OK, so speeding kills. I'd argue that very few speeding deaths were the result of people driving with radar detectors.
Anyway, let's make it so that cars cannot go faster than the speed limit -- we have the technology.
Better yet, let's ban cars. People die in cars. They must be bad.
Where do you draw the line? I suggest that rather than looking to ban radar detectors you should lobby for police organizations to use lasers. As further and further layers of bans and regulations come into play, not only to we lose our freedom, but we also set the precendent to lose more. It also leaves the door open for corruption, and police corruption is already bad enough. A radar detector serves a very useful early warning role -- If you are driving at the speed of traffic, which is likely over the speed limit, but have an out of state plate, your chances of being pulled over go up immensely. In Florida, if you have an OUT OF COUNTY plate, you are likely to get hassled. Your friend's bad luck does nothing to justify curtailing a citizen's right to observe his own domain.
Obviously some strong opinions are out there, but a right to one's domain does not allow one to risk the life of another observing his own domain safely.
Get the police to use lasers... vaporize them and then you don't have to deal with 'em again! I like it!
Fire phasers! Photon torpedoes would really do the trick.
Radar detectors exist. So do laser detectors.
The police should start using motion detection cameras that have been calibrated for the particular site and that analyze the image on the screen to determine speed, thereby eliminating the use of projection systems such as radar and lasers altogether.
I also heard that Canada (anybody know about this?) was considering installing GPS-based monitors in vehicles in the near future. Some trucking companies in Japan proudly display their membership in such programs, and the trucks indeed drive the limit.
Obviously some strong opinions are out there, but a right to one's domain does not allow one to risk the life of another observing his own domain safely.
I think you've been in Japan too long, and seem to forget the virtues of individual freedom. "Allowance" does not exist. The only thing that's ultimately stopping me from going to the bar next door and killing someone is my own code of ethics. It might be influenced by state and federal law, but ultimately, if I want to kill someone, I can. But that's not my goal. When I get in a car, it's not my goal either, which is why I don't drink and drive or do stupid things in high traffic areas. Even so, I am allowed to own and operate a car, and also a gun (I don't actually have a gun). Both are capable of killing, potentially even when it's not my goal to kill. There are people that are more careless than I am, as well as incidents that are beyond my control, and that's why there is manslaughter legislation. Trying to protect society from itself is walking a fine line, but life isn't fair and there's nothing anyone can do to make it so. We have courts to help flesh out whether a tragedy is incidental or part of a wider trend, but I really don't think you'll have any luck establishing that radar detectors are part of a wider trend of automotive manslaughter.
If I remember correctly, the states in which radar detectors are prohibited are actually of this position because detectors dramtically reduce revenue from traffic tickets.
but life isn't fair and there's nothing anyone can do to make it so.
I think 1) that that's an assumption that you bought into, 2) that it describes the world given certain conditions and 3) that those conditions are amenable to change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel
but I really don't think you'll have any luck establishing that radar detectors are part of a wider trend of automotive manslaughter.
You know I think that's right.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Splinemodel
If I remember correctly, the states in which radar detectors are prohibited are actually of this position because detectors dramtically reduce revenue from traffic tickets.
Living in Japan lowers a person's understanding of the virtues of individual freedoms... That's a good one! Most Americans are too caught up in their freedoms to understand the nature of freedom; freedom comes with responsibility. (You called this persoanl ethics; same thing, or different? Same end?) In fact, Americans may be less free than people in some other countries (especially regarding gender and race).
Good reading here (especially for those who do not think GWB is all that great) about freedom and responsibility:
Includes info on a US case that upheld the constiutionality of the ban on detector use in trucks (in that the ban does not limit freedom) and also sites several studies done worldwide that show that radar cam use indeed does lower speeding and also lowers the number of accidents involving injury.
Gotta go... the wife is calling (and encroaching on my freedom).
Includes info on a US case that upheld the constiutionality of the ban on detector use in trucks (in that the ban does not limit freedom) and also sites several studies done worldwide that show that radar cam use indeed does lower speeding and also lowers the number of accidents involving injury.
The point is that this particular court found banning detectors to be OK. I do not believe it is. Anyway, what I came here to say is that if your goal is to eliminate speeding why don't you just come out of your shell and say that you want to mandate governors installed in all cars? If you would admit that you have fascist-leaning sensibilities, that would end this argument.
If I remember correctly, the states in which radar detectors are prohibited are actually of this position because detectors dramtically reduce revenue from traffic tickets.
Comments
Correction: 1 in 3 fatalities is due to differences in speed. Speed doesn't kill. Relative speed kills.
No, I think they can quantify increased deaths above a certain speed regardless of how fast other vehicles are traveling.
Let's not bring Einstein into the equation just yet.
Speeding related: 13,380
"Just" 13,380 "isolated incidents."
According to the US Census Bureau, nearly 1 in 3 fatalities in motor vehicle accidents is due to speeding.
