Slashdot Mirror
GPS Tracking Device Beats Radar Gun in Court
MojoKid writes "According to a release issued by Rocky Mountain Tracking, an 18-year old man, Shaun Malone, was able to
successfully contest a speeding ticket in court using the data from a GPS device installed in his car. This wasn't just any old make-a-left-turn-100-feet-ahead-onto-Maple-Street GPS; this was a vehicle-tracking GPS device — the kind used by trucking fleets — or in this case, overprotective parents. The device was installed in Malone's car by his parents, and the press release makes no mention if the teenager knew that the device was installed in his vehicle at the time."
Take that, you oppressive pigs!
We've got counter-measures.
Good thing: enabling people to install these devices voluntarily to defend themselves against false claims of speeding or reckless driving.
Bad thing: having the government mandate their installation, and at some later time mandating that the data be uploaded to a central processing facility.
God invented whiskey so the Irish would not rule the world.
I believe insurance companies give discounts to drivers (especially young ones) for having gps tracking installed in their cars.
get off my lawn
(please type the word in this image: masters)
The highly accurate radio wave reflection system or the highly accurate satellite positioning system? One of you must be wrong! Machines can't lie?! MACHINES CAN'T LIE?!!??!!
http://twitter.com/OLDTELEGRAM
The article says that he was doing 62 MPH according to the radar gun. The GPS says 45. If the GPS was right, why was the gun wrong? Bad calibration? Operator error? Dyslexia?
How many other people were caught "speeding" by the same gun,and are they planning to notify any of them that they have reason to believe the gun was wrong?
Perhaps he's just hard on the brakes as well as the accelerator.
If only.
GPS device gets time from GPS satellite, not user.
They don't work that way unfortunately.
Time is kept on the server side.
is the so called professor revising his "expertise" so quickly and so radically. Now it would be interesting to know (or the court forcing him to say) on WHAT he based his first expertise and what new publicly available information made him change his mind, and why he did not make use of this information for the first written testimony. I get the feeling this guy is as much expert in GPS & radar gun, as my expertise in medicine forensic is (not much).
C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
visit randi.org
what about the time being incorrectly recorded when taken by the speed camera? If the speed camera's absolute time was 1 minute slow, the guy could well have slowed down (especially if he ended up seeing the speed camera).
It's the same thing as a desktop, web client, or indeed the browser itself - the client can never be trusted.
Are the cops or the courts going to audit every GPS device or line of device code to ensure that 20 mph is *not* being deducted off what is written to the log above a certain speed?
Come to think of it, that's a great idea for OS or FSF - create code for popular GPS devices, and then produce the code for audit when you go to court contesting a ticket, while asking that the cops produce the code off of their device!!
[17] Leary, T., White, C., Wood, P. R., Bhabha, W. D., and Wirth, N. Lambda calculus considered harmful. In Proceedings
- Kid got speeding fine
- Parents let him in on the secret installed GPS tracker
- Kid tried the 'GPS Defense' and lost
- Kid appealed - expert witness said that particular GPS was accurate
- Kid won.
- GPS manufacture releases press release to show off how cool their kit is.
Happy day.
Your cell phone or navigator GPS still won't cut it.
...a GPS device which will always produce data which shows I'm not speeding?
....rock beats scissors, and paper beats rock.
too bad. the cop did not keep up his part of the duty (or may be his teammates). anyways I think that the clocks are synched to the local headquarters. and if they are not, they should be.
Most GPS units don't take the Z axis into account; if you're going up or down a hill, the GPS will register a slower speed than your speedometer or a radar gun.
... unless our right to not testify against ourselves is taken away, in one form or another (e.g., mandatory tracking).
And you can be sure that if something like that came to be, this would DEFINITELY no longer be the United States in which I was born. There would have to be a war first.
October of last year - http://www1.pressdemocrat.com/article/20071002/NEWS/710020308/1033/NEWS01
I have a handheld Garmin GPS (with car mount) that specifications claim that it is within .75 knot accuracy on the speed display.
I used it to get out of a speeding ticket outside of El Paso. I said the GPS said I wwas doing 75, the cop said his radar gun said 76 and it is calibrated. I responded thatt my GPS uses government satellite signals. He let me go.
Fight Spammers!
Good thing: enabling people to install these devices voluntarily to defend themselves against false claims of speeding or reckless driving.
Bad thing: having the government mandate their installation, and at some later time mandating that the data be uploaded to a central processing facility.
My thoughts...
Good Thing: Everyone thinks the output of electronic devices is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
Bad Thing: Everyone thinks the output of electronic devices is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth.
If I mod you up, it doesn't necessarily mean I agree with what you've said, sorry.
Maybe this kid's device does, but a few weeks ago, I went: "WTF?" when I realized that the clock on my run-of-the mill GPS system was wrong (by several minutes) and that I had to set it manually. I still don't understand why my GPS system clock is inaccurate.
The real "Libtards" are the Libertarians!
Come to think of it, that's a great idea for OS or FSF - create code for popular GPS devices, and then produce the code for audit when you go to court contesting a ticket, while asking that the cops produce the code off of their device!!
A variation of this has been done in a number of DUI/DWI cases. A number of defendants have demanded that the source for the breathalyzer be made available for review by the defense.
In the cases I'm aware of, the manufacturer has refused to release the source as their agreement/license with the relevant law enforcement agency does not provide for this.
I believe the outcomes have ranged, but in general this has been a successful defense.
If this guy's parents were really as overprotective as the article makes them out to be, they would have implanted the GPS into his skull, not his car.
Only if the drivers allow themselves to be tracked at all times and allow the data to be uploaded to a location where the insurance company can monitor the data at their own whim and fancy. You are right though - I know Progressive gives discounts for kids who have GPS trackers in their vehicles.
PRICELESS
They'd never admit that. If that were the case then every ticket written because of that speed camera would be suspect.
any type of non-video speed camera is not 100% accurate in a speed case and even those are not 100%.
A cop using any type of speed gun (laser, pop, etc) can almost 100% of the time, tell if a driver is speeding IF THE DRIVER is the only one in the LINE OF SIGHT. The issue with these guns is that they are CONE based and many things INCLUDING OTHER AUTOS will throw off they signal.
Most video speed cameras use a laser LINE OF SIGHT trigger, that produces a picture from a elapsed time. The picture is almost 100% accurate but not 100% accurate.
To this date, no hard factual science has proven that speed cameras have saved lives or reduces accidents.
If your GPS time was off by even one second, your position would be off by about 300km -- give or take depending on satellite geometry -- there's no way to separate the two.
Then the GPS logs would show that as well.
Police departments routinely clock the wrong person due to the use of old fashioned radar rather than more specific laser radar. They wrongly think that because they are aiming it like a gun it is getting a specific person. It is sad that we have to go to an Orwellian extreme to fight such flawed evidence is regular Ka radar.
Is new guns and their "pop" mode. Basically it is an ultrafast start and shutdown mode for the gun. The reason is, of course, RADAR detectors. They've gotten quite good. They don't necessarily need the gun to be on and transmitting to pick it up. When the gun is in standby (with it's electronics operating but not transmitting a beam) they can still be picked up. Same sort of way RADAR counterdetectors work. Even though the detector itself isn't trying to emit anything, it does anyhow (as does any superheterodyne device).
Ok, great, however you might pause to wonder about the ability to electronics operating in the 30GHz range to quickly come on and stabilise and, well, you'd be right. Guns in "pop" mode aren't accurate. In part due to the fast start, in part due to less data points, they can produce unreliable readings. The gun manufacturers say that pop mode isn't to be used as a final speed measurement, but that doesn't stop police forces from doing so anyhow.
Or it could be even more simple: The gun wasn't calibrated. Like any precision device, they need periodic recalibration. Had this been allowed to happen, it is entirely possible the gun was producing inaccurate readings.
It is a good idea for all drivers to take a little time to educate themselves about various speed measurement technologies and such. While I'd say the majority of police departments use their equipment right and the tickets are legit, they aren't always. If you get nailed with a bogus ticket, you don't necessarily need GPS to fight it. Tell the department you want the calibration records for the gun in question, find out if it was in pop mode, etc, etc. If they screwed up, let the judge know and they'll most likely drop the ticket.
