'Black Box' Readings Help Convict Montreal Driver

the man writes "From CBC News, Here's one that is going to get a lot of attention in the coming years. Quebec police won a dangerous-driving conviction Friday using evidence from the 'black box' in the car, a first in the province. Turns out that not many people know of these things. Time to start working on the mod for my Toyota."

Comments

well

[revmoo]

As much as everyone here will rant on and on about how this is an intrusion of their rights, how "big brother" is watching them, this is actually a rather good idea.

I'm not saying it should be mandated that these be installed in every single vehicle manufactured, but I see no reason why they shouldn't be admitted as evidence in a trial. Perhaps it will make people think twice before speeding like maniacs... ...*goes to check that his car doesn't have one*

Re:well

[EvanED]

I agree. I'll be one of the first people to jump up at privacy violations, but I think both that the privacy issues with this are minimal and that the benefits are enormous. I would pay to have one of these installed so in the event of a crash if there's a dispute over who is at fault or if insurance should cover, I can pull the information and say "look, not my fault." Of course, if these start phoning home and reporting violations, then we have a major problem. They should be accessable only with a warrant or by the owner (or people s/he hires).

Re:well

[Potor]

You have not given an argument for why you think it is a good idea that something I own can then spy on me, why the existence of this device should be hidden from me, and why it should be illegal for me to remove or tamper with it.

Moreover, you have not argued in any way why this is actually a rather good idea, nor specified what "this" is -- is it the box, or its admission as evidence, or something else?

Further, you tread rather dangerously close to what I call the technicalist fallacy, which is the belief that technology will solve the problems of human behaviour. The box will not stop speeding, but rather increase the amount of information the police have at their disposal. This fallacy is constantly invoke to intrude on daily life. And the more we crave our convenience, the more it will take away our privacy. And don't tell me the roads are not private, for this is not the issue. The issue is making any given citizen culpable for every minute of his/her life.

cheers, potor (like you, I do not own a car, and nor do I ever plan to buy one.)

Re:well

[isorox]

Yes, if you want to have this box in your car, by all means opt in. If you dont want it, you shouldn't have to have it. You'll pay higher insurance premiums, but thats fair.

Re:well

[colinemckay]

No privacy violation -- it doesn't track where you've been, since these things only record a few seconds of data, it doesn't transmit to anyone, and it isn't easily accessable.

Further, the box has an equal ability to prove that someone is not at fault. It is there as a neutral observer.

Re:well

[BSD Yoda]

Well, in my country there is a fifth amendment to our constitution that prevents the government from compelling us to incriminate ourselves in criminal court. This is a direct violation of that amendment. The biggest argument against this, though, is that there is no third-party validation. The local cops have to calibrate their radar guns, on a regular basis, with some known standard. The black box on the other hand, is configured however GM wants it to be configured, and is held to no external standard. In fact, they could alter the data to protect themselves in certain error conditions and no one could do anything about it because they're accountable to no one. Other factors such as damage to the device, and more likely, damage to sensors, could alter the readings recorded by the device, and the poor driver would be convicted with almost no recourse - the car company probably couldn't even be forced to provide the source to the box code since its a trade secret. This is one of the worst ideas ever. At least word is out now, soon there will be a pissed off engineer who will figure out how to bypass it....

Re:well

[canadian_right]

When you drive your car on a public road your actions are public, not private. The police, courts, and public have every right to see the contents of your black box when driving on a public road.

Re:well

[canajin56]

IIRC, the recording window is beteween 30 and 60 seconds, and it stops when you get in an accident (OR at least, any accident severe enough to make the airbag deploy)

Re:well

[Pig Hogger]

You have not given an argument for why you think it is a good idea that something I own can then spy on me, why the existence of this device should be hidden from me, and why it should be illegal for me to remove or tamper with it.

Here are a few good reasons. Enjoy!

1. Driving is a public activity performed on public roads, therefore there cannot be any expectation of privacy
2. Driving is not a right, but a privilege. However, to be safe from the negligence of other is a right, so it is quite natural that a privilege be deemed less important than a right, therefore the due process needed to remove a privilege shall be less arduous than required to remove a right.
3. Putting event recorders in cars is no different than putting policemen on every street corner, which is perfectly legal now. So making event recorders in car compulsory is therefore legal, and obstructing it's operation shall be deemed the same thing as interfering with the work of police.
4. Aircraft, locomotives, buses and trucks are currently fitted with event recorders. It is only natural that this be extended to automobiles, especially that the standard behaviour expected of car drivers is considerably lower than for the other vehicles and the greater number of automobiles make for considerable danger.

Here's an idea

[Anonymous Coward]

How about just driving responsibly instead of trying to mod your box so you can continue driving irresponsibly? If you've gotten in an accident AND the box happens to show you were driving like a fool, then in order for it to be a conspiracy someone would have intentionally had to get you in an accident while your box was malfunctioning.

Right. I believe you.

