In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.

On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? Citation needed for that story, mommy.

On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? Citation needed for that story, mommy.


Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:20:41 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? Citation needed for that story, mommy.


Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

I repeat, most? You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

"HeyBub" wrote in message
m...

In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.

I have been rear ended 3 times. Each time I was stopped at a red light. One
was a drunken driver. One was a young girl. One was a fellow in a hot rod
that was racing the engine and his foot slipped off of the clutch. So
maybe that could have stopped the drunk and the girl. WW

On Aug 2, 2:57*pm, "HeyBub" wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...res-autonomous...

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.

And there would be something bad about forcing people to maintain
reasonable following distances? Or to have the brakes activate becase
dip****s are too busy witht he phone to pay attention?

Harry K

On 8/2/2012 8:50 PM, homme de la maison wrote:
On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers
want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles
could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year


You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

And then you got the over-60 crowd, most can barely pass a drivers test.

On 2012-08-03, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

I repeat, most? You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

Screw the "assertion". The real issue is, what else will that AEB
system be doing. You can bet yer ass it will also be an Event Data
Recorder (EDR) that will be recording yer driving history, like how
fast you were going when you hit the brakes, etc. And who do you
think is behind this? The insurance companies, so they can use yer
own car's event data against you should you be in an accident in which
they might have to settle. In short, yer own car will be ratting you
out to the insurance companies. Most new cars already include one or
more EDRs in yer car, specially if you have ABS brakes. You think
it's not gonna get worse? This AEB thing is jes another pretense to
get even more sophisticated EDR mechanisms into yer car. Believe that!

nb

--
"Do you recognize me? No!
....cuz I don't work here"
Support labelling GMO foods
http://www.nongmoproject.org/

On Aug 3, 8:17*am, notbob wrote:
On 2012-08-03, wrote:

I repeat, most? *You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

Screw the "assertion". *The real issue is, what else will that AEB
system be doing. *You can bet yer ass it will also be an Event Data
Recorder (EDR) that will be recording yer driving history, like how
fast you were going when you hit the brakes, etc. *And who do you
think is behind this? *The insurance companies, so they can use yer
own car's event data against you should you be in an accident in which
they might have to settle. *In short, yer own car will be ratting you
out to the insurance companies. *Most new cars already include one or
more EDRs in yer car, specially if you have ABS brakes. *You think
it's not gonna get worse? *This AEB thing is jes another pretense to
get even more sophisticated EDR mechanisms into yer car. *Believe that!

Shhh! I hear the plaintive whine of the irresponsible motorist...
-----

- gpsman

On 03/08/2012 7:35 AM, Harvey Specter wrote:
On 8/2/2012 8:50 PM, homme de la maison wrote:
On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers
want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles
could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year



You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

And then you got the over-60 crowd, most can barely pass a drivers test.

That's 'big' of you. Just remember that probably some day you will be
over sixty and then we'll see how you feel about your statement then.
There are good and bad drivers in every age classification.

On Aug 2, 9:38*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:20:41 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:
On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? *Citation needed for that story, mommy.

Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

I repeat, most? *You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

Proof the average motorist is not fully engaged in the driving task is
easily.... well, you can't ****ing miss it unless you have no idea of
what constitutes the task of "driving", the chance of which is far
greater than very likely.

All one must do to confirm this fact is note/recall their own internal
monologue the next/last time they motored.

It takes effort to concentrate on driving and take and maintain
"conscious control of the attentional spotlight". "I've got to get in
front of that truck" and "What's going to happen when I'm late this
time", etc., do not qualify as "driving-related" thought.

Then there are statistics: ~200M motorists -report to police- 6M
crashes per year.
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policyinform...021/fig4_3.cfm
http://exchange.aaa.com/safety/roadway-safety/

"The societal cost of crashes is a staggering $164.2 billion annually,
nearly two and a half times greater than the $67.6 billion price tag
for congestion, according to a new report released today by AAA."
http://newsroom.aaa.com/2008/03/cras...st-to-society/

"In 2000, 5,211 people were killed and about 140,000 injured in
crashes involving large trucks, according to AAA's Foundation for
Traffic Safety, which analyzed 10,000 fatal car-truck accidents.

" Car drivers were to blame in 75 percent of the accidents, while
truckers were deemed responsible in the rest."
http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=1...1#.UBvMdPV_Wuk
-----

- gpsman

On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 07:35:32 -0400, Harvey Specter
wrote:

On 8/2/2012 8:50 PM, homme de la maison wrote:
On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers
want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles
could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year


You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

And then you got the over-60 crowd, most can barely pass a drivers test.