First we can use GPS gear to get our locale.
Instead of using some recorder, we can transmit this on the HAM bands via GPRS, and have it recorded via a local digipeter for a webserver.
We now have hard-ish logs to cook, along with federal laws backing us up, as it is illegal to transmit on a radio that you are not in the vicinity of. And since the data is real-time, you can argue that we have local logs X, and server logs based on my Federal License at Y.
You're right that measuring speed with most radar guns at an angle gives an inaccurate measurement. However, the inaccuracy DECREASES the measured speed versus the actual vehicular speed. That is, head-on, or at 0 degrees, the gun is at its most accurate, but as the angle approaches 90 degrees, the measured speed will decrease to zero varying with the cosine of the angle.
(Now that's not completely accurate either, as most devices will not be able to get a good doppler reading long before you get to 90 degrees, but the general principle applies as one of the factors governing doppler speed measurements.)
So if an officer clocks you at 15 over the limit but tagged you at an angle, assuming all other factors radar gun and gun operator factors are insignificant, just be very, VERY glad the officer didn't clock your actual speed, as it was most certainly higher.
Let's assume this is the case and that both devices are 100% accurate in their measure of speed, except the GPS ignores Z axis.
The radar measures you on the hypotenuse of the right triangle, and GPS measures you on the "adjacent" (i.e. horizontal) leg. Cos(x) = adj/hyp, so x = 43.5 degrees. Now take tan(43.5) = opp/adj = 0.948. That's 94.8% grade. (Hint: sqrt(62^2 - 45^2)/45 = 0.948, also -- and not by coincidence.)
Now let's be somewhat more realistic. According to http://deputy-dog.com/2007/09/18/the-steepest-streets-in-the-world/, the world's steepest road is only 37% grade (canton avenue, pittsburgh, united states).
Let's assume the kid is cruising down the road. We know it's 37% grade. atan(37%) = 20.3 degrees. cos(20.3 deg) = 0.938. So if the GPS is "correct" and the horizontal speed is 45 mph, then the hypotenuse is 45/0.938 = 48.0 mph (not 62 seen by the gun). If the radar gun is correct, then he's traveling 62 on the hypotenuse, then it's 62*.938 = 58.1 mph on the horizontal (rather than 45 measured by the GPS).
Chances are that steepest street in your town is probably only 10% grade (5.7 degrees, or 0.995 adj/hyp = 0.5% difference). I seriously doubt he was driving on a street over 2% grade (1.1 degrees, or 0.9998 adj/hyp 0.02% difference).
I'm still betting that this particular GPS would report actual speed rather than "horizontal" speed.
If your GPS time was off by even one second, your position would be off by about 300km -- give or take depending on satellite geometry -- there's no way to separate the two.
Sure there is. The GPS clock system is independent of our common business-day clock. GPS does not incorporate time zones, does not incorporate daylight savings time adjustments, does not incorporate leap years or leap days or leap seconds or anything else. It is not tied to any earth time system. The GPS network simply counts its own seconds, independent of our earthly wall-clock time conventions.
The GPS unit likely has an independent clock circuit so that you can have a clock even when you are not receiving any GPS signals. And if it is running off of satellite time, it would have to have some stored translation factor to convert the satellite time to an earth-clock time, to account for time zones and daylight savings time and other adjustments, and to account for the fact that the satellite time *does* drift out of sync with official earth time systems. In fact due to leap seconds and whatnot, GPS time has drifted 14 seconds out of sync with GMT / UTC Coordinated Universal Time.
The fact that it was even physically possible for him to manually set the clock proves that the satellite time was not being directly displayed on the clock, that there is either an independent internal clock and/or some stored translation factor to convert the GPS network's internal clock system into whatever "common local time" you want displayed on the user-clock. None of this would would be used in the GPS position calculations.
-
- - You can't take something off the Internet! That's like trying to take pee out of a swimming pool.
Oddly enough, I was thinking on these lines only yesterday. I was driving down a piece of dual carriageway that was built in the early seventies for early seventies(crossply tyres, drum brakes, leaf springs) vehicles to do 70mph on. There are no side roads and no crossing points for pedestrians (indeed pedestrians, bicycles and mopeds are banned from this road which is cut into a little artificial canyon), yet modern traffic (well, the proles anyway) is limited to 40 mph.
I think we are told to OBEY SPEED LAWS that are made up as needed. As needed by some bureaucrat to 'massage' statistics.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
The camera *and* the GPS are right. It depends over which distance, and over which time the vehicle was measured.
First 100 metres. Av speed 100km/h. ...see police. Hard on brakes.
Next 100 metres. Av. speed 50km/h.
Av speed over 200 metres, 75km/h. Speed while clocked, 100km/h.
I have seen a GPS device, based on Windows Mobile, with two clocks! One was the GPS clock and the other the device (Pocket PC) clock. They functioned independitly of each other ( there was setting somewere that manually reset the device clock with GPS but was buried on the system settings...)
Actually all this would do, if GPS units were required, is let us know where they died, within 1m of resolution.
Maybe if you mandated people install governors, so that they couldn't accelerate over the speed limit to avoid accidents...
-- Terry
That would mean that road deaths are a greater threat than paedophiles and terrorism ...... Oh.
I call bullshit here. Obviously you don't have a clue how GPS works.
It is entirely essential that your GPS time reference is extremely accurate, otherwise the triangulation - which is done by calculation of the distances to the GPS satellites, by measuring how long the signals took to arrive - would not be possible.
In many (most) GPS devices you cannot set the time at all, only the time zone.
Ehm.... I remember reading this story about a year ago (maybe more or less), does anybody have an exact date on when this happened or is this just another urban legend that keeps coming round?
0) Put your own GPS sats, which you can control, into orbit.
Might be taking it too far, but what the hey.
I am so looking forward to my first trip to Australia. What do you have there that is also very interesting? Can I see hovering rocks, or swimming earth fish?
Anyway - just a quick question. Do the trees have cute little feet, or big long legs? I'm having trouble picturing this.
thanks - see you soon.
..........FULL STOP.
Bicycles track you!
The real question is why does the GPS need to be told what time zone it is in? Isn't it its job to figure that out?
Don't know is GPS devices are different from my satnav here, but with Tomtom, I need to set the clock manually. I can then press "sync" and it goes to the closest half hour based on GPS time.
There is a balance between protecting your children and allowing them to grow up.
Stop chasing after speeding ticket money.
Instead, go after the drunk and TRULY reckless drivers (i.e. drivers weaving through traffic to get somewhere FAST) if you must.
The municipality you live in should be able to pay you enough from the pool of tax monies collected there. If that is not the case, somebody is ripping them off--so investigate and go arrest them as well. If big business didn't put the squeeze on everybody that works for them, nobody would be in a rush and there wouldn't be people speeding while using their cellphones -- a recipie for disaster if there ever was one.
Instead, fight the kinds of crime that kill/hurt people FIRST (like murder and rape and drunk / reckless driving), property crimes (like arson and embezzlement), THEN chase after the speeders who are otherwise driving safely.
Just turn the inside left lane on the highways into an Autobahn and throw away your ticket books.
Your road is not the issue. The issue is are speed limits valid exercises of government rule making and is enforcing speed limits with faulty / error prone technology useful?
Speeding is usually a "strict liability" offense with few, if any, ways to challenge the officer's reported speed.
Libertarians (inserting themselves into the topic) don't believe that the government should set speed limits. Roadways are constructed within engineering parameters that permit "safe" travel at certain ranges of speed, dependent upon conditions.
Fines cannot be used to enrich the Court (conflict of interest) and go to the community that pays for the municipal court with separate tax sources. The fines serve to deter Libertarians, 18 year-olds and DUI laws take drivers off the road.
If error is present, it should be transparent to the cited, counsel and the Court and officer - not to mention the prosecutor. Prosecutors have a duty to dismiss bad busts - and in muni courts, most do.
...because that tends to happen with kids from authoritarian parents. They turn 19, go off to college and screw up because they don't know how to handle freedom or make their own choices.
No questions asked and no they don't get a choice...They both aren't ever allowed a single moment of privacy. *gasp* Nope.
