Gotcha, you damn drunk driver

No, I had a Perception Quest years back when plastic roto-molded kayaks were relatively new... it was a rounded-keel boat suited to rivers and I was in a flat-water environment. A sea kayak of some kind would have done me better. But I still had fun with it and remember it fondly.

A couple years ago my wife won a kayak "3 hour cruise" with a local guy in a raffle at work and sent me on it up the St Croix river (MN/WI border), that was beautiful. I could still balance and paddle but tired quickly and I felt it the next day.

Where do you paddle?

miker

Lake Travis for the most part, because it is about a block away. The deadliest lake in Texas, woohoo! I have to paddle like a madman to catch those drunk power boaters. :-)

Pat

Looks nice. I live fairly close to Lake Minnetonka, which is a fascinating collection of bays, islands, and connecting channels, but there's WAY too many boats (power and sail) for pleasant kayaking. I did see some people getting instruction up in Copper Harbor MI last month, that looks like an excellent sea-kayaking place as well - cold water but no man-eating fish.

miker

Not a great picture, but there is a lot of paddling room in the coves where it's pretty safe.

This boat paddles like a kayak, but it is a wide, stable and slow sit-on-top model, and even has a transom mount for a trolling motor. It will hold two adults plus a small child or dog up front. It is made for fishing and hunting rather than covering distance quickly. I mainly use it for fun and exercise.

I will check out Lake Minnetonka one day. I have seen the pictures and it looks awesome.

It is absolutely beautiful out there today. I just gave myself the rest of the day off. Too much work and arguing, not enough fun, I am off to paddle and see if I can pull in a bass or two.

Feel free to reply to my e-mail if you would like. I am sure that we are boring the hell out of everyone here..... ;-)

Pat

pws wrote in news:kmwSg.393$ snipped-for-privacy@tornado.texas.rr.com:

Hey, you guys, get a room!

Some facts that should have come out of this but may not have:

1. People driving w/o control of the car kill and maim other, it makes NO difference if the reason for the lack of control is distraction (ie. cell phone, kids in car, etc.), impairment (alcohol, drugs, stupidity, etc.) or bad judgement (speeding, unsafe passing, etc.) the effect is the same, people get killed, people get maimed.
2. There are laws and established punishments for ALL of the above and:
3. These laws have proven to be ineffective.

So what's the fix?

I'll start the discussion by saying I don't have the answer. Two weeks ago I almost got in a wreck. A guy came off a freeway ramp w/o ever slowing down, he was moving around 75mph or so and I was driving the legal 40mph. There were cars in all the other lanes going approximately the speed limit. I watched in the rearwiew mirror as the guy apparently intended to park his Chevrolet Tahoe in the trunk of my Miata (no, it won't fit!). At the very last minute, I heard brakes and tires screaming, he swung into the next lane narrowly missing the car there and accelerated (from his 60mph back to 75mph in a 40mph zone!) past me w/o removing the cell phone from his ear.

Had I been so inclined I probably should have stopped him and smashed his phone, I wish I had done so as he may have killed someone by now.

This thread was dead and buried. Some level of agreement had even been reached after two days. Then you go and wave your evil wand and bring it back to life. Didn't you see the scorched battlefield? Why would you want to wander out there? :-)

Nah, he would have just bought a new phone. My plan will give me one for free if I bring them the pieces.

I also feel that temptation to take the law into my own hands, though I would much rather smash his head than his phone. Of course, doing both at once is also possible. Still, it just isn't worth it, as you obviously understand since you are both alive and not in jail. Gotta let the cops handle it. They have the authority, the backup, those nifty vests, tasers, helicopters, all sorts of things that we can not count on.

Pat

pws wrote in news:ShHSg.529$ snipped-for-privacy@tornado.texas.rr.com:

Because the important part had not been discussed. Read points 1, 2 and 3 again.

We have the necessary laws, we have enforcement (to some level) but it isn't working. Someone, somewhere has to come up with a solution of some sort... why not someone here?

