Police remotely stop cars

Yes I am comfortable with that. At least more comfortable than having to trust people that might have something to hide. Also I want to state that I'm not implying that a BB is the be all end all. It is just an additional tool; a factor which can be considered. I believe a helpful one.

Not crazy, just misguided. This may come as a shock to you but I'm a huge supporter of privacy rights. For example I have big issues with the so called Patriot act, but that's for another day in another forum. Anyway, I just don't think that anyone has a "right" not to be watched, looked at, gazed upon, photographed, videoed or otherwise observed in PUBLIC PLACES. Last I checked, our city streets and intersections are public places. In short, if a policeman could stand on the corner and observe people running the red light, then a video camera that serves the function by proxy, to me is really no different (in terms of legitimacy). So yeah, I'm with you on defending real issues of privacy rights, but I just don't see this as violating any of those rights. Try to spy inside my home or such though and see how friendly I am to that. ;-)

You are incorrect. You can be observed, photographed or even video taped in public places; not only by members of law enforcement by your fellow members of the public as well. You have no such "right" to prohibit such. Exactly where do you think this right is coded, recorded or otherwise legally recognized?

I'm unfamiliar with this issue but judging by my general stance on public places like that, I would guess I wouldn't have a problem with it.

Okay. Hey, just remember I am a strong supporter of rights, especially privacy. We just happen to disagree on a couple things as pertains to their status as rights or non rights. Let's get back to our F-bodies shall we?

** To email a reply, please remove everything up to and including the underscore in my email reply header.
Reply to
SgtSilicon
Loading thread data ...

Thank you for the kind words. My understanding is that in the ECM, BCM or some other such module in many of todays current production automobiles, that some telemetry information is recorded. Things such as speed, brakes application etc. Exactly which elements of telemetry, for what span of time, or even under which circumstances it is recorded are unknown to me. I guess I might basically say that it would seem there is more going on there than just mere OBD-II in many of todays vehicles. Or so legend has it.

Anyway, it doesn't bother me if such a BB (black box) is forensically evaluated in the event of a crash investigation or some such. Much the same way that the tires, body, gauges or road markings are. I would not, however, support the use of such technology to actively report, disclose or otherwise communicate such information pro actively. Such use I think runs into a possible conflict with 4th amendment rights to privacy and even possibly 5th amendment issues.

And yes... I certainly make my share of mistakes too.

** To email a reply, please remove everything up to and including the underscore in my email reply header.
Reply to
SgtSilicon

On Wed, 21 Jan 2004 03:02:19 GMT, foolspicedham_melbo snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com (SgtSilicon) puked:

Why do you think they have to pay recognizable extras in movies? And if you notice, on COPS they often blur out people's faces. And I've heard of more than one occasion of people being arrested for trying to film women without their knowledge in public places.

Privacy isn't necessarily confined to ones home.

-- lab~rat >:-) Do you want polite or do you want sincere?

Reply to
lab~rat

Well....damn...all that time it was thought to be about royalties to be paid from the exhibition of a for profit show....

IF you have a problem being taped, I suggest that places like NC, NY, SC, CA, CO, NV and others be off your driving list, as even here in NC, you can see cams at every intersection, and at all interstate junctions.

Reply to
CBhvac

It's already been shown that most of those stoplight cameras are timed to generate revenue and actually cause accidents as people slam on thier brakes rather than safely go through a yellow. I call BS on that. As far as the "black boxes" go, it's an iffy deal in my mind. What happens if an accident occurs directy in front of you in say slick conditions, and then as you drive out of the skid you hit the skinny pedal to get the ass end loose to power steer? At that point if you are still unable to avoid the accident, that box might show your terminal speed as 90. You weren't doing 90 but it's not like the box will supply anything but raw info. As far as cops being able to kill ignition to stop a car no way I'll ever own a car that will allow that. It was mentioned earlier in this thread that if you aren't doing anything wrong you have no need for privacy. Now THAT is a spurious argument.

Reply to
FBR

: > Also I say bring on the red light cameras. Need more of them. Too : > many selfish people putting other's lives at risk for the sake of : > their own selfish interest. : >

: : It's already been shown that most of those stoplight cameras are timed to : generate revenue and actually cause accidents as people slam on thier brakes : rather than safely go through a yellow. I call BS on that. As far as the : "black boxes" go, it's an iffy deal in my mind. What happens if an accident : occurs directy in front of you in say slick conditions, and then as you : drive out of the skid you hit the skinny pedal to get the ass end loose to : power steer? At that point if you are still unable to avoid the accident, : that box might show your terminal speed as 90. You weren't doing 90 but : it's not like the box will supply anything but raw info. As far as cops : being able to kill ignition to stop a car no way I'll ever own a car that : will allow that. It was mentioned earlier in this thread that if you aren't : doing anything wrong you have no need for privacy. Now THAT is a spurious : argument.