And you naturally abide by the same rules, right, so you aren't the biggest hypocrite on the face of the planet? If they have to carry GPS tracking phones, so do you. If they have to use the computer in the living room, so do you. If you can search their rooms at any time for any reason, they can search yours at any time for any reason. Otherwise you're as full of it as a parent that smokes 2 packs a day, drinks heavily, and brings home women picked up at seedy bars yet insists his kids never drink, smoke, or have sex until they're 25 and married. And your kids will know this.
The key is "appropriate" speed. Any moron who drives 100 km/h in a 30 km/h zone should lose his license and deserved IMHO some extra education with a cluebat (those areas tend to have small kids running around). Ditto for people speeding and weaving in and out lanes during peak hour (ditto for morons hanging in an overtaking lane for no apparent reason).
However, if someone hammers along at twice the permitted speed at 3am on an empty road with a car that can handle it and does this sensibly (not flying into unknown bends at a stupid speed) I actually can't see the problem.
I regularly have the pleasure of driving in Germany, and my car is capable of doing well over twice the national speed limit in the UK (and other EU countries). It is stable at those speeds, but regardless of being able to do so you will not catch me doing that sort of speed when it's busy.
The simple argument is risk management, your very first duty as a driver is to be safe - also for others. This also provides the argument for sticking very firmly to restrictions: with the exception of a few places in the UK where they simply want speeding revenue, speed is normally reduced for a reason: risk. It's stupid to think you know better than the people who spent effort, time and tax money putting those signs up IMHO..
Incidentally, there's another barrier to driving very fast: fuel consumption at 260 km/h can be about 5x of that at 120 km/h. It's fun for a short while but I prefer to have as less stress as possible when driving - risk means stress.
Insert
Using GPRS, you simply connect via TCP/IP to your server. The unit was clearly not a simple recorder as you can see the SIM card on the picture.
Bingo. Somebody mod this post up, as it is the only one with any correct information.
I was being facetious. Clearly it would be a bad idea.
-- Terry
You aren't going to like my answer but, yes... If they were technologically capable of it and wanted then I'd carry such a phone. However, they aren't. Instead they know they can call me any time, day or night, and no matter what I am doing I will be there. I do, actually, use a PC in front of other people more often than not. There are some exceptions but that's because there is no one here and I'm an adult and able to make safer choices. *gasp* (No kids I take it?) Oh and here's the kicker... I do smoke cigars but my children only know it and haven't ever seen it because I don't and won't smoke with them in the building. Want more of a kicker? I sometimes enjoy a beer. *gasp again* In my State it is perfectly legal so, you know? They've BOTH taken a sip off of Daddy's beer and didn't like it one bit. *gasp* I have firearms in the house too! Oh no!!! I suppose I should allow them free access to those because I'm able to use them safely? Is that your logic? Yes? Treat your kids with respect, not the same level of rules you apply to yourself. You're sitting there spouting gibberish. "Well you drive so your kids should be able to." Come on now. Grow up and admit you have no children and no clue other than your ideals. Raise some sometime. I'll give you one free lesson...
(And this is why they modded my comment and left your comment as babbling idiocy.) Firearms. Let's not debate the value - I live in NORTHERN MAINE and grow and hunt my own food. They are in a combination locked safe and every single one of them can't be fired without removing it and assembling the firearm (bolt removed, etc.) and every single one of them has a trigger lock. *gasp* Yeah, that happens when you grow up and have children. You can let your children cyber with 90 year old men when you have some if you want but I'm gonna stop that from happening as often as I can - that's what parents do. We stop what we can and clean up the rest and love them regardless. Anyhow... Your free lesson, free as in beer and speach... My children aren't allowed toy guns at all. Guns are never toys. If it looks like a gun then it is not a toy. However... They both, ages seven and nine, know how they work and have been out on the range with proper hearing protection and taken lessons in firearm safety. Ten is the limit... At 10 my daughter gets her first BB Gun. (I've picked a nice quality weapon for her.) That is what she gets. She will, if she wants, learn to use it safely or it will not be used. On the other hand, I know, damned well, that my son, the youngest of the two, will be out there convincing her to let him have a shot and I'll end up with a dead bird or two. I'll cook that bird. He will have it served to him. (I won't make him eat it but he will learn that the taking of a life means that you did so for a few reasons and a few reasons only - one of which is to eat.) I am not ignorant, by any means, I know what is going to happen and why it will happen and I have made my choices based on this. I am not perfect but, from the sounds of things, I'm a damned lot better than many/most will ever know and until you have raised perfect children don't bother commenting again? Take the free lesson and apply it to your own moral values. You don't own your children, you have a responsibility to them and for them.
"So long and thanks for all the fish."
I hope this post was meant as sarcasm. If not ... *gasp*
The agony of not knowing everything in the world about your child is too much for many people to bear. Nonetheless, it is the sacrifice you must make, if you are to allow them to become individuals.
TRUE!
In all US vehicles, (and in some foreign cars) this computer is installed on most cars since the late 1980's or so. This computer is mainly used to diagnose engine issues -- misfires, O^2 sensors, fuel mix, etc. The newer models will even record information that is displayed on your console, such as low tire-pressure and "Service Engine Soon" warnings.
As you said, this can also be good for pulling accident data, or just keeping an eye on your kids. Really would help to prevent them from hiding any accidents that they try to cover up while on vacation, no matter how good an episode of TV it might be... uh, right.
TIP: You can also go to many places like Auto-Zone and they will plug in their reader for free to check out your "trouble codes".
If they were "just" GPS then yes.
Just for your information, the "P" in GPS stands for (P)osition....
If they communicated your speed and position to a central system
...and speed is just the derivative of position over time.
As long as you have a GPS device (or whatever else) that reports its position to something outside (say a service for recovering stolen cars or a service for paranoid parents wanting to track their children) you have enough data to do speeding tickets. Although, if position is transmitted less frequently, you may miss some speeding (nevertheless, there was a case here in Europe, maybe in France, where a guy got ticketed on the ground of timing at which he showed up at toll booths on both end of a toll highway. there's no way he could cross this distance that fast without speeding).
The only way to avoid oppressive use of positioning devices (GPS/GLONASS/GALILEO/in-phone GSM tower triangulation/WiFi SSID logging/etc.) is to use system that reports the data to a personnal service, similar to the open source laptop tracking software recently reported on /. that was respectful toward privacy.
If the owner is still in charge of his own data, that the only way to be sure that privacy will be respected.
I would not want this to happen but someday they will justify it on the grounds of "tracking terrorists" or something like that.
You forgot to also drop the ugly "pirates" and awful "paedophiles" keywords.
It will be used to track ungodly evil "pirate peado-terrorists" heathen scum.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
Imagine you are entering an intersection on a green light, at 60km/h and suddenly, you see a car on a crash course on your right, entering the intersection despite the red light for him. If the crash seems absolutely imminent, usually the best thing to do is to smash the gas into the floor and hope your car isn't speed-locked. If it is, well, your safety feature just killed you.
On the other hand if the system is intelligent enough to determine the maximum speed the car should be travelling at a given position (it needs an up to date map of streets and speed restriction on them), it should be able to determine if the car is supposed to travel at all (and nicely stops on its own on a red light).
Congratulation you've almost discovered auto-pilot. Now just thrown in a collision avoidance system and people will finally be able to read newspapers during long commutes.
*but* if a car can't exactly determine what it should do, then you'll only have alerts, no actual automated take-over of the control from the on-board computer.
An alarm sounds when driver is going over limit. Le the driver choose if there isn't an exceptional situation calling for a special behaviour.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]
You know what that means then? That I could be incriminating myself*. Although I don't speed any more due to the very high fuel costs. £1.30 per litre of diesel. Meh.
However, I don't transmit the timestamp of the signal from my phone to the server, so I could always argue that network jitter, etc caused inaccuracies.
Get your own free personal location tracker
In NJ and I'll assume most states, your car's onboard data can be downloaded w/o a warrant or need for consent. From what I remember, GM & Ford used to (and may still) maintain that the vehicle data is *their* property. On-Star etc already allow remote access to some(or more) of this data.
How long before your car gives you a ticket?