....and the under fifty crowd who never learned.

notbob wrote:
On 2012-08-03, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

I repeat, most? You're going to need some proof for such a wild
assertion.

Screw the "assertion". The real issue is, what else will that AEB
system be doing. You can bet yer ass it will also be an Event Data
Recorder (EDR) that will be recording yer driving history, like how
fast you were going when you hit the brakes, etc. And who do you
think is behind this? The insurance companies, so they can use yer
own car's event data against you should you be in an accident in which
they might have to settle. In short, yer own car will be ratting you
out to the insurance companies. Most new cars already include one or
more EDRs in yer car, specially if you have ABS brakes. You think
it's not gonna get worse? This AEB thing is jes another pretense to
get even more sophisticated EDR mechanisms into yer car. Believe
that!


I think you put the cart before the horse.

Auto makers put the EDR's in cars for their own purposes, not because such
was legislated and certainly not at the behest of the insurance companies.
It was the trial/plaintiff legal community that glommed on to the EDR data.

As for EDR's being a tool of the insurance companies, I suspect that an EDR
helps an insurance company about as often as it hurts. In a collision, for
example, a State Farm policy holder may be at fault when he hits an Allstate
policy holder. In the next accident, the blame is reversed. In the big
picture, the contents of an EDR is proabably a wash as far as insurance
goes.

On Aug 3, 5:17*am, notbob wrote:
On 2012-08-03, wrote:

I repeat, most? *You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

Screw the "assertion". *The real issue is, what else will that AEB
system be doing. *You can bet yer ass it will also be an Event Data
Recorder (EDR) that will be recording yer driving history, like how
fast you were going when you hit the brakes, etc. *And who do you
think is behind this? *The insurance companies, so they can use yer
own car's event data against you should you be in an accident in which
they might have to settle. *In short, yer own car will be ratting you
out to the insurance companies. *Most new cars already include one or
more EDRs in yer car, specially if you have ABS brakes. *You think
it's not gonna get worse? *This AEB thing is jes another pretense to
get even more sophisticated EDR mechanisms into yer car. *Believe that!

nb

--
"Do you recognize me? *No!
...cuz I don't work here"
Support labelling GMO foodshttp://www.nongmoproject.org/

So your driving is so poor you don't want it recorded...got it.

Harry K

On Aug 3, 4:35*am, Harvey Specter wrote:
On 8/2/2012 8:50 PM, homme de la maison wrote:





On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers
want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles
could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...res-autonomous....

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.

Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

And then you got the over-60 crowd, most can barely pass a drivers test.

And what do you think your drivign ability will be when _you_ are over
60? As for accident record the worst group is the youths...which I
suspect you either are in or have just shortly left.

BTW 60 these days is a far pace from being what is considered "old".
I'll bet the statistics for age related accidents shows it begins at
around 70 or later.

Harry K

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 09:41:40 -0500, "HeyBub" wrote:

notbob wrote:
On 2012-08-03, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

I repeat, most? You're going to need some proof for such a wild
assertion.

Screw the "assertion". The real issue is, what else will that AEB
system be doing. You can bet yer ass it will also be an Event Data
Recorder (EDR) that will be recording yer driving history, like how
fast you were going when you hit the brakes, etc. And who do you
think is behind this? The insurance companies, so they can use yer
own car's event data against you should you be in an accident in which
they might have to settle. In short, yer own car will be ratting you
out to the insurance companies. Most new cars already include one or
more EDRs in yer car, specially if you have ABS brakes. You think
it's not gonna get worse? This AEB thing is jes another pretense to
get even more sophisticated EDR mechanisms into yer car. Believe
that!


I think you put the cart before the horse.

Auto makers put the EDR's in cars for their own purposes, not because such
was legislated and certainly not at the behest of the insurance companies.
It was the trial/plaintiff legal community that glommed on to the EDR data.

As for EDR's being a tool of the insurance companies, I suspect that an EDR
helps an insurance company about as often as it hurts. In a collision, for
example, a State Farm policy holder may be at fault when he hits an Allstate
policy holder. In the next accident, the blame is reversed. In the big
picture, the contents of an EDR is proabably a wash as far as insurance
goes.