Re:Here's an idea

[rco3]

Horseshit. The point of all this discussion is that the LAW is what's wrong. The LAW - in this case, the speed limit - is far too often designed to increase revenue, not to promote increased safety.

Your logic is fine, within a very narrowly defined set of limits. Your logic falls apart when the laws are misdirected or inappropriate, when the punishment is disproportionate to the crime, and when the law is applied selectively and unequally.

And if you try to tell me that none of those apply to traffic laws, you are either a fool or a liar. Possibly both.

I spent every day this last summer driving through one of the most notorious speed traps in the state of Florida. The speed limits are deliberately set artificially low, and deceivingly so wherever possible. State laws were passed specifically to curb the behavior of this town, and to discourage others. AAA specifically refers to this place as a speed trap, and has even taken out billboards warning motorists that a speed trap is 6 miles ahead. This town actually turns a profit on speeding tickets - completely funds the police department, and money left over. Until the law was passed, in one stretch of road the speed limit went from 65 to 45 back to 65 in under a mile. Why? Flea market. Lots of places for the cops to hide.

THAT, my friend, is in no way just.

When you see that the non-compliance rate (speeding) on a section of Beltline around DC is over 80% - is it the drivers who are wrong? Or the laws? WHO DECIDES?

I've just looked at your posting history, and I see that you are fond of trolling. I should have known.

Re:Here's an idea

[surprise_audit]

If its my car, I can take the stupid little "black" box out of it if I want.

Until the day when the manufacturers begin to route something critical through it, such as ignition control or fuel pump power...

That's bad exactly how?

[October_30th]

Quebec police won a dangerous-driving conviction Friday using evidence from the 'black box' in the car, a first in the province.

Dangerous-driving conviction? And that's bad exactly how?

toyota mod

[herrvinny]

Time to start working on the mod for my Toyota."

Wouldn't that be illegal under something? The DMCA, or some Patriot Act whatnot? You're breaking into something that supposed to protect society, etc...

Paranoid much?

[wampus]

It records a few simple data for a short period... like the events leading up to a crash. Unless you plan on using your car as a murder weapon, I wouldn't worry much about it.

OTOH, when it starts recording everything and sending it to the police every night at 2am, I will be among the first in the driveway with a soldering iron.

Ummm, no.

[fiftyLou]

Time to start working on the mod for my Toyota.

Or your driving skills. Your choice.

Black box becoming standard?

[LordOfYourPants]

Why do planes have black boxes in the first place? I'm guessing the pilots of the plane have a responsibility to their passengers. In the event of a crash, grieving families might want to know what exactly went wrong before a crash. Is a car any different?

If I'm a passenger driving with a friend, that friend has a responsibility to get me from A to B safely. The same rules apply to me as a driver. I know that if a friend of mine was killed in a crash that I'd like to know if it happened to be someone else's fault or ultimately the car that was driving my friend's fault.

If you can prove these things inaccurate in crash conditions then maybe we should be second-guessing whether to use them to prosecute people. Until then, I don't see why it's harmful to use them as a tool to reconstruct fault.

Ok before everyone goes bezerk

[unixwin]

Before everyone starts pulling their hair apart, running into their garages and tear their car to pieces please read what this blackbox does / can do... QUOTE

The device is known as an event data recorder (EDR), or simply a "black box," because it serves a similar function to a flight data recorder in an aircraft. The information the black boxes record includes: the car's speed; the engine's speed; whether the brakes are applied; the position of the gas pedal. It also records other information, such as whether the driver was wearing a seatbelt and the force of the collision. Because the memory of the black box is limited, it only retains this information for a few seconds. After a collision, the black box contains a record of what was happening in the last seconds before the impact.

This is good

[JFMulder]

I've heard about the case a few months ago, since I live in Montreal. They said that these little devices recorded only speeds and such. No audio is involved of course. What is interresting is that it doesn't record for a long time. It essentially has a buffer of about 5 or 10 seconds. When the car body registers a hit, it stops registering speeds, so it doesn't overwrite the speed before the impact. This way, police officers can't use these as a way to prove someone was going over the limit when they were chasing someone, but it's still usefull in car crashes.

I wonder what happens though if I have an accident once with my car, and then have it repaired. Is the box reset by the car repairman?

Re:This is good

[Pig Hogger]

I've heard about the case a few months ago, since I live in Montreal. They said that these little devices recorded only speeds and such. No audio is involved of course.

The audio would most likely be: "Tabarnak!!!"...

So what

[Andorion]

These things will only be used in two cases:

1) Driver kills or seriously injurs someone, and claims innocence - the box will tell the truth, and if they're guilty of the crime, they SHOULD be found out and punished.

2) The driver is dead, in which case the box will tell his story for him - and tell it accurately.

This thing won't be used for your common speeding violation... it's been in cars for a long while, it serves it's purpose, and there's no reason to be up in arms over it.

~Berj

Things are starting to look up for geeks...

[khenson]

I can see geeks getting pulled over and cops plugging into the car for the last 5 minutes speed information.