I reckon speed limits are if not invalid, then at least badly flawed, badly implemented and obsolete in their current form. They do not take account of atmospheric conditions nor traffic density nor geography, and are only concerned with an arbitrary and artificial rule to be enforced on anyone who is neither too socially important(off-duty cops upwards) nor socially unimportant (joyriding kids etc) to pay the fines.
Replace traffic cops speed guns with camcorders and let them prosecute on 'dangerous driving' grounds to a jury if they think excessive speed is being used for the conditions.
They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
does not incorporate daylight savings time
It is really hard for me to trust this guys comment when he talks about "daylight savings time" ... its daylight saving time.
If you travel 100m at 100m/s and 100m at 50m/s, you have traveled 200m in 3s for an average speed of 66.67m/s, not 75m/s.
I don't think measuring 62mph vs 45mph can be regarded as a "calibration error". That's 25% off. Who'd make measuring devices that wander off so much over time? I can see a 5mph error. But not 17mph. I think the cop was BS'ing and just trying to make his quota - note that in related articles it is pointed out that the particular stretch of road is known to be a speed trap. Makes you wonder how many other people were caught speeding who simply did not have the technology to contest it.
Ehhh...Chesterville isn't Northern Maine, buddy, regardless of how the Portland/LA/Augusta cabal have decided to redefine geography.
Nothing wrong with protecting your kids from the consequences of their actions ... when the consequences are unjustified by their actions. Which is usually the case when the cops take someone young to court.
Also... Considering the amount of ridicule that psychology gets (as a real science) from the slashdot crowd... there sure are a lot of people ready to try to participate in it.
emphasis on the 'try'.
Fucking lazy bastards will sit their fat asses on the side of the highway and harass people driving in a controlled manner, albeit a little too quickly, but when you drop a shitload of evidence in their lap that you know the person who robbed your house they act like fucking Barney Fife. I'm glad to see this policeman left with egg on his face, and I hope his fellow cops bust his balls for it every day until he eats his service pistol.
I think that if I gave them a car, that would be just enough rope to hang themselves.
... then they'd either accept the car WITH lojack, or not accept the car. Either way, I offered.
... and watch them go crazy trying to find the second, non-existant one....
If I gave them a lojacked car
and if my kids are smart, they'd find a way around being tracked, and I'd congratulate them for it. Then I'd tell them I actually had two tracking devices in it (which I wouldn't)
I thought you were considered an adult at 18.
Can't be used to enrich the court?
When was the last time you looked at a citation for any sort of traffic offense? In Virginia at least there's there's a $62 "processing fee" on any vehicular offense you drive away from (I'm sure the ones that result in arrest are even worse) In other states it may have different names, including in PA, if I'm thinking back to high school correctly, a $1.50 charge to fund the "Judicial Computer Program"
Way back when, some well meaning semi-honest politician put the rule into place that fines go to some sort of general fund that pays for schools in poor areas or some such end.
However, politicians, as they always do, found a way to pervert the intent of the law, and hence on a $25 expired registration, $30 expired inspection, or $40 having a radar detector (my favorite), you pay a $62 processing fee. Want to guess where the processing charge goes to? (hint: it isn't to help poor kids learn to read)
In fact, when it comes to speeding, you have to be going 13mph over before the "fine" portion catches up with the "processing fee".
Now, a cynic might say that money the government forces you to pay it because you broke the law is a fine, no matter what they put on the slip of paper to get through that loophole.
I think (accurate) speed limits are necessary. I also think that entirely too often in the US speed limits are set for political reasons at a level significantly below what the road will support, often due to things like blanket state limits.
(how many times have you been on an interstate crossing state lines and the speed limit changes at the border? Did the road suddenly get more dangerous because you crossed an imaginary line?)
As long as the event of pulling someone over puts any amount of money into the local government's coffers, there will be incentive to use the laws for purposes of revenue. Plain and simple. Not to mention how much better "cracking down on speeders" sounds than raising taxes for officials who face reelection.
And the following fines have been automatically removed from your back account:
Rolling though a stop sign 5th and Main at 9:21am: $120
Parking meter expired for 3minutes 18 seconds at 11:57am: $50
Speeding 38mph in a 35mph zone at 5:58pm: $80
Failure to use turn signal while making a lane change at 7:09pm: $35
and your oil is over due for a change by 51 miles: Manufacture warranty now VOID
Due to these violations you vehicle will no longer be allowed to operate , sorry for the inconvenience of leaving you stranded on the highway in the middle of nowhere at 3:47 am. But it's your own fault for not doing what your told.
Are radar guns highly inaccurate or did the cop profile the person because they are young and it's unlikely he would get a fair trial (his word vs the older cops)? I'd like to know how the police corrected this problem to ensure it does not happen again.
Man, I hate your kind.
"I treat them like humans and I talk to them like that."
You treat them like humans?? How kind of you.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
the GPS said I wwas doing 75, the cop said his radar gun said 76
Are you saying a cop pulled you over for doing 76 in a 75? That is HIGHLY illegal and it would be(have been) an easy court case to get the cop fired....of course then you better not go back to that county/state ever again....
Fleet tracking GPS devices and SatNav GPS devices are two seperate animals. Fleet tracking GPS has absolutely no in vehicle user interface. It's solely for the use of management to know where you are at what time. It has no function for the driver to get directions to his destination.
I have repeatedly gone past these thing that display your speed. Quite often, I see my speed displayed as close to double. I have a handheld GPS and knew that I was going ~15MPH, but I would see on the display that I was going 31MPH. I think that it was the approaching spokes of my bike that was causing the discrepancy. It would be apparent that the same thing could be going on with "spinners" and irregular wheels that are used on cars that young people have.
Notmysig
I'm amazed at the people who just assume that the GPS is very accurate (I'm not arguing for the RADAR) but did you know that GPS satellites fail? At last count, I believe there are 8 that are dead and 24 working (that's a 25% failure rate,) orbiting the earth. That is why a GPS is not considered accurate for aircraft navigation, unless the GPS has a RAIM facility (Receiver Autonomus Integrity Monitoring.) RAIM tells the GPS when the signal is not reliable--in order to prevent a pilot from using it to fly into a mountain or something. They also created WAAS to provide the "pinpoint" accuracy for GPS landings, but this augments the GPS signal with a ground-based signal to correct for any errors. There is no automotive GPS that uses RAIM, and neither do the tracking GPS's, so in this case, it is possible that the GPS was not accurate. In any case, it is nice to know that the court didn't just blindly side with the police.
Take police out of the picture and you have nobody to prevent accidents from the high-speed, ETOH-fueled drivers. Is eliminating DUI law your real plan here?
Depending upon how the GPS is implemented it could be pretty misleading about the velocity. Heck, if it averages a sample every minute, you could easily scream above the speed limit, then slow down or sit at a stop light for a moment, and the average between the two sample points would still look "below the speed limit". Radar is practically instantaneous by comparison. It isn't perfect either, but I don't get the expert's comments from the article: "Dr. Heppe also pointed out that the GPS device released instantaneous data, and not data averaged over a distance.""
Are these military grade GPS units or something? Every GPS unit I've ever used samples at a relatively coarse time sampling, and the "instantaneous" velocity is all over the place as you slow down and/or change directions. The software attempts to interpolate something reasonable, but it sometimes isn't. Sample spacing is usually user-configurable with a tradeoff between the number of points stored and the limited memory storage of the unit. Regardless, the information *has* to be averaged over a significant distance or it isn't very accurate given the limited spatial resolution of a few metres.
I did some searching and based on the name of the GPS unit illustrated in the article I found another more detailed article cited on the vendor's page. On that page you'll see a proud stepdad showing the map with GPS data apparently used in court (click on the image -- it gets bigger). The points illustrated on that map are city blocks apart.
The map is detailed enough to figure out exactly where it is if you poke around in Google Maps near the places mentioned such as the Lakeville Highway. Apparently the traffic incident occurred along Lakeville Highway (116), on the southeast side of Petaluma, California. With that comparison it's possible to figure out the scale, and determine that there's 500-600m or more between the sample points close to the one that's circled in red (presumably the key one, and the street names match).
