The First Person Ever To Die In a Tesla Is a Guy Who Stole One

mrspoonsi sends this news from The Verge: Elon Musk can no longer say that no one's ever died in a Tesla automobile crash. But few people will be pointing fingers at the electric car maker for this senseless tragedy. Earlier this month, 26-year-old Joshua Slot managed to successfully ride off with a Model S he'd stolen from a Tesla service center in Los Angeles, but police quickly spotted the luxury vehicle and gave chase. According to Park Labrea News, the high-speed pursuit was eventually called off after officers were involved in a fender bender of their own, leaving the police department strained for resources and without any feasible way of catching up to Slot. Reports claim he was traveling at speeds of "nearly 100 mph," but losing the police tail apparently didn't convince Slot to hit the brakes. Instead he sped on, eventually colliding with three other vehicles and a pair of street poles. The final impact was severe enough to "split the Tesla in half" and eject Slot from the car's remains. The Tesla's front section wound up in the middle of the road and caught fire. Its rear portion flew through the air with such force that it slammed into the side of a local Jewish community center and became wedged there.

Comments

Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy fuck, the lawyers will be at this for millenia.

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, really..

It couldn't just be slammed into the side of a building and became wedged there. Nooo, it had to be a local Jewish community center... as opposed to one in another city.

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy fuck, the lawyers will be at this for millenia.

Or Israel will retaliate by bombing Los Angeles.

 

Re: Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

To continue your deft analysis of current events, they'll call first and watch to make sure the civilians are out before surgically bombing the thief's house.

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

"How would you feel if you were thrown half Tesla cars? We have the right to defend ourselves!" The same fucking bullshit those new-era nazis in the Israeli Government are waving every time they feel the urge to smash Palestinian heads...

Re: Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

To continue your deft analysis of current events, they'll call first and watch to make sure the civilians are out before surgically bombing the thief's house.

Israel has killed over 100 people in Gaza, mostly civilians, in retaliation for three Israeli deaths. So cut the crap about their deep concern for human life.

Re: Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

But everyone knows that ragheads are sub-human monsters.

Re:Jews?

[Vinegar Joe]

Or Israel will retaliate by bombing Los Angeles.

I'm trying to see the downside.

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

..they always local bro, like 24/7.

Still, looks like Musk has indeed invented flying cars, faster than he bargained for.
- shame about the other half tho.

Re: Jews?

[Nephandus]

Who are veritably as genetically Hebrew as any Ashkenazi, so...

Re:Jews?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

The car was low on battery and misread it as "Juice".

Re: Jews?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Technically, Arab insurgents in the area are *all* civilians, aren't they? It's not like they're a part of some nation's army.

Re:Jews?

[steelfood]

Michael Bay will get the movie rights.

Re:Jews?

[sneakyimp]

That makes no sense at all. There are probably more jews in Los Angeles than in Tel Aviv.

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Vegas is still there.

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

We don't want Los Angeles to become da bomb.

Re: Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually no. By firing weapons while hiding in civilian areas and not wearing a uniform of some kind (it does not need to be much) they lose all protection given to combatants and to civilians and can be dealt with however the opposing power chooses. They have absolutely no protections of any kind whatsoever under the Geneva Accords.

Read them. They are not long. A few pages each.

Re: Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Stop being a kyke.

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hollywood will make it into a 5 part trilogy and the Americans will win.

Re: Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

When i read "civilian" i mentally substitute "terrorist". It makes everything right again :-)

Re:Jews?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm sure this wasn't the last thing to go through his mind...in fact it was probably his ass...

Re: Jews?

[qfman]

Give me a break. From the picture in the paper this morning it is clear that Israel is hitting weapons Depots. What kind of assholes store massive quantities of explosives in a residential neighborhood full of non-combatants?

Re: Jews?

[ImprovOmega]

3 Israeli deaths and 700+ rockets per day being shot willy-nilly into densely populated areas. But yeah, sure, let's pretend like the Palestinians aren't doing everything they can to provoke Israel and then crying when they get hit.

Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

Considering he was thrown from the vehicle (likely from not wearing a seatbelt) I'm not sure you could say he died 'in' a Tesla.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Jarik C-Bol]

Died "near" a Tesla.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

Died after driving a Telsa.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Gr33nJ3ll0]

Wouldn't this apply to all Tesla owners?

