wrote:
On Feb 23, 9:32 pm, Eric Vey wrote:
Pat wrote:

You-all need to move to someplace sane. Around here, there's no
relationship between cell phone use and driving.
You live out in the woods or something? If you took the cell phones away
from people here, there would be an open revolt. The President can
commit war crimes and that's okay so long as you don't take away
people's cell phones. Having a cell phone is their God given right, like
owning a gun. I own both, but somehow I suspect that people would give
up their guns before they gave up their cell phones.

A few states don't allow cell phones, and I believe NY is one of them.

NY does not allow HAND HELD use. They allow using a microphone.

http://www.nysgtsc.state.ny.us/phon-ndx.htm

Hey, anonymous drivers with an addiction to gas, your vehicle causes
death and mayhem. Just like if you drink and drive, when you talk on
the cell phone, or any kind of reckless behavior, you carry a license
to kill...

Nikolas Barkelay

Montreal, d. 22.September.2002, hit in traffic

I wrote this on this night, Thursday September 26 2002, in honour of
Nikolas Barkelay, following an over-hundred-strong bicycle courier
critical mass here in Montreal, in memory of our fallen courier
comrade...

I am still moved tonight by the events that have transpired in the
last week following Nikolas Barkelay's accident and death...an almost
unknown bike messenger who died so sadly and so violently on his bike
after barely 3 months in this noble trade...a young 22 year old who
had a dream, which ended so suddenly, like shattered glass. A brave
warrior for whom over 100 of us rode for, in his memory, on this
evening tainted by sadness and recognition of the dangers we all face
every day as bicycle messengers in this urban jungle we call
home...over a hundred of us all upon our steel horses through the
streets of downtown Montreal, escorted by Nikolas's grieving parents,
no driver daring to honk at us as we are so used to during the day...a
strangely respectful procession through town, on our bicycles, in
memory of a fallen messenger who no one ever really got to know...

....

"The number-one danger is people on cell phones," says Joe Hendry, the
Toronto-based media spokesman for the International Federation of Bike
Messengers' Associations, a five-year-old international advocacy
organization that also puts on world championship races for couriers.
"That and door prizes. I've heard about people getting into
altercations, and I know one guy who had a cabbie throw a tire iron at
him. But [careless car drivers] are the biggest causes of accidents
for bike messengers." But not of fatalities. Hendry says that, "90 per
cent of deaths are caused by a truck, a bus, a van or an SUV."

http://www.ahalenia.com/memorial/nbarkelay.html

On Feb 24, 1:15*pm, donquijote1954
wrote:
On Feb 23, 9:32*pm, Eric Vey wrote:

Pat wrote:

You-all need to move to someplace sane. *Around here, there's no
relationship between cell phone use and driving.

You live out in the woods or something? If you took the cell phones away
from people here, there would be an open revolt. The President can
commit war crimes and that's okay so long as you don't take away
people's cell phones. Having a cell phone is their God given right, like
owning a gun. I own both, but somehow I suspect that people would give
up their guns before they gave up their cell phones.

A few states don't allow cell phones, and I believe NY is one of them.

Banning cell phones is an incredibly stupid law. What does it do? It
makes people openly and blantanly ignore the law. So when our kids
see it, they see us breaking the law. It teaches them that adults
sometimes feel that it's okay to break the rules. It's an incredibly
bad thing for the kids to see. But it's just a stupid, stupid law.

On Feb 24, 1:14*pm, donquijote1954
wrote:
On Feb 24, 2:16*am, (Bill Z.) wrote:





donquijote1954 writes:
You wouldn't know this if you listen to all the vilification of drunk
drivers, while you see everybody chatting on the cell phone, but the
latter may be just as dangerous as the former. Well, it may just be
that, just as terrorism, they need a scapegoat to keep people off the
real subjects....

Cell phone driving = drunk driving...

snip

Except the article is overstating it: they compared drivers using
cell phones to drivers with a blood alcohol level of 0.08%, which
is just at the lower limit for drunk driving. *It's set low enough
that there is not a serious level of impairment, and it is legal
to drive with a blood alchohol level of 0.079 (in California - the
level may differ from state to state).

The article closes saying...

"This study does not mean people should start driving drunk," said co-
author Frank Drews. "It means that driving while talking on a cell
phone is as bad as or maybe worse than driving drunk, which is
completely unacceptable and cannot be tolerated by society."

I think some people can handle more or less alcohol/cell chatting. The
point is that we as society put up with a high level of hypocrisy,
before saying "no" to both alchohol and cell phones.

Just exactly who is "society"?

If "society" is all of you city-slickers who are ****ed off at the
world, then what do you know anyway....

"it is not uncommon to hear cyclists being told by cops that the 'law
of the jungle' exists on the road."

http://www.ibiketo.ca/node/1735

I just want drivers and authorities to acknowledge that there's such
law at work on our roads and that we cyclists (and everything on two
wheels or legs) are at the bottom of the food chain, and that we need
special laws that protect us. By the way, the dangerous drivers are
the predators of this jungle.