That was tongue-in-cheek. I think that there may be about 4 people left reading this thread though, so if we want action, you might want to start a new one. :-)

I do agree with you on not having an answer. I also agree that the laws are mostly ineffective, but not entirely. Case in point, the driver that I called in did not get to go as far as he would have, thus possibly preventing an accident, plus he will probably get to clean up some trash on the side of the highway while wearing that stylish orange jacket, which is just a bonus. We do have very clean highways here....

A drop in the bucket, sure, but not entirely without effect. Austin had over 5,000 DUI arrests last year, or about 14 every day of the year.

Of course, the guy that almost smashed you with his Tahoe was apparently not impaired by chemicals, just stupidity, so calling in the cops would have done no good unless they saw him continue to drive recklessly. They also aren't likely to respond to a *parent yelling at kids in back seat* call very quickly either.

I can't do it, I am willing to admit that easily enough. If someone wants to step up to the plate, all the power in the world to them. I am all for safer streets, especially with my daughter driving this year for the first time.

Pat

Alright then, I'll bite.

I'd say the first part of the solution is proper driver's education and testing. None of this nonsense like in the UK and in the US where a parent or basically anyone else with a driver's license can "teach" someone else to drive; that's just pure insanity and will lead to bad drivers passing on bad habits. Sure, some of the bad habits will cause the new driver to fail the exam, but no practical exam can catch everything, so people will slip through with appalling driving habits.

Second part - regular testing. My parents (bless them) are dreadful drivers, but used to be even worse. They moved to Canada when they were in their late

50s, where they had to take a test in order to be allowed to drive there beyond one year (or something like that). One of them failed which, to my mind, was a Very Good Thing. I think they both ended up taking a few lessons which did improve their driving substantially.

Third - and this is tongue in cheek, but would definitely help a lot - make everyone take motorbike lessons and an exam. I'd been driving a car 15 years when I was finally allowed to learn how to ride a bike (I managed to remove the thumb I was under, you see). Learning to ride a motorbike without doubt improved my car-driving skills: made me much more aware (again?) of what was going on on the road, made me think ahead much more, made me sit in lanes much more tightly. Whether it was the fact that I was learning to ride a bike, or just taking driving lessons of any kind again after 15 years, I'm not entirely sure, but something about the experience definitely sharpened up my driving. (As an aside, one brilliant thing on the course was that we were shown a video of an accident between a helmet-wearing motorcyclist and a Mini. The Mini ended up driving over the guy's head - he got up afterwards and was fine. That sure taught us to always wear a helmet and proper clothing.)

Anyway, that would be my recommendation: real, proper driving instruction like they've got in Germany and other European countries, and regular testing (every 5 years or so).

Eric

pws wrote in news:FTISg.759$ snipped-for-privacy@tornado.texas.rr.com:

But I'll bet he'll drive drunk again..... :-(

I'll play it safe and just add a technological suggestion: Cars that are keyed to some biometric of the owner (fingerprint, retinal scan, whatever...)

The beauty of this is that, if the loading of the personal ID data is done by a regulated site (something like the pollution testers), an individuals "permission" can be removed from the vehicle for a legal suspension period. Similar to taking away a suspendee's keys but harder to defeat.

Some ways around it might be: Having your wife (who's not under suspension) start your jointly owned car for you, but then she also has to come with you to start it when you return home (unless you're going to leave it run and get it stolen :). Come to think of it, this raises the bar for stealing cars as well, it's another system that has to be defeated.

The idea of course is to make a person under suspension actually not able to drive anyway. While a savvy person might be able to find a way around it, most people wouldn't, especially impatient people under chemical influence.

miker

Eric Baber wrote on 09/28/06 01:49:

I absolutely agree. As a motorbike rider, you learn to have much better situational awareness. And that of course helps with driving a car as well.

-Joe

That won't solve the problem, but it would help. The drunk drivers will still be there, though I seem to remember Germany having extremely tough laws on DUI.

I completely agree that it is WAY too easy to get a driver's license here, and apparently in the U.K. as well. The class that I took for my license was a joke. They concentrated on almost nothing except the general rules of the road and to look out for cars. No discussion whatsoever on car handling dynamics except for, "leave some extra room when it is raining". Not a word about snow or ice, I guess that they though that we would all remain in central Texas for life, besides which, we do get freezing precipitation here on a very rare occasion.