Half a kilometre sampling is more accurate than radar??? And the article mentions 30-second time sampling. Give me a break! It's relevant, but I don't see why the GPS results would be automatically more reliable.
Finally, if you look carefully at the map in Google Earth and the one in the article, you'll discover that Lakeville Highway significantly curves immediately before the point circled in red ... whereas the line drawn between the red one and the immediately preceding sample point is a straight line. This could be significant if the software calculating the speed from the GPS coordinates was assuming a straight-line path between the points, whereas, in reality, the path taken was curved and therefore longer in the same amount of time. The speed will be underestimated.
Most likely the court simply rolled over the moment the ticket was contested with any type of evidence to the contrary.
But it wouldn't have worked on me, at least not for quite a bit longer and further.
I wandered away from my mom once - got hungry and went through a buffet line. They didn't even realize I wasn't around my parents until the adults on both sides disclaimed me.
The leash might of worked. Mostly as a reminder 'this is how far you're allowed from mom/dad'.
I don't read AC A human right
There will be drunk programmers ALL OVER THE PLACE!
Please check out how GPS works. Don't make stuff up. It's not that hard.
All pure conjecture. The law is every state but Louisiana (don't know, Napoleonic code, you know) is that no traffic/municipal court can fund itself from fines. Your fees and so on go to agencies other than the court - they just "enhance" the low fine by putting a handling charge in place.
Oh, and in the Old Dominion the state ran up the traffic fines to hundreds, if not thousands of dollars, to feed the state's coffers. I believe that experiment failed.
The real question here is wether the radar gun is ineffective (in which case stop using them). Or did the cop do something naughty (in which case legal action should be taken against him).
It's likely that the radar was close to correct, but that there were multiple cars.
It happens all the time.
Usually, the police expert tells how accurate radar (or laser) is, and they win.
Even if they got the wrong car.
While many GPS's can show your vertical position, I don't know of one that calculates speed using vertical position. In other words your speed is calculated assuming you are on a horizontal plane and it calculates your displacement on that plane vs time. Also, these car GPSs aren't accurate, they are to calculate an approx position and speed. Even having a 1M error, that would cause issues with the calculation of speed.
Not any worse than American drivers, mind you, but have you ever tried to drive in Rome? I had a MUCH easier time driving through downtown L.A. Please don't act all high and mighty like America has cornered the market on bad drivers.
Ahh, fuck this stupid Slashdot script preventing me from posting twice as AC in less than 2 hours.
The time zone is a user display preference. If the time zone was auto-calculated, the GPS device would have to store all possible time zone options in memory and do do spatial calculations on every position it received when time is being shown.
The job of the GPS is to reports its position and GMT time, along with whatever else is relevant to its task (go0gle NMEA for possible returned strings).
Honestly, I think the judges welcome valid reasons to let people slide. You just can't say "I dont want a ticket". Providing any tech data will give them a reason to let it slide. BTW, (full disclosure). I sell a GPS speed limit device. Before you get mad. Let me explain. It runs your cruise control. (gpscruise.com) I got a ticket and mentioned the device in court. After I lost (yes I still lost), the judge said, "You never said that the device was actively operating your gas pedal". Had I said that, I would have won! Next time.
While I don't speed, one solution is to simply jam these bands as to render these things ineffective. As you can probably tell, I don't have much confidence in police or our legal system that insists that their equipment is calibrated and or operated correctly.
"I bow to no man" - Riddick
They can't fund themselves from *fines* This is specifically why they call it a fee. (read any one of the numerous articles about the failed $1k speeding ticket experiment - it's how I became aware of the very important legal distinction between fines and fees when dealing with this area)
The fact that it goes to "other agencies" is irrelevant. If 50 dollars from the fee goes to fund the parks department, the city/county/whatever can take another 50 dollars of tax money that would have gone to fund the parks, and put it towards other things, like the court, police force, or whatever else it pleases. The effect is the same: There is an incentive for local governments to set speed limits based on things other than sound engineering surveys, and use the enforcement of these politically set speed limits to generate revenue.
here's one example: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4191/is_20041114/ai_n10042164
I do recall one instance where some town hall lackey was dumb enough to end up on record saying speed limits were lowered to help with a budget deficit, but I can't find it at the moment.
If it was a cheating husband or criminal they would have been in court showing how inaccurate their GPS is.
Sure takes the fun out of being a teen tho....thank God my folks didn't have this when I was young. I had a blast....but, didn't get into trouble, made my grades....worked etc. But, I ran around...partied...didn't get DWI's (hell, I got pulled over once half tanked, but, was close to home and the cop let me drive home warning I'd go to jail if he saw me out again that night, man, you'd not see THAT happen again these days).
There are only 'consequences' of actions if you do something wrong or get caught. Kids have to make mistakes and take chances in order to grow. If you parents are so over protective, how are you going to learn....and being young is the time to be a little reckless and have fun. You get to be 'resposible' and adult acting soon enough...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
You could as easily have made a shorter post stating:
"If your GPS time was off by even one second, your position would be off by about 300km"
Since when the fuck do we have land vehicles that allow us to go 300 kilometers in a second? Did you suddenly forget physics and your G-Forces or what? GPS is also time-independent!
Still waiting on Serviscope_minor to wake up to fucking reality and realize that Jessica Price isn't going to fuck him.
If I ever got called into court on a 1-2 MPH over ticket, I would just pull out the radar gun specs that says +/-3 MPH. Most of the manuals for the radar guns state that they are accurate +-3mph.
Fight Spammers!
Read much?
He suggested prosecuting dangerous driving instead of (often) abitrary limits, not getting rid of cops.
That is truly great advice, but can be misused in the hands of idiot parents who substitute "Kids have to make mistakes" with "Kids should have no rules or discipline." Part of being a (good) parent is setting rules and limits, then justly punishing when their children do (and they always will) break the rules. What makes it difficult is that no two children are the same, so there isn't a one-size-fits-all crime/punishment rulebook to follow.
Great parents respect their kids, but they also "instill" respect in their kids for themselves and other adults. Bottom line, having/raising kids is a HUGE responsibility, and it should be treated as such...a HUGE responsibility.
When I have a kid, I want to put him in one of those strollers for twins and then run around the mall looking frantic.
do these laser speed guns damage our eyesight?
I mean, the cops just randomly shoot IR lasers at us. Are these things powerful enough to damage our eyesight or blind us?
we'd never know because we can't see the beam. Do cops know that lasers can blind people? do they care?
They're using their grammar skills there.
Most GPS units I've seen aren't terribly accurate with speed and distance. Why? Because when they do those calculations, despite the fact that they have altitude data, they typically don't use it. This will result in a lower than actual speed/distance, as the calculations are based on a flat projection rather than the actual distance travelled.
This becomes really apparent if you compare what a gps says your speed/distance is compared to your dialed-in computer on a bicycle.
It still happens these days...
I got pulled over about 50 yards from my house, caught speeding and really trashed.
He wrote me up for speeding, and said the only reason I got off was he didn't have a field sobriety kit. I think it was cause I answered every question he asked (grilled me for 10 mins) perfectly, providing proof of residences, EVERYTHING. (had out or province tags, etc.)
Worst/Best Lesson of my life. Never drive after two beer anymore. Not worth it, and am a staunch advocate of my friends not doing it either.
I got pulled over once half tanked, but, was close to home and the cop let me drive home warning I'd go to jail if he saw me out again that night, man, you'd not see THAT happen again these days
And well you shouldn't! You endangered everybody you encountered on the road that night. In my opinion, the cop was irresponsible to let you go. If getting pulled over for DWI vas a virtual guarantee of a visit to jail (assuming that you actually fail the test, of course) then maybe fewer people would be so casual about operating complicated and deadly machinery while under the influence of mind-numbing drugs.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
Reminded me of someone's sig (toughly):
To become successful, people learn from their mistakes; I choose to learn from theirs.
You have to realize that despite being the 'Home of the Brave, Land of the Free', we're also the country that passed prohibition, had dry states, and still have 'dry' counties in a few spots were it's illegal to sell alcohol, period.
We do have quite a population of wanna-be nannies.