Except that if they show blame, the insurance company doesn't get the
deductible from both parties. If they can pin some responsibility on each,
they get the deductible.

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 06:08:49 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
wrote:

On Aug 2, 9:38*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:20:41 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:
On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? *Citation needed for that story, mommy.

Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

I repeat, most? *You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

Proof the average motorist is not fully engaged in the driving task is
easily.... well, you can't ****ing miss it unless you have no idea of
what constitutes the task of "driving", the chance of which is far
greater than very likely.

OK, so give us a believable citation for that. Then one that shows that "not
fully engaged" == texting or (you can read the list from above)

All one must do to confirm this fact is note/recall their own internal
monologue the next/last time they motored.

irrelevant bull**** snipped

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 08:07:25 -0700 (PDT), Harry K
wrote:

On Aug 3, 4:35*am, Harvey Specter wrote:
On 8/2/2012 8:50 PM, homme de la maison wrote:





On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers
want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles
could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...res-autonomous...

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.

Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

And then you got the over-60 crowd, most can barely pass a drivers test.

And what do you think your drivign ability will be when _you_ are over
60? As for accident record the worst group is the youths...which I
suspect you either are in or have just shortly left.

BTW 60 these days is a far pace from being what is considered "old".
I'll bet the statistics for age related accidents shows it begins at
around 70 or later.

Close. It's certainly a bathtub curve with the worst, those over 75, slightly
worse than the 16-20 group. The 20-24 group is about the same as the 70-74
group. The middle of the bathtub, from age 30 to age 70 is pretty flat at
about half that of the 20-24 group. It's kinda old data but if anything the
older people are likely doing better now.

http://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstr...6.0001.001.pdf

On 8/2/2012 4:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.


I'll bet that police vehicles will not be equipped with such a device
because it might make it difficult or impossible for them to ram any
vehicle or do the PIT maneuver. Possibly all vehicles belonging to any
government law enforcement agency will be exempt from something forced
on us lowly subjects of The Imperial Federal Government. ^_^

TDD

On Aug 3, 1:05*pm, "
wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 06:08:49 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
wrote:
On Aug 2, 9:38*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:20:41 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:
On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? *Citation needed for that story, mommy.

Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

I repeat, most? *You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

Proof the average motorist is not fully engaged in the driving task is
easily.... well, you can't ****ing miss it unless you have no idea of
what constitutes the task of "driving", the chance of which is far
greater than very likely.

OK, so give us a believable citation for that.

"Driver inattention is the leading factor in most crashes and near-
crashes, according to a landmark research report released today
[Thursday, April 21, 2006] by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
(VTTI)."
http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Pre...+Driving+Study

Then one that shows that "not
fully engaged" == texting or (you can read the list from above)

I don't believe the list was intended to be all-inclusive, and only
someone grasping at straws would interpret it that way.

All one must do to confirm this fact is note/recall their own internal
monologue the next/last time they motored.

irrelevant bull**** snipped

That's exactly the type of sparkling rebuttal I expected.
-----

- gpsman

On Friday, August 3, 2012 9:01:12 AM UTC-4, Gil wrote:
That's 'big' of you. Just remember that probably some day you will be
over sixty and then we'll see how you feel about your statement then.
There are good and bad drivers in every age classification.

Of course there are always SOME good drivers in every age group.

When does it make sense to stop letting ALL the drivers in a particular age group continue to drive, simply because SOME of them are still good drivers?

Apparently never, because their feewings will be hurt. We can't tell old Mr Magoo he can't drive anymore because he might get MAD at us. We can't tell old Mr Magoo he can't drive anymore because it's HARD. Awww.

Just an aside, caring about someone else's feelings, or someone else's safety, is a liberal trait. Good conservatives always look out for #1.

Personally, I would hope that someone takes my keys away if I become a menace. I'll probably get very angry when it happens. I'm sure I won't like it, but I won't be in a position to make an objective decision about my ability to drive. I'll still fancy myself to be Dale Freaking Earnhardt Jr, even if I'm 85, blind in one eye, with no feeling in my right leg.

On 08/02/2012 09:38 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:20:41 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? Citation needed for that story, mommy.


Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

I repeat, most? You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.


LOL, you're an amusing dumbass!

If you hear rain on your roof and you look out the window and see that
it is in fact raining, do you still need to go to www.weather.gov for proof?