Total: 42,643\tSpeeding related: 13,380
http://www.census.gov/compendia/stat...nd_fatalities/
(file number 1091)
If you curb speeding, you save lives.
OK, so speeding kills. I'd argue that very few speeding deaths were the result of people driving with radar detectors.
Anyway, let's make it so that cars cannot go faster than the speed limit -- we have the technology.
Better yet, let's ban cars. People die in cars. They must be bad.
Where do you draw the line? I suggest that rather than looking to ban radar detectors you should lobby for police organizations to use lasers. As further and further layers of bans and regulations come into play, not only to we lose our freedom, but we also set the precendent to lose more. It also leaves the door open for corruption, and police corruption is already bad enough. A radar detector serves a very useful early warning role -- If you are driving at the speed of traffic, which is likely over the speed limit, but have an out of state plate, your chances of being pulled over go up immensely. In Florida, if you have an OUT OF COUNTY plate, you are likely to get hassled. Your friend's bad luck does nothing to justify curtailing a citizen's right to observe his own domain.
-----
Some interesting data:
http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/inju...h/cov-toc.html
One section seems to support your point about the speed of traffic being over the limit: 50% of drivers say they keep up with faster traffic.
Am searching for data on detector use and speeding tendency...
Students top the list, with doctors right behind in traffic violations and mishaps.
http://www.insurancejournal.com/news...1/21/35943.htm
38% of young drivers involved in fatal accidents had been speeding.
The economic cost of speeding according to the DOT: $40 billion
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd...629/810629.htm
Fire phasers! Photon torpedoes would really do the trick.
Radar detectors exist. So do laser detectors.
The police should start using motion detection cameras that have been calibrated for the particular site and that analyze the image on the screen to determine speed, thereby eliminating the use of projection systems such as radar and lasers altogether.
I also heard that Canada (anybody know about this?) was considering installing GPS-based monitors in vehicles in the near future. Some trucking companies in Japan proudly display their membership in such programs, and the trucks indeed drive the limit.
Japanese gas stations don't have food marts, which really sucks.
Obviously some strong opinions are out there, but a right to one's domain does not allow one to risk the life of another observing his own domain safely.
I think you've been in Japan too long, and seem to forget the virtues of individual freedom. "Allowance" does not exist. The only thing that's ultimately stopping me from going to the bar next door and killing someone is my own code of ethics. It might be influenced by state and federal law, but ultimately, if I want to kill someone, I can. But that's not my goal. When I get in a car, it's not my goal either, which is why I don't drink and drive or do stupid things in high traffic areas. Even so, I am allowed to own and operate a car, and also a gun (I don't actually have a gun). Both are capable of killing, potentially even when it's not my goal to kill. There are people that are more careless than I am, as well as incidents that are beyond my control, and that's why there is manslaughter legislation. Trying to protect society from itself is walking a fine line, but life isn't fair and there's nothing anyone can do to make it so. We have courts to help flesh out whether a tragedy is incidental or part of a wider trend, but I really don't think you'll have any luck establishing that radar detectors are part of a wider trend of automotive manslaughter.
If I remember correctly, the states in which radar detectors are prohibited are actually of this position because detectors dramtically reduce revenue from traffic tickets.
but life isn't fair and there's nothing anyone can do to make it so.
I think 1) that that's an assumption that you bought into, 2) that it describes the world given certain conditions and 3) that those conditions are amenable to change.
but I really don't think you'll have any luck establishing that radar detectors are part of a wider trend of automotive manslaughter.
You know I think that's right.
If I remember correctly, the states in which radar detectors are prohibited are actually of this position because detectors dramtically reduce revenue from traffic tickets.
That sounds pretty damn sensible.
Good reading here (especially for those who do not think GWB is all that great) about freedom and responsibility:
http://www.scu.edu/ethics/publicatio...nsibility.html
Back to the topic: Nice article here:
http://www.iihs.org/research/qanda/speed_lawenf.html
Includes info on a US case that upheld the constiutionality of the ban on detector use in trucks (in that the ban does not limit freedom) and also sites several studies done worldwide that show that radar cam use indeed does lower speeding and also lowers the number of accidents involving injury.
Gotta go... the wife is calling (and encroaching on my freedom).
Includes info on a US case that upheld the constiutionality of the ban on detector use in trucks (in that the ban does not limit freedom) and also sites several studies done worldwide that show that radar cam use indeed does lower speeding and also lowers the number of accidents involving injury.
The point is that this particular court found banning detectors to be OK. I do not believe it is. Anyway, what I came here to say is that if your goal is to eliminate speeding why don't you just come out of your shell and say that you want to mandate governors installed in all cars? If you would admit that you have fascist-leaning sensibilities, that would end this argument.
If I remember correctly, the states in which radar detectors are prohibited are actually of this position because detectors dramtically reduce revenue from traffic tickets.
The only State that currently bans them is VA.