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

Lol, you are technically correct.

The best kind of correct.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[UltraZelda64]

Got killed when the Tesla ejected (rejected?) him.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[jandrese]

Hopefully not yet.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[NotDrWho]

Considering he was thrown from the vehicle (likely from not wearing a seatbelt) I'm not sure you could say he died 'in' a Tesla.

I'd be surprised if they found most of him in the same city.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[michelcolman]

It's a new feature on the smartphone app: you could already honk the horn, open the windows and roof, and many other things. Now they added "split in half and eject driver". Very useful, I must say.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[mythosaz]

As there have only been 100 billion humans ever on the planet, 7% of us are still alive, making being human only 93% lethal.

I suspect the number of Tesla owners versus dead Tesla owners demonstrates them to be nearly immortal.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[binarylarry]

hopefully it said some cheesy Arnold ask phrase like "time to split, asshole."

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

That guy did not own Tesla.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

such autism

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Austerity Empowers]

So Tesla's anti-theft system is 100% lethal?

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[mythosaz]

...and thus not immortal.

QED

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

It's a new feature on the smartphone app: you could already honk the horn, open the windows and roof, and many other things. Now they added "split in half and eject driver". Very useful, I must say.

Still playing catch-up with the big boys, I see.

Ferrari is years ahead of Tesla in this regard

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[K. S. Kyosuke]

Obviously, the car pwned him. ;)

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[nitehawk214]

Hopefully some people that have driven the car are still alive.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[sneakyimp]

Yeah! Just more proof that electric cars will never catch on in the United States.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

No, that's when the touch screen has been goatse'd

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

Only the ones that have died.
Who knows, maybe one of them will find the secret to eternal life,

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

Died after driving a Telsa.

Wouldn't this apply to all Tesla owners?

Not at the present moment.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

Will never catch on? Didn't you read the summary? It clearly states that the car *caught on fire*.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

"Lol, you are technically correct."

Not so much actually. Please pay attention to tense, as I'm pretty sure that there are a number of Tesla owners and previous owners who haven't died quite yet.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[sootman]

Old joke:
A white guy is driving through the South. He drives into two black guys. One is knocked across the street, the other pinwheels and crashes through the windshield into the car. The white guy gets out of the car just as a sheriff drives around the corner. He sees the wreck and gets out. The driver says "Oh my God, sheriff, this is so horrible." The sheriff says "Don't worry about it, I'll arrest these two." The driver says "I hit them -- why would you arrest them?" The sheriff points and says "This one, for breaking and entering, and that one, for leaving the scene of an accident."

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

"No Tesla owner or their passengers have ever been killed in a crash!"

Elon, just ask when you need my PayPal or BTC info to cough up for the marketing help.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[newcastlejon]

Incinerating the thief is all well and good but I'd sooner have a car that doesn't bifurcate then burst into flames in the process.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[citizenr]

Its a car to die for .. and out of!

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, you never know... They could be getting better!

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[BronsCon]

That'd be an issue for your insurance to remedy after the fact.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

Died BECAUSE of a Tesla. Yet another victim of the idiotic EV hype machine. I can't wait until I can roll coal on some Tesla driving schmuck's ass. It's gonna be sweet.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[TheRecklessWanderer]

It's too bad that such a nice car had to give it's life to get rid of one douchebag.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Applehu Akbar]

If you drove a Volvo or a Toyota in the same way, you would also crash and burn in pretty much the same manner, but with a tank of explosive gasoline to make things more interesting. Anyway, good riddance to this guy.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Gr33nJ3ll0]

Yet is the operative term here. Sooner or later you dance with the reaper.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[slick7]

How do I get one for my car? It sure looks effective.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Immerman]

Ah, but time being circular we can treat the outcome we know will happen as having already happened, and thus conclude that it is not safe for me to enter the Tesla.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[marciot]

I guess they can also charge him with "leaving the scene of a crime"

Why just charge him when you can supercharge him?

