View Single Post
  #122   Report Post  
erniegalts
 
Posts: n/a
Default 8 Murdered, 45 critically injured in LA Spree

On 18 Jul 2003 23:37:50 -0700, (Jaws) wrote:

leon skunkers wrote in message . ..
On Thu, 17 Jul 2003 03:58:47 GMT, Gunner
wrote:

8 dead , 45 critically injured, including many children in LA Farmers
Market Driving Spree!

Ban Cars! Register them and license their owners!

No one has a need for a deadly automobile, let alone one that will
travel in excess of 60 miles per hour with one push of the peddle!

Ban these horrible instruments of death. Every year in the US, over
40,000 people are killed by them, and hundreds of thousands more are
maimed and crippled for life!

For Gods Sake,ban them for the Children!

Gunner

Liberals - Cosmopolitan critics, men who are the friends
of every country save their own. Benjamin Disraeli


yeah. And send your contributions to MAGOO (mothers against geezers
operating oldsmobiles). Hang up posters of the dead people all over
Florida's Fossil Riviera and get celebrities to whine about the whole
thing on TV.

Hangin' is too good for these old farts that take to the road
knowingly impaired by the ravages of age.


You'll be an "old fart" one of these days. After driving all those
years you're just going to hand over your keys. No laws saying you
have to, just decide for yourself that you're to old to drive. Give
up the vintage 1999 Corvette????? Give the old guy a little respect.
Maybe he caused an accident but he's still a human being.


The trouble with that attitude is that would have to excuse anyone for
anything, starting from Hitler, Stalin, and going on down. All were
"human beings" and all may have thought they were "doing the right
thing at the time."

Not necessarily the fault of this particular driver, IMHO, more the
fault of his society in allowing him to drive at his age without
periodic retesting.

There are obviously some people who shouldn't be licensed to drive.
If a person becomes legally blind at any age would you suggest that he
had some sort of a "right" to drive?

I seem to remember a news item a few years ago where some legally
blind person in the USA was arrested for driving while having an young
child on his lap telling him which way to steer.

How about a uncontrolled epileptics? How about those who suffer from
narcolepsy? How about sufferers from a number of other physical or
mental conditions?

Age alone doesn't imply incapacity. Some people can probably safely
drive at 95 or 100. However, this doesn't mean that all can.

According to reports I've read, this bloke drove three blocks through
a crowded marketplace at 100 kph, or about 62 MPH.

Any way to stop such carnage other than better driver testing?

Sure, could plant temporary land mines which would only trigger under
he weight of a vehicle on all approach streets, and provide warning
signs. [A bit tough on those who cannot read or make mistakes, but
limits damage to innocent people.]

Or could provide an armed guard at each entrance to the market with a
..44 magnum. They could have stopped the car or the driver with a well
placed shot.

Am sure that could find lots of volunteers in California who would
love to use their weapon to disable a car or disable or kill its
driver.

However, a kinder, more technological, solution would be a unit on the
car that would kill the engine on receipt of a coded tight EM signal,
such as a radar signal. It is probably even possible to set up an
"electronic fence" that no vehicle equipped with the engine shutoff
device could bypass.

If required all vehicles to be equipped with such a device, would
greatly simplify stopping vehicles at roadblocks , police chases, etc.

Of course, there are other possibilities. Could pull semitrailers
across all access roads and drivers who were out of control could
crash into them.

Or, if had good anchor points, could simply string heavy enough steel
cable.

Perhaps others would like to offer other possibilities to prevent such
tragedies?

Although I really don't expect much from many people on
misc.survivalism who have in the past tried to defend the "right" of
drunken drivers to drive without the risk of random breath tests. :-)