On Friday, August 3, 2012 1:38:36 PM UTC-4, The Daring Dufas wrote:
I'll bet that police vehicles will not be equipped with such a device
because it might make it difficult or impossible for them to ram any
vehicle or do the PIT maneuver. Possibly all vehicles belonging to any
government law enforcement agency will be exempt from something forced
on us lowly subjects of The Imperial Federal Government. ^_^

If all vehicles had an autonomous braking system, the police wouldn't have to ram anyone or perform the PIT maneuver. They just need to box the perp in, and slow down. The perp's car will stop itself, so as to avoid hitting the police vehicle in front of it.

On 03/08/2012 3:17 PM, wrote:
On Friday, August 3, 2012 9:01:12 AM UTC-4, Gil wrote:
That's 'big' of you. Just remember that probably some day you will be
over sixty and then we'll see how you feel about your statement then.
There are good and bad drivers in every age classification.

Of course there are always SOME good drivers in every age group.

When does it make sense to stop letting ALL the drivers in a particular age group continue to drive, simply because SOME of them are still good drivers?

Apparently never, because their feewings will be hurt. We can't tell old Mr Magoo he can't drive anymore because he might get MAD at us. We can't tell old Mr Magoo he can't drive anymore because it's HARD. Awww.



That's a stupid attitude. Loss of driving privileges should be based on
displayed performance, not on some perceived deficiency because someone
reaches a certain age. A hell of a lot twenty-year old drivers shouldn't
be on the road. Based on your comments I doubt you would recognize a
sixty-year old if you saw one. Probably at your age everyone over forty
looks 'old'.




Just an aside, caring about someone else's feelings, or someone else's safety, is a liberal trait. Good conservatives always look out for #1.

Personally, I would hope that someone takes my keys away if I become a menace.

I agree and it should be regardless of age. If you think you can drive
safely like Dale Earnhart used to on the track just because you're
young, then you are delusional.


I'll probably get very angry when it happens. I'm sure I won't like it,
but I won't be in a position to make an objective decision about my
ability to drive. I'll still fancy myself to be Dale Freaking Earnhardt
Jr, even if I'm 85, blind in one eye, with no feeling in my right leg.

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 10:46:11 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
wrote:

On Aug 3, 1:05*pm, "
wrote:
On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 06:08:49 -0700 (PDT), gpsman
wrote:
On Aug 2, 9:38*pm, "
wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:20:41 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:
On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? *Citation needed for that story, mommy.

Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

I repeat, most? *You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.

Proof the average motorist is not fully engaged in the driving task is
easily.... well, you can't ****ing miss it unless you have no idea of
what constitutes the task of "driving", the chance of which is far
greater than very likely.

OK, so give us a believable citation for that.

"Driver inattention is the leading factor in most crashes and near-
crashes, according to a landmark research report released today
[Thursday, April 21, 2006] by the National Highway Traffic Safety
Administration (NHTSA) and the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute
(VTTI)."
http://www.nhtsa.gov/About+NHTSA/Pre...+Driving+Study

The average driver isn't crashing. Your logic isn't.

Then one that shows that "not
fully engaged" == texting or (you can read the list from above)

I don't believe the list was intended to be all-inclusive, and only
someone grasping at straws would interpret it that way.

The issue was a stupid rant against texting. Not that I'm for DWT but it was
a stupid rant, which you've just made more stupid with your tangent.

All one must do to confirm this fact is note/recall their own internal
monologue the next/last time they motored.

irrelevant bull**** snipped

That's exactly the type of sparkling rebuttal I expected.

OK, genius, tell us how it's relevant to the *majority* of drivers texting
(add list from above) while driving.

On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 15:18:49 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 09:38 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 21:20:41 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 08:54 PM, zzzzzzzzzz wrote:
On Thu, 02 Aug 2012 20:50:33 -0400, homme de la maison
wrote:

On 08/02/2012 05:57 PM, HeyBub wrote:
In Europe, so says Popular Science.

"Cars in Europe may soon become very much more robotic whether drivers want
them to or not. New rules coming down from the European Commission will
require all commercial vehicles to be fitted with autonomous emergency
braking (AEB) technology by November 2013, and passenger vehicles could soon
follow suit."

http://www.popsci.com/cars/article/2...sold-next-year

You can probably expect the U.S. to mimic Europe if the "It's for the
children" politicians are in power.



Considering that most "drivers" are busy texting, sexting, blogging,
twittering, chatting, updating Fecesbook or applying makeup, maybe this
is actually a good idea.

Most? Citation needed for that story, mommy.