In the USA, you're 99% an adult at 18. You can vote, smoke, join the military without your parent's consent, get married, buy/own property, etc... Except for a number of political offices(with varying age rules), alcohol is about the only 'right' restricted to 21. Kinda like Australia's homosexual thing. It's more an exception.
There are other exceptions, of course, at the state level. We're more tightly bound than the EU, but less than other countries do for state levels. Can you name any other country in the world with varying rape/murder laws within subsections of the country itself? For example, one oddity is that the age for handling your own medical care in Nebraska is 19. Makes for some interesting situations at the University(lots of freshmen away from their parents)... The military simply ignores the law, of course, being a federal agency.
I don't read AC A human right
Umm, GPS units measure time difference of arrival in order to establish their position. Slight differences in arrival times between the various GPS satellites is how they establish their position.
In order to do that, you need to have an independent clock inside of the unit in order to measure the time differences. It doesn't have to be stable enough to keep perfect wall clock time over long periods, but it needs to be good enough over short periods, to precisely measure the phase difference between signals.
So yes, every single GPS unit has to have its own clock. And it's not just for convenience.
I got pulled over once half tanked, but, was close to home and the cop let me drive home warning I'd go to jail if he saw me out again that night, man, you'd not see THAT happen again these days
And well you shouldn't! You endangered everybody you encountered on the road that night. In my opinion, the cop was irresponsible to let you go. If getting pulled over for DWI vas a virtual guarantee of a visit to jail (assuming that you actually fail the test, of course) then maybe fewer people would be so casual about operating complicated and deadly machinery while under the influence of mind-numbing drugs.
Remember that the next time you work a really long shift and drive home or when talking on your cell phone when driving. Which is worse, an accident caused by someone too tired to drive, or under the influence? For that matter, should people who drive recklessly and kill someone be executed on the spot. Does that sound fair? The DUI laws here are based on an arbitrary number. .08 may be drunk for one but not another. It should be based on your motor skills- because that's what really matters when driving.
"Nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you're a hit man or a video gamer"- Jack Thompson
There are only 'consequences' of actions if you do something wrong
Like say, driving drunk? Or for that matter what are you doing drinking enough to get you drunk in the first place?
One is never too young to smarten up and act responsible.
I agree with you here. As a rule, I like to think the "best" course of action is to allow your kid(s) as much freedom as they can handle. When they show a lack of caution or abuse of the privileges you give them, then you have to reign them back in - reminding them WHY it was done.
I'd like to think I'd never resort to GPS tracking of where my daughter was driving in my car, once she reaches that age. I know it wouldn't be something I'd do from the start. But if she kept taking the car, using all the gas up, and getting into trouble with it? Sure ... that might become one option.
Envision your own car putting you in jail. ...)
(hint: disable OnStar, Blackbox, Bluetooth
Since EVERYTHING else is bugged why stop there.
http://www.buzzflash.com/farrell/06/02/far06001.html
The Secrets of Microsoft's Sync:
(a previous comment)
[PLAY] Funeral For A Friend - Elton John
http://digg.com/microsoft/The_Secrets_of_Microsoft_s_Sync?t=13126894#c13126894
~hylas
Just because people can get away with similarly bad behavior doesn't mean that the law against this bad behavior shouldn't be enforced. If you want to make it fair, start punishing them all. If you are too impaired to drive, don't drive. If you drive anyway, you should go to jail. The source of the impairment shouldn't matter.
As for the .08 number being arbitrary, this is true, but I think that the problem is more that there will be people who are impaired below this number than that there are people who won't be impaired above it. A lot of heavy drinkers end up becoming pretty good at hiding inebriation, but that only applies to looking sober; your car doesn't care whether you're hiding it or not.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
Well, Well, Well. A little victory for the citizenry. I personally think people need to do more to protect themselves given the amount of corruption in today's law enforcement. That is not to say that there is not some risks in doing so. I think the most important thing is for the owner to somehow keep control of the data to make sure that it is not used against you. For example, in a situation like this the GPS data recorder should be only accessible to the owners (parents, possibly child). If there are attempts to access the data by unauthorized parties (Including but not limited to Law Enforcement, Criminals, Lawyers, ect) the data self deletes. Preferably the system would have both hardware (open the case, good by data) and software (enter the wrong password more than 5 times, data deleted) countermeasures. From a more "Adult Owner" perspective I would throw in video as well, though the system would have to be set up on a say 15 minute loop constantly deleting anything beyond that 15 minutes unless you entered a password. If you wanted to go really far you could put in a panic button and have it transmit the last 15 minutes of video to several video sharing sites and email notify a few choice people should anything really bad occur.
Well I think that's enough of a rant for me.
There are plenty of people that can drive a car perfectly well at .08 BAC. It is an arbitrary number. Impairment should be based on physical ability. If you are not weaving, or having any problems driving...if you get pulled over even with an open beer in the car, you should be good to go. Driving impaired does not mean necessarily that you have had some alcohol. There are people out there driving sleepy or on cell phones that are more impared than someone who has had 2-3 beers....
That time I described as a teen...I told the officer what the deal was, that I'd been to a party, had a few drinks, but, realized I'd not eaten...that I was heading home with a load of Taco Bell. He let us go saying to go straight home (I was only a few blocks away)...and we went home, ate and crashed there. No harm, no record...obviously if he knew I was impared beyond driving, etc...he'd have taken me in, but, he used good judgement to see that I wasn't impaired beyond safely driving home. Nowdays...with all the financial incentives...they go after you if they can even pin one beer on you...they are often on 'fishing' expeditions just to make headlines and make $. It isn't all about safety.
That's why, if I'm even close to the 'legal' limit...and I'm pulled over, I really don't say a thing other than hand them my license and reg. If they want to make me do field sobriety tests...I refuse, those do nothing but gather evidence for them. I just will put my hands out for the cuffs, and go with them...refusing any test. Worst you'll get in many states is a suspended license, and you can always get hardship license that will allow you to drive to/from work. It may be a PITA, but, at least it doesn't go on your record as a DWI and ruin your credit and insurance....
With the limits so low, and them trying to get anyone they can, I see nothing wrong with trying to avoid the system, or at the very least NOT helping them gather evidence against me. Get a good lawyer, and you can get out of this usually.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
"a bloody good bollocking for wandering off. Apparently I never wandered again."
I'd say I wouldn't run off again if my parents "whacked me in the nuts" when I did it the first time! Or does that have a different meaning elsewhere?
I only look human.
My mother is a halfling and my dad is an ogre, so that makes me an Ogreling
Having drinks and driving is pretty darned common, if you think otherwise you need to wake up. See all those bars out there in the city? You think no one is drinking there and driving home? I'd wager easily 98% of the people that are patrons there are doing just that...you never see many of those bars at night after closing time with parking lots filled with cars of people that took the bus home.
You can have a few drinks, and not be impaired beyond capable driving. If you do get too trashed...then you should not drive, but, having a few, and knowing your limit, nothing wrong with that.
If you think differently, then for goodness sake, outlaw the sales of alcohol at bars and dining establishments. If you don't, then I don't see much of a place to make an argument not to drink at all and drive...
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I do agree with you that .08 for some means drunk and .08 for others means not so drunk they can't function. But unfortuantely you need to have that arbitrary number or there would be a lot of cops having to make judgement calls about who is too drunk to drive and who isn't. There would be a ton more court cases asking for dismissal with the defense of "I wasn't THAT drunk."
Insert funny smart-ass comment here.
Oh because the speed limit is 80kph it must be unsafe to go 180kph huh? And you call yourself a crazy Swedish guy. Ghostrider frowns upon you.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
My cousins had extremely over-protective parents. They learned by being reckless and wild as soon as they moved out to college. The problem is, once you turn 18, that recklessness has real world, life long consequences.
The result is that one of them dropped out of college, and lost $40,000 in scholarships. The other completely turned his back on his strict religious upbringing. Neither are walking the straight and narrow the way their parents had hoped.
The problem is when the mistakes seriously injure someone, destroy someone else's property, or take a life. There should be enough supervision to stop that. And if the kids don't display enough common sense to avoid those situations with a relative degree of confidence, they shouldn't be unsupervised until they do know.