"Sir, I suppose I was wrong - your vehicle appeared to be doing 55 all the time... in fact - it appears to be doing 55 right now..."

time to start educating idiots.

[Lumpy]

First these "black boxes" are nothing more than a small amount of flash memory that is written to when the airbag system is activated. if your car has airbags, then YOU HAVE THE RECORDER. [Add ominous evil soundtrack here]

now, they record nothing unless the airbags are deployed. when they do they record vital data that the airbag system manufacturers need to continue to make airbag systems safer and save more lives, it's just that lawyers got wind of this and decided to start having the data used in court.

The fun part is that the insurance companies started the trend. and you know what?? you crash your car, the insurance company can instantly get ownership of the car and data by simply "totaling it out" so they will now gladly give the data freely to the courts.

you want an answer? A- remove the airbags and trigger sensors from your car... or B- drive like a sane person.

those are your two choices..pick one.

More information always helps truth

[Sheetrock]

I have more problems with the implementation than the idea.

Black boxes in vehicles should be common knowledge, easily retrievable in a court case (preferably fitting a common standard), and tamperproof.

The fault I find with them right now is that because most people don't know they're there it's more likely black box information would be used in cases against the owner rather than by the owner as concurring evidence to an accident report.

Your black box is not the only rat

[anubi]

There are many pieces of evidence left behind after an event.

Tire marks. The amount of energy required to cause so much metal deformation. Distances airborne. Inertial effects. Witnesses. And I am sure there are many I did not think of.

The black box evidence is just one of many. It will either confirm the other evidence, in which case you have some explaining to do, or it may exonerate you. ( i.e. you WERE driving a safe legal speed and the other party did in fact do a real lulu in front of you. ).

My own take - its a non-issue. Every observable event will leave evidence. This is just one more of many trails left after an automotive accident event. You can really prejudice yourself by trying to tamper with the evidence.

FUD Alert

[jfmiller]

from the article:


"The prospect that we're all under constant scrutiny has social effects and legal effects that we haven't even contemplated," said Stephen Keating of the Privacy Foundation at the University of Denver.

This is just plain wrong. The "black box" can only be used if/when the airbag deploys. Under any other circumstances it discards all information every 2 seconds. Even if it was to be removed from a parked car it would only tell the snoop that the car was stopped before it was shut off.

Just to make sure everbody get the point:
Monitering is not constant but only availible after an airbag deploying crash.

JFMILLER

Ummm...No

[Jameth]

"After all, a car is a lethal weapon just like a gun and guns have serial numbers."

Actually a car is a TOOL which is used for TRANSPORTATION and occasionally has SIDE-EFFECTS which may be harmful, but usually just have the intended effect.

Guns, by contrast, are TOOLS which are used for KILLING and commonly have the intended effect.

By your logic, a whole damn lot of things are lethal weapons just because they cause death. Your mistake is in calling a car a weapon. Weapons are DESIGNED to cause harm. Cars are designed to MOVE.

Now, if you rig a car up with scythed wheels like a good ol' fashioned war chariot, that'll qualify as a weapon.

131km/h = 81.4 MPH

[BigBlockMopar]

Furthermore, I don't see why every single vehicle should not be manufactured with this feature. After all, a car is a lethal weapon just like a gun and guns have serial numbers.

I think most of them are now. The collected data is used to improve airbag designs. Since airbags are dangerous (though, admittedly less dangerous than hitting your steering column and dashboard when you're brought to an abrupt halt from 131km/h in Montreal traffic), manufacturers have a tremendous liability if airbags are killing people in accidents. I know for sure that GM, DaimlerChrysler and most of the Japanese companies are using this.

131km/h is 81.4 MPH. Speaking as one who has lived in Montreal and driven on Montreal's old freeways (built before there was a real understanding of freeway design), this is too fast for the freeways of the area, let alone the city streets. Much of downtown Montreal has narrow winding streets with loads of pedestrian and cyclist traffic. Doing 81.4 MPH in those conditions is criminal irresponsibility, and an individual capable of doing something like that clearly has such a gross lack of understanding of cars and their capabilities that they probably thought 2 Fast 2 Furious was a good movie.

Never been to Montreal? Would you drive 80MPH through the streets of Lower Manhattan? Downtown Chicago?

Christ, parts of downtown Montreal have cobblestoned streets. Wet cobblestones are insanely slippery, and you still can stand at an intersection and watch some idiot who thinks his MacPherson-strut equipped front-wheel-drive Acura Integra with tinted windows can take him around any corner safely at twice - let alone four times - the posted speed limit.

This should have been a criminal conviction, especially with the supporting evidence from the black box.

Re:131km/h = 81.4 MPH

[Karellen !-P]

Worst this is that the 131 km/h was just before impact. The previous 2 seconds of data indicated that the moron lifted his foot off the gas and slowed down from 154 km/h. Data from the black box was necessary since there were no eyewitness and no skid marks.