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Smerta]

Agreed. And with a Toyota, the car might very well accelerate to 100 MPH, crash and burn all on its own.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

That is what I said. Perhaps English is your second language? They will die, but they haven't died, ergo he was technically quite incorrect.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

Time cannot possibly be circular, as it does not exist at all.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

Possession is 9/10ths of the law, so technically by law, he had 10% ownership rights.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not uncommon to be ejected from a vechicle that is split in two, wearing a seatbelt or not. Your seat tends to go where the piece it's bolt to goes, or get ejected itself when the bolt break in such a crash.

Re: Died Outside a Tesla

[JakeBurn]

We really need ejector seats in cars. Couple that with auto braking and the poor Tesla would still be alive after this ordeal.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[lucien86]

Its a great pity. Its also throwing away what may be a perfectly good human body. Someone could have used that for something, like sex slave or medical experiments or something - he could even be a crash test dummy for other cars, maybe Teslas. :D Criminals are such wasters...

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[guruevi]

According to the article he didn't even die (yet) while in the Tesla. He was resuscitated and died of his injuries later.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[s0nicfreak]

But he will be correct eventually.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

Not necessarily. Anyone making the statement he made at a time subsequent to the death of all Tesla owners will be correct. In order for him to be correct, he will have to outlive all Tesla owners and then make the statement again.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[s0nicfreak]

No, we just have to read it again after all Tesla owners have died.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

You must have missed the time and date stamp.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[s0nicfreak]

They are irrelevant.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

I'm sorry, but at this point I am just going to accept that you lack the basic cognitive faculties to keep up with the thread and allow you to go about your life thinking that you are correct, when you couldn't be more incorrect. (Hint: In a discussion about the proper conjugation of verbs time is not only relevant, but is the critical factor)

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

Depends on the context of his response.

If the context was, "All Tesla owners died after driving a Tesla," you'd be right.

However, if the context is, "All Telsa owners will have died after driving a Tesla," then you are incorrect.

Please pay attention to tense

Back atcha, bud - "Wouldn't this apply to all Tesla owners" doesn't preclude the already-dead or will-be-dead-eventually.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[Zero__Kelvin]

"Died after driving a Telsa."

"If the context was, "All Tesla owners died after driving a Tesla," you'd be right."

By your own admission then, I am right (not that there was ever any question.) For future reference, the history of any Slashdot thread is readily available, and you could have looked yourself rather than implying that there was ever any question as to the context.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[coinreturn]

But he will be correct eventually.

You assume that everyone will die eventually. Perhaps, but that is, as-yet, unproven.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[coinreturn]

Died BECAUSE of a Tesla. Yet another victim of the idiotic EV hype machine. I can't wait until I can roll coal on some Tesla driving schmuck's ass. It's gonna be sweet.

No, he died because he was an asshole.

Re:Died Outside a Tesla

[CanHasDIY]

"Died after driving a Telsa."

"If the context was, "All Tesla owners died after driving a Tesla," you'd be right."

By your own admission then, I am right

If that's the context in which you frame the statement, yes. However, if one chooses to frame the statement as "All Telsa owners will have died after driving a Tesla" instead, you would not be correct. As it stands, the statement is not phrased in a definitive way, thus the interpretation is at the mercy of the reader.

Unless, of course, you're applying the OP's context to my statement, which would make it read "he died ... after driving a Tesla." Which would be an accurate statement to make about every Tesla driver, at some point in time.

Speaking of time, I'm amazed you've wasted so much arguing a non-important, subjective point. But then, humans do lots of inane things that amaze me.

first death

[Anonymous Coward]

havent posted on /. in some 10 years now

Re:first death

[i kan reed]

Make it another 10, please.

Re:first death

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha. Like Slashdot will still be here in 10 years, or even 5.

Re:first death

[Anonymous Coward]

Haha. Like Slashdot will still be here in 10 years, or even 5.

lycos.com is still here. heck, dogpile.com still exists. Probably quite a few more if I could remember their names.
Slashdot will be around for a long time. It doesn't take much to keep a website up once it is up.
Whether it will still have any good content or significant traffic is another story.

Re:first death

[sneakyimp]

Dude, the Space Jam website is still up: http://www2.warnerbros.com/spa...

Thrown from the vehicle

[Megahard]

So, assuming he wasn't