You seem to have a decent outlook on the situation and this comment would probably be better suited for the parent. But "Respect" is a somewhat interpreted term that doesn't really have a concrete meaning. I respect the animals I hunt down and kill just like I respect the weapons I use to do it with. But I caused injury and harm to them to the animals. There needs to be more then just respect like maybe some absolute morals or qualities. Don't concentrate on morals as in the modern religious sense and look at them from the "the actions I do cause other things to happen" in the fable type of sense. Too often this is purely a relative point of view and if someone can justify it it to themselves then they can move the bar. This shift also leads to people going from moving the bar for something that is accepted behavior to unacceptable behavior like theft (they had more and I had less).
You are right though, it is complicated by no two kids being alike.
If anyone is interested in GPS tracking, there is a free service that works with inexpensive cell phones: http://www.instamapper.com/diy.html
You claim that many people can drive just fine at .08 BAC, do you have any cites or evidence for this? I ask simply because I don't believe it. I know that there are many people who think that they can drive just fine at .08 BAC (or some other level), but this is mainly because moderate amounts of alcohol tend to mess with your perception in such a way that you feel like you're doing the same as before, when in fact your reactions and judgement are significantly degraded. People who believe that they experience no impairment after "just a couple of beers" are, from what I've seen, just plain wrong about it.
Your rant against the police is very strange to me. You're taking charge of a large, dangerous machine, one which is dangerous not only to yourself but to anyone who comes near you. You owe it to yourself and to society to be in good mental condition when you do this.
I don't drink and drive, period. If I'm driving somewhere within the next couple of hours I do not drink. If I want to have a beer with dinner, I make sure that I can stay in the area for a while afterwards, or I go someplace within walking distance, or I have somebody else drive. I tried driving with "just one beer" a couple of times. I felt fine, with no effect on my driving. Thinking about it afterwards I realized that my reactions were significantly slower, and my judgement was much worse. So I never did it again.
I consider the legal limit to be quite a bit higher than it should be. I'm a pilot, and the FAA has very strict limits on alcohol. The BAC limit is .04, which is basically any detectable alcohol in the blood. In addition to this limit, they have a strict limit (hard to enforce, of course) that you may not drink any alcohol in the eight hours before you take the controls of an aircraft. This is vastly more strict than any automobile laws I'm aware of. But guess what, I've never heard any pilot complain about the rules.
The trick to avoiding police action is quite simple: if you drink, do not drive. They won't be able to convict you of anything if there isn't any alcohol in your blood. And you shouldn't have any alcohol in your blood while operating a car, no matter what the law allows.
I agree that the law should be based on a much broader definition of impairment, rather than being so specific to alcohol. But I think the standard of impairment should be much lower than it is as well.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
Chrysler is planning in-car 802.11 "hotspots" on all their new vehicles, you wouldn't even need to install anything in the vehicle to find out where it's been. All it would take is setting up a network of fixed access points in monitor mode (kismet or something similar) along intersections that tracks and logs the vehicle's SSID/MAC address OUI's, and you could effectively and cheaply be able to monitor a slew of vehicle's whereabouts without the owner even knowing. I think this new in-car wifi fad will have some (un)intended consequences to privacy.
Thats a flawed argument. Both are bad, you can't justify ONE of them by demonizing the other.
extremely over-protective parents = just as bad as extremely under-protective parents.
Have you ever noticed how bars tend to have parking lots next to them? That always makes me chuckle in a "Wow, everyone is really good at doublethink" kind of way...
Nope. I like to be sociable, and go meet out with people and try to pick up chicks in bars. I do not go to bars and not drink, just isn't gonna happen. I have to get home, and get to work the next day, so I need to get my car home. I'm driving there alone, therefore I will be driving home alone. I will be driving after having some drinks. Unless I'm tanked, I will drive...but, since most of the time it is a work night, I will not get tanked, I can't afford to be hungover and miss work. As I've gotten older, that has started to mean less and less alcohol consumption, it takes less to make me feel bad the next day. But, that's the reality of the situation. Unless you ban bars and the like from serving alcohol to the public outside their homes....this is going to be the situation.
I also find that the negative thoughts towards drinking (some) and driving seems to be more negative the further north you live, whereas in the south, it is more common and not thought of as such a horrible evil. I live in New Orleans now....and it is MUCH more liberal down there...hell, was only a few years ago that they finally passed an open container law for the car...in the past if you were getting pulled over, just hand your beer to the passenger before they cop came up to you...nothing they could do. Oh well...
Honestly...I don't think I've known anyone that went out with a 'designated driver'....and really rarely does not drive themselves home.
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
It's for all the designated drivers!
I'm sure there's somebody, somewhere, who actually believes that.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
When I worked for the FAA, I did some work at certain airport (name omitted just in case), that had parking for your plane right outside the bar, and a special gate going from the bar to the plane parking area. This was a large commercial airport. Controllers would tell me stories of drunk private pilots taking off from the taxiways.
This was 25+ years ago though. I am sure things are much more stringent now.
Read the parent of parent, and don't worry you wont ever hear "sorry" from me. I think my parenting was great. They trusted me enough that I could tell them anything so they didn't have to spy on me. My ass never needed Lojacking. Says something about your parenting though. PROTIP: you're an ass.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Most people can drive perfectly well over the limit. That is until they have to break suddenly to avoid an accident. Then their impared reactions kill people.
Well, your choice of lifestyle is in fundamental conflict with the law and with safe operation of your vehicle. While this is unfortunate, that doesn't mean that you're right and the law is wrong.
And just because "everybody does it" does not make it right either.
Your story of habitual drunk driving is not going to win you any points in your fight against your perceived mistreatment at the hands of police. In fact this perfectly illustrates the point from my original post. Maybe if that cop had thrown your ass in jail when you were a teenager, you would have wised up and wouldn't be out constantly endangering the lives of others now. Instead, you got the message that drunk driving was fine as long as you're "careful", and surprise surprise, you continue to do it, even to the point of railing against the police who try to stop you.
While I'm sure you couldn't possibly care less about my opinion, my advice would be to move to a location where you can walk or take public transportation to these bars you love so much.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
First off, humans are terrible at judging their own performance. Secondly, drunk humans are even worse. Thirdly, your suggestion, if made law, would encourage drunk humans to say "I'm one of those people who doesn't drive dangerously when drunk, so it's legal." End result, more drunk drivers.
I think it's much better if people know "once I've had X amount of alcohol in Y amount of time, I'm probably over the limit." Objective standards are good - especially for law enforcement.
I think your attitude of "I can handle it so it's fine" is exactly the kind of dangerous denial that gets people killed by drunk drivers all the time.
Right. Which is why sleepy, weaving people should also be pulled over. The difference is that it's harder to quantify how sleepy they are once you've got them pulled over. And you can bet they'll wake up a bit with a cop shining a flashlight in their face. Not that being sleepy is less dangerous.
Oh, yes, GPS-based seed measurement...
Some folks I know had made a bet once after an argument whose car is faster. They have agreed to meet in a week. The one who has got the highest recorded speed on his GPS wins.
The bet was won (and won by a margin) by a guy who got his driver's licence just recently and whose car was a crappy one. He has simply turned on his GPS in a plane.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
In case the data comming from the GPS is bullet proof (taking into accoount how inaccurate GPS is) then the data from the radar gun must be completely faked/wrong/tainted or even knowingly falsified.
A GPS system has by far not the accuracy to proove how fast you are traveling. At least not in the "local" surrounding you would expect when you get monitored by a truck.
A GPS system pinpoints your location roughly every 5 seconds, with an accuracy of roughly 5 to 10 yards. So if you move like 50mp/h over a distance of like 200 yards, then a GPS system would roughly tell you that you have moved 200 yards +/- 10 yards ... and that you where roughly 40mp/h to 60mp/h fast.
So .... either the speed ticket is like 55mp/h (when you where supposed to only drive 45mp/h) the GPS system would not be able to prove anything. ... when a radar system is hyper accurate and can pinpoint your speed on 0.1mp/h accuracy?
Or on the other hand if your ticket is like 70mp/h, then the GPS system would proove the ticket wrong, but would not necessaryly prove that you did not drive to fast.