Pull your head out of your ass and look around...you'll see what I mean.

I repeat, most? You're going to need some proof for such a wild assertion.


LOL, you're an amusing dumbass!

You changed your nym again, Dumb****? It would be good if you changed your
panties as often.

If you hear rain on your roof and you look out the window and see that
it is in fact raining, do you still need to go to www.weather.gov for proof?

When it's a lie, sure, I want proof. ...but liars like lies, don't you,
Dumb****.

zzzzzzzzzz wrote:

Auto makers put the EDR's in cars for their own purposes, not
because such was legislated and certainly not at the behest of the
insurance companies. It was the trial/plaintiff legal community that
glommed on to the EDR data.

As for EDR's being a tool of the insurance companies, I suspect that
an EDR helps an insurance company about as often as it hurts. In a
collision, for example, a State Farm policy holder may be at fault
when he hits an Allstate policy holder. In the next accident, the
blame is reversed. In the big picture, the contents of an EDR is
proabably a wash as far as insurance goes.

Except that if they show blame, the insurance company doesn't get the
deductible from both parties. If they can pin some responsibility on
each, they get the deductible.

You've got a good point. Still, I think the expense of subpoenaing the
device, removing it from the wrecked car, having it read and decoded by an
expert, and so on, would be more expensive than a $500 or $1000
deductable...

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 15:48:04 -0500, "HeyBub" wrote:

wrote:

Auto makers put the EDR's in cars for their own purposes, not
because such was legislated and certainly not at the behest of the
insurance companies. It was the trial/plaintiff legal community that
glommed on to the EDR data.

As for EDR's being a tool of the insurance companies, I suspect that
an EDR helps an insurance company about as often as it hurts. In a
collision, for example, a State Farm policy holder may be at fault
when he hits an Allstate policy holder. In the next accident, the
blame is reversed. In the big picture, the contents of an EDR is
proabably a wash as far as insurance goes.

Except that if they show blame, the insurance company doesn't get the
deductible from both parties. If they can pin some responsibility on
each, they get the deductible.

You've got a good point. Still, I think the expense of subpoenaing the
device, removing it from the wrecked car, having it read and decoded by an
expert, and so on, would be more expensive than a $500 or $1000
deductable...

Ah, but *without* the device the insurance companies can easily pin it on
both; "prove us wrong". I had that happen in a parking lot a few years ago.
Both of us were at fault, which was fine with me. My truck bumper hit her
fender (both backing up). No damage at all to my bumper.

Harvey Specter wrote:

And then you got the over-60 crowd, most can barely pass a drivers
test.

I doubt that assertion.

#1. I'll bet, but am too lazy to look it up, that drivers over 60, per
capita, have fewer wrecks than drivers under 25.

#2. Most of us old farts recognize creeping infirmity and adjust our
behavior accordingly. I, for example, know my reaction time has increased
over the years, so I expand the distance I use in following another car,
particularily at speed. I also check cross-street traffic twice, rather than
relying on the other driver to stop, and so on.

#3. With age comes patience. I can't remember the last time I flipped the
bird at another driver, shouted some obscenity, resorted to freeway
pay-back, or played a game of chicken.

No more road-rage for me. You'd be surprised at how much respect and
admiration you can garner by showing off your really big gun!

On 8/3/2012 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Friday, August 3, 2012 1:38:36 PM UTC-4, The Daring Dufas wrote:
I'll bet that police vehicles will not be equipped with such a device
because it might make it difficult or impossible for them to ram any
vehicle or do the PIT maneuver. Possibly all vehicles belonging to any
government law enforcement agency will be exempt from something forced
on us lowly subjects of The Imperial Federal Government. ^_^

If all vehicles had an autonomous braking system, the police wouldn't have to ram anyone or perform the PIT maneuver. They just need to box the perp in, and slow down. The perp's car will stop itself, so as to avoid hitting the police vehicle in front of it.


I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

TDD

Didn't Onstar do that already?

I have also heard of "buy here; pay here" places doing that, also. Using
remote boxes, and computer interface. I don't have the story, but I remember
hearing of a car place, an employee was fired, but they didn't delete his
log and pass for their computer. He went home, and disabled 100 plus cars,
from his home computer.

Christopher A. Young
Learn more about Jesus
www.lds.org
..

"The Daring Dufas" wrote in message
...