I can't disagree with your statement. In many places, cameras have been put up to generate revenue rather than safeguard and regulate the flow of traffic. Perhaps it just seems that way, but I'm skeptical.

HOWEVER, as a standard, what do red lights indicate? Red means stop! That's why we have it on stop lights, on Do Not Enter, on Wrong Way, on Stop Signs, break/tail lights. Yellow means slow down, caution! Hence most yield signs, and most R/R signs are yellow, turn signals are yellow, caution/warning traffic lights flash yellow, Special Speed Limit signs are in yellow, traffic lights have a yellow indicator to signify to drivers CAUTION, I'm about to change. As a general rule, yellow lights will give you 1sec. of indication per every 10mph of speed limit. Drivers who are not already IN the intersection or cannot come to a complete stop before entering an intersection in which a traffic light has just turned yellow - are supposed to come to a complete stop whether the light is red or not.

And so, I am all for the revenue generating stop light cameras. Generates Revenue? Sure. Makes people think twice about flooring the accelerator to get through the intersection? I hope so. What's 3-5min. right? Is it worth the $80 ticket? Or worse, injuring a pedestrian or others in another vehicle? I should say not. What's more, the cameras are clearly indicated and it is entirely up to the driver to defy the law. Cameras are infinitely more innocuous than allowing anyone to remotely stop your vehicle.

Like I said, I can't disagree that many cameras have been placed to generate revenue, and it really doesn't bother me.

Martin '01 Formula - MTI Air Box Lid, K&N Filter, Hurst-6, SLP Cold Air Induction & Smooth Intake Bellow Corsa Catback w/Premium Tips '83 V45 Magna

Reply to
GLK9MM

I call BS on your blurb above. The revenue can only be generated if there are people in violation. And please don't tell ne they don't work. They do. If there's a problem the units shut themselves down. Would you prefer people get jail time instead of a fine? Or do you think people should just run lights as the choose without penalty? I say fines are a good way to go. Naturally that generates revenue but that can help offset the cost of government's operational budget. I think you imply that the machines are set to cite people that are not in violation. That just isn't the case. If it is then yeah, that's a problem. I'm just not going to believe it because you say so.

That is what investigations, testimony and ultimately judges and juries are for. The box is but one tool. Testimony, reason, environmental circumstance and other forensics still play a role.

I know I never made that point and I don't recall anyone else making it either. I think you are either legitimately confusing it with the point that if you aren't doing anything wrong, you have no reason to fear some type of measured observation, or else you are making a straw man by transforming one point into a more easily attacked position. The issue of nothing to fear if behaving, is apart from not having a need (or more accurately; right) to privacy. In short, the point that was made was more along the lines of: A black box is not a violation of privacy, and as such strenuous opposition to it must stem from some other motivation. That motivation is then suspected to be fear of getting busted for acting improperly. It is this line of thinking that brings about the statement or reminder that only deviant types need to fear. It is in fact not a position based on regarding privacy rights to be irrelevant at all.

** To email a reply, please remove everything up to and including the underscore in my email reply header.
Reply to
SgtSilicon

I call bullshit on those that think they can beat the yellow, so they hit the gas and try to beat it anyway. I have seen it too many times. Charlotte, Greensboro, and High Point all use them, along with many other towns, but I have seen more acidents NOT due to the cam, since the camera is nothing but an inanimate object that is there to do a job, but the driver that makes the choice not to hit the brakes, but try to beat the red, and ends up hitting the car on the other side of the intersection thats slowed for another light, or some old lady thats pulling out into traffic.

Thats not power steering, thats power stupid. I dont agree with it, and I have over a million miles now under my belt. Counter steering on a bike is one thing, (BTW, Martin, the Magnas for sale..maybe..) and anyone that would have to correct in such a fashion in slick conditions, was following too closely for conditions.

That 20MPG UMPH in the ass from the tall skinny being slapped to the floor would not have a thing in the world to do with that would it?

Doubtful. It would show your RPMS, and your MPH, and it would be obvious to anyone reading the unit that you dont go from 35, to 90 in 2 seconds in whatever you might be in, and the RPMs would rat it out anyway, since about that time you would be out of high and into a lower gear, thus, you might have a tire speed of 90, but it would be obvious that it was not so.

And if thats the case, see above. The boxes record enough time so that it can be proven...too many people worry about that stuff.. Fords been using them for years...where are all the lawsuits?

Do you have electronic ignition? Surprise..its possible now. And its being used in place of spike strips. Its an interesting deal that fries the ignition system, and anything electronic in the car basically....you drive over it and BAM, lightning bolt from underneath...really cool vids of it were someplace..have to look to see if I can find them again.

Reply to
CBhvac

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.