The first time I spun the rear end out on a car, the only reason I knew to turn into the corner instead of out of it and to not slam the brakes was because I had read a very good book by Bob Bondurant on racing before I ever drove. No teacher ever told me anything at all about what to do to once the emergency started, except for good old Mr. Bondurant, of course. He also explains all about corner apex in a great way for beginners.

Pat

Well, I'd say that for a start that's a "punishment" approach rather than a "preventative" one, which was what XS11E was after (and I agree I'd rather find ways of stopping people from driving badly in the first place, rather than focusing on the punishment afterwards).

Secondly this sounds a bit too Big Brother-ish to me!!

Eric

No doubt. Also, what I did might not have helped, it may have made things worse. He appeared to be alone. If he had not recovered after going halfway off of the road into those big trees at 60 mph, we would probably be looking at a one-person fatality, which would be problem solved for anyone he might hurt in the future while doing this again.

Now he may go drive again, this time with 3 kids in the car, and not recover in that next curve.

Since there is no way to predict this, calling him in seems best. If I could have been positive that he would wreck and not hurt anyone else, I would not have called anyone, but that goes back to playing god. :-)

Pat

Ok miker, it's back on. :-)

How much would all of this cost? Who pays for the equipment and for it to be installed? Who pays for it when it breaks? Do me and the other people who do not drink and drive have to shoulder the costs? What happens when it fails? That is one more part on your car to leave you stranded if it is not working properly.

I agree with Eric, way too big-brotherish. I don't want my car to communicate with anybody but myself and my mechanic. If it was 100% foolproof, it might make trading the freedom for security a little less bitter-tasting, but I think I will pass on that solution if at all possible.

Pat

Cost, if made a standard required part of any car and factory installed (talking new equipment here of course) would probably be less than the cost to society of the alternative. What do accidents from drinking/driving cost, including medical, legal, police, prison support? But I should make clear, this isn't targeted specifically at drinking/driving, it's targeted at preventing anyone who's lost their license from driving. DUI suspensions would be one example of that. Loss of license from repeated reckless behavior would be another. And most likely, extreme failure to pay parking tickets. :)

I'm tempted to open the issue of driving being a priviledge rather than a right, but y'all know about that. And anyway, this isn't about monitoring driving, it's about preventing those from driving who, for one reason or another, shouldn't be.

???

You understand I'm not talking about monitoring... I'm talking about the equivalent of a car having only one key, and if they take your key away (because of something you did) you can't start the car and ergo can't drive it. And you can't drive anyone elses either, because they only have one key for theirs and they can't give it to you. Biometric info can be stored onboard, doesn't have to be transmitted around (tho it could be).

Is it really more big-brotherish than a key only your dealer can duplicate? (i.e. Corvette etc)

miker

Do you have to cover the cost of a ignition lock and steering column lock even if your car is never stolen? Are you required to pay for insurance even if you don't have accidents? Do you pay the same annual license fee as someone else who drives twice as much? This is not so much a drink/drive-targeted solution as a "Only people who are licensed can drive" solution... part of the cost of driving, if you will. The above are other things that you have to pay for even if you aren't "using" your share.

While you're right, I would ask how many people get stranded thru failed fuel injection computers or electronic ignitions? While it happens, I guess I can't say it's ever happened to me.

Anyway, just an idea - from a tech-hating Luddite, no less. :)

miker

I understand that, but we have cars on the road that are 80 years old or more, so this equipment would have to be installed and adapted to every motorized road vehicle made before the equipment became standard. The costs would be enormous, especially for the first 10 years or so.

Gotcha.

Ok, I can understand that, but now look at what we have. No more driving a person home in their vehicle if they have been drinking. How about test-drives? I have driven many vehicles that were not mine to diagnose problems. That would be the end of that. Would a mechanic have an override key or would you have to drive them around in your car? The mechanic's override device would be a big prize, and probably not too hard for a high-tech teenager to duplicate. It goes on and on.....

I think so, you are giving them your DNA, retinal scan, fingerprints, or whatever. That is a bit more than having the dealer being the only one able to duplicate your key.

Pat