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

TDD

On 2012-08-03, The Daring Dufas wrote:

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

Not a new idea. That one's been waiting in the wings fer some time.

nb

--
"Do you recognize me? No!
....cuz I don't work here"
Support labelling GMO foods
http://www.nongmoproject.org/

On 8/3/2012 5:14 PM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-08-03, The Daring Dufas wrote:

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

Not a new idea. That one's been waiting in the wings fer some time.

nb


Like gun control. O_o

Remember Jimmy Carter's (female?) head of DOT who wanted all automobiles
fitted with governors to keep them from exceeding
55mph? ^_^

TDD

On Aug 3, 6:03*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 8/3/2012 2:26 PM, wrote:

On Friday, August 3, 2012 1:38:36 PM UTC-4, The Daring Dufas wrote:
I'll bet that police vehicles will not be equipped with such a device
because it might make it difficult or impossible for them to ram any
vehicle or do the PIT maneuver. Possibly all vehicles belonging to any
government law enforcement agency will be exempt from something forced
on us lowly subjects of The Imperial Federal Government. ^_^

If all vehicles had an autonomous braking system, the police wouldn't have to ram anyone or perform the PIT maneuver. They just need to box the perp in, and slow down. The perp's car will stop itself, so as to avoid hitting the police vehicle in front of it.

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

TDD

for our safety........

incidenty young drivers vare statistically worse than old drivers

with age comes some self control, for many......

young people havent known failure and believe they are
indestructible...

i taught a 16 year old to drive, he believed the speed limit was the
minimum speed to drive. he passed his drivers test on saturday, and
had a accident monday afternoon..... 72 hours later.

he laughed at my driving, go a little under the speed limit, never be
in a hurry, leave lots of extra space between you and everyone else,
dont follow too close......

i seriously suggested he drive more like me.......

if he has another accident before he turns 18 his mom will make him
turn in his license, for his safety and beyond which insurance wouldnt
be affordable.....

i drive for my job over 40K miles a year......

On 8/3/2012 5:22 PM, bob haller wrote:
On Aug 3, 6:03 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 8/3/2012 2:26 PM, wrote:

On Friday, August 3, 2012 1:38:36 PM UTC-4, The Daring Dufas wrote:
I'll bet that police vehicles will not be equipped with such a device
because it might make it difficult or impossible for them to ram any
vehicle or do the PIT maneuver. Possibly all vehicles belonging to any
government law enforcement agency will be exempt from something forced
on us lowly subjects of The Imperial Federal Government. ^_^

If all vehicles had an autonomous braking system, the police wouldn't have to ram anyone or perform the PIT maneuver. They just need to box the perp in, and slow down. The perp's car will stop itself, so as to avoid hitting the police vehicle in front of it.

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

TDD

for our safety........

incidenty young drivers vare statistically worse than old drivers

with age comes some self control, for many......

young people havent known failure and believe they are
indestructible...

i taught a 16 year old to drive, he believed the speed limit was the
minimum speed to drive. he passed his drivers test on saturday, and
had a accident monday afternoon..... 72 hours later.

he laughed at my driving, go a little under the speed limit, never be
in a hurry, leave lots of extra space between you and everyone else,
dont follow too close......

i seriously suggested he drive more like me.......

if he has another accident before he turns 18 his mom will make him
turn in his license, for his safety and beyond which insurance wouldnt
be affordable.....

i drive for my job over 40K miles a year......


Back in the 80's I was running service calls around The Southeast and
put 70k miles on a six cylinder Ford Econoline in a single year. ^_^

TDD

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 15:56:16 -0500, "HeyBub" wrote:

Harvey Specter wrote:

And then you got the over-60 crowd, most can barely pass a drivers
test.

I doubt that assertion.

#1. I'll bet, but am too lazy to look it up, that drivers over 60, per
capita, have fewer wrecks than drivers under 25.

Yep. I posted a link to some statistics earlier.

#2. Most of us old farts recognize creeping infirmity and adjust our
behavior accordingly. I, for example, know my reaction time has increased
over the years, so I expand the distance I use in following another car,
particularily at speed. I also check cross-street traffic twice, rather than
relying on the other driver to stop, and so on.

....and check twice, in case you forgot. ;-)

#3. With age comes patience. I can't remember the last time I flipped the
bird at another driver, shouted some obscenity, resorted to freeway
pay-back, or played a game of chicken.

Alzheimer's does that, too. ;-)

No more road-rage for me. You'd be surprised at how much respect and
admiration you can garner by showing off your really big gun!