More interesting, why did the police ticket you for driveing 70mp/h
Well, the case just sounds strange .. some ideas ... feel free to ignore them ^^
Cost free eBook I read (by iBook/Kobo/Amazon/ObookO/Gutenberg etc.): "The Green Odyssey" by Philip Jose Farmer.
Wow, although I can not argue against your opinion, I can say this. People have lost the ability to be people. I have seen the local gendarme from my community imbibing a few towns away. That way they are not seen by the citizenry. Not very fair for someone who can screw your life for a while. The point is this- IF you are driving ok, regardless of your physical or mental state you should not be arrested. I can make some wicked arguments about traffic laws, but that's not what I want to do. I am tired of the damnation I hear towards people who go to a bar, have a few drinks in a responsible manner and then drive home. The same people who damn others are guilty of other offenses- we all are. Let he who has not sinned...
"Nobody shoots anybody in the face unless you're a hit man or a video gamer"- Jack Thompson
Your position seems rather chaotic.
Your local police drink and drive, so you should be able to as well? Seems like an argument against police corruption, not drunk driving laws. "The other guy does it too" is never an excuse.
People are guilty of other offenses, so they shouldn't criticize this one? This just makes no sense. Let's not criticize anything, ever, because at some point we've all done something wrong! That's just not how it works. The fact that I occasionally do bad things does not remove my right to criticize other people who do bad things. I'm not saying that you're evil. I'm just saying that you're doing a bad thing, and should stop.
And lastly, I agree completely that people should only be arrested if they are truly impaired. However, and this is the part where I'm sure we really disagree, I don't think that any significant number of people are able to exceed the legal limit without being significantly impaired. People think that they can drink a few beers and still drive fine, but they are wrong. That is where the real danger lies. People who are so drunk that they get to the point where they realize they are too dangerous to drive aren't all that much of a problem. It's the people like you, who think that they can drink a few beers and not have it affect their driving, who are really dangerous, because you think you aren't.
If you mod me Overrated, you are admitting that you have no penis.
Parent and child:
same moral and ethical standards? yes.
same rules and privileges? no.
You'd have to be some piece of work to think that a kid of 9 or 7 (or like my kids, 3 or 2 or 1) years should have the same rules and privileges as their parents. Should I let my 3 year old drive the car? No? I must be some kind of hypocrite then!
The rules must absolutely be different for the parent than for the child. Especially while they are still learning how to direct themselves.
Parental control is something that has to change throughout a child's life: at birth, the parents should pretty much be in control. As the kid grows and shows increasing maturity and trustworthiness, the parent should give them increasing freedom to choose. Hopefully, the parent ends up with a young adult who can consistently choose well, who doesn't need oversight, and who feels free to go to his/her parents for advice and direction if needed. As time goes by, that advice and direction should be needed less and less. A parent's job is to work themselves out of the job.
I want to clarify that the moral standards should be the same for parent as for child, though. As in your example of a parent boozing it up but requiring their child to never touch alcohol, it is wrong for the parents to require a certain level of morality from their children that they themselves won't adhere to. I know my kids will be given opportunities to taste alcohol before they're 21. But they will be required to demonstrate moderation. I don't get drunk, and I will expect my children to abide by the same standard.
I'll take you to the ball, Barbara Manitee!!!
In the UK a successful anti-drink-driving campaign has more-or-less made it socially unacceptable, and it's entirely acceptable to say, "No thanks, cola for me, I'm driving". A designated driver is very common.
There are generally alternatives in towns (buses, trains, taxis) which helps.
If any of you, and that includes the SlashDot editors, were to actually read the RMT press release (which, by the way is no longer on their web site), you will see that nowhere does it say that the defendant in this case was victorious. This was purely a bs press release designed to provide exposure for the company that makes the tracker.
In fact, the case is still on appeal before a new commissioner, as reported here:
http://www.petaluma360.com/article/20080712/NEWS/807120355/-1/petaluma360&template=ptart
Testimony is still ongoing, and the next expert to testify is scheduled to appear on October 3. This is still far from over.
I mean, an actual population would much rather be governed by a corrupt dictator like Saddam than by a corrupt dictator like Bush.
Nothing to add to your comment, you already made my point.
WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
I got ticketed in a podunk little speed trap of a town in Arkansas, with a GPS sitting on the dash at the time. I'm pretty sure that when the officer saw the GPS he lowered what he was going to be ticketing me for. I thought about trying to fight it, but it just wasn't worth it - it would've been 16+ hours in the car to get there & back, a motel in the area, etc. all to fight a $75 or so ticket using a GPS tracklog as evidence. Throw in the local judge, local cops, etc. and it would've been a waste.
fencepost
just a little off
Lying happens - One of the more interesting family stories is one my mom shared with me from when she used to date a Chicago cop. The guy used to put super glue in peoples locks as he stood outside their door if they pissed them off (discretely of course), or if they REALLY annoyed him he would drop a little baggy of coke on them.
The guy also gave her a switchblade he confiscated (they are illegal here) to keep in her purse on the basis that "it's better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".
Modern aircraft have high levels of computer automation and flying a commercial aircraft is largely a matter of instrumentation, which means I feel safer with my pilot being drunk than with my friend being drunk when we're driving home from a party. In a car, and you're drunk, if you start to drift to one side you hit a telephone pole or an on-coming car. In a plane, you start to drift to one side, you hit a cloud. The ground is far enough away that making one little slip has to be followed by continuing to make vastly incorrect choices for tragedy to occur (due to pilot error that is - not counting stuff that is out of his control). Other planes are (hopefully) not passing within 2-10 feet of you on a regular basis.
Sorry but I've seen that where people hadn't been drinking. They just weren't paying attention to the traffic. Reasons vary, whether it be alcohol, sleep deprivation, a cellphone, a passenger they are talking to, a noisy child/baby in the back. People need to pay attention or not drive.
Shut up you self righteous asshole.
You have forgotten the human error factor:
The 1st human error factor is that more than one vehicle near the same location will trigger several different speeds. The radar will bounce between multiple vehicles and it's up to the officer's discretion to determine which one is going faster.
The 2nd human error factor is the method of running radar. There are two options: stationary and mobile. Stationary radar is much more accurate because the radar does not have to calculate the police vehicle speed. However, even with stationary radar there can be improper readings. I have personally seen radar jump up to over 100 MPH for a second or two when I knew there was only one vehicle in sight that was going less than half that speed.
The 3rd human error factor is proper identification of the vehicle. This can be especially difficult when an officer is running stationary radar. Pulling out into traffic without causing an accident and then accelerating fast enough to catch the vehicle can be challenge. The officer is then responsible for identifying the vehicle that was believed to be speeding before a traffic stop is conducted.
There are also other things that can interfere with the accuracy of radar, such as, hills and turns in the roads; the police cars fan for the heater / AC; and if the radars calibration is current.
Radar has several human error factor:
The 1st human error factor is that more than one vehicle near the same location will trigger several different speeds. The radar will bounce between multiple vehicles and it's up to the officer's discretion to determine which one is going faster.
The 2nd human error factor is the method of running radar. There are two options: stationary and mobile. Stationary radar is much more accurate because the radar does not have to calculate the police vehicle speed. However, even with stationary radar there can be improper readings. I have personally seen radar jump up to over 100 MPH for a second or two when I knew there was only one vehicle in sight that was going less than half that speed.
The 3rd human error factor is proper identification of the vehicle. This can be especially difficult when an officer is running stationary radar. Pulling out into traffic without causing an accident and then accelerating fast enough to catch the vehicle can be challenge. The officer is then responsible for identifying the vehicle that was believed to be speeding before a traffic stop is conducted.
There are also other things that can interfere with the accuracy of radar, such as, hills and turns in the roads; the police cars fan for the heater / AC; and if the radars calibration is current.
There is almost no room for error with regard to gps tracking devices. The couple negative things that could be said about gps do not apply to the Shaun Malone case. To that point, the prosecutions own expert witness who is being paid $5,000 for his testimony said himself that Rocky Mountain Tracking's RMT Rover GPS device is "very" accurate to within 1 mph. I checked out the company's gps tracking web site and looked at the spec sheet for this device. I would concur with his analysis.
Some of you obviously think this is a GPS navigation device. It's not. I looked at the company's gps tracking web site. This is a TRACKING device.