Didn't they tell you to put that away! It scares the children.

On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 17:19:31 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 8/3/2012 5:14 PM, notbob wrote:
On 2012-08-03, The Daring Dufas wrote:

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

Not a new idea. That one's been waiting in the wings fer some time.

nb


Like gun control. O_o

Remember Jimmy Carter's (female?) head of DOT who wanted all automobiles
fitted with governors to keep them from exceeding
55mph? ^_^

I suggested that they start with Carter (hmm, I did have a car fitted with a
Carter carburetor). Perhaps today Cuomo could run along beside your car.

On Fri, 3 Aug 2012 15:22:11 -0700 (PDT), bob haller wrote:

On Aug 3, 6:03*pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 8/3/2012 2:26 PM, wrote:

On Friday, August 3, 2012 1:38:36 PM UTC-4, The Daring Dufas wrote:
I'll bet that police vehicles will not be equipped with such a device
because it might make it difficult or impossible for them to ram any
vehicle or do the PIT maneuver. Possibly all vehicles belonging to any
government law enforcement agency will be exempt from something forced
on us lowly subjects of The Imperial Federal Government. ^_^

If all vehicles had an autonomous braking system, the police wouldn't have to ram anyone or perform the PIT maneuver. They just need to box the perp in, and slow down. The perp's car will stop itself, so as to avoid hitting the police vehicle in front of it.

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

TDD

for our safety........

incidenty young drivers vare statistically worse than old drivers

with age comes some self control, for many......

young people havent known failure and believe they are
indestructible...

i taught a 16 year old to drive, he believed the speed limit was the
minimum speed to drive. he passed his drivers test on saturday, and
had a accident monday afternoon..... 72 hours later.

What was he doing driving alone 72 hours after getting his license? Mommy
screwed up, big time. It was a month before I got the car by myself and my
son wasn't much different (though he was 18 before he got is license - had to
force him to get it).

he laughed at my driving, go a little under the speed limit, never be
in a hurry, leave lots of extra space between you and everyone else,
dont follow too close......

i seriously suggested he drive more like me.......

Yeah, I bet he listened intently to that suggestion. rolls eyes

if he has another accident before he turns 18 his mom will make him
turn in his license, for his safety and beyond which insurance wouldnt
be affordable.....

I would have pulled the keys after the first one (before, see above).
Insurance usually goes *way* up for minors after the first accident.

i drive for my job over 40K miles a year......

On Fri, 03 Aug 2012 17:39:22 -0500, The Daring Dufas
wrote:

On 8/3/2012 5:22 PM, bob haller wrote:
On Aug 3, 6:03 pm, The Daring Dufas the-daring-du...@stinky-
finger.net wrote:
On 8/3/2012 2:26 PM, wrote:

On Friday, August 3, 2012 1:38:36 PM UTC-4, The Daring Dufas wrote:
I'll bet that police vehicles will not be equipped with such a device
because it might make it difficult or impossible for them to ram any
vehicle or do the PIT maneuver. Possibly all vehicles belonging to any
government law enforcement agency will be exempt from something forced
on us lowly subjects of The Imperial Federal Government. ^_^

If all vehicles had an autonomous braking system, the police wouldn't have to ram anyone or perform the PIT maneuver. They just need to box the perp in, and slow down. The perp's car will stop itself, so as to avoid hitting the police vehicle in front of it.

I have a feeling a remote kill switch and government database containing
the kill code for every vehicle will be added by
well meaning lawmakers to the specs for all new vehicles sold
in this country. It is for the children. ^_^

TDD

for our safety........

incidenty young drivers vare statistically worse than old drivers

with age comes some self control, for many......

young people havent known failure and believe they are
indestructible...

i taught a 16 year old to drive, he believed the speed limit was the
minimum speed to drive. he passed his drivers test on saturday, and
had a accident monday afternoon..... 72 hours later.

he laughed at my driving, go a little under the speed limit, never be
in a hurry, leave lots of extra space between you and everyone else,
dont follow too close......

i seriously suggested he drive more like me.......

if he has another accident before he turns 18 his mom will make him
turn in his license, for his safety and beyond which insurance wouldnt
be affordable.....

i drive for my job over 40K miles a year......


Back in the 80's I was running service calls around The Southeast and
put 70k miles on a six cylinder Ford Econoline in a single year. ^_^

I have 107K on my 2001 (20K in the last 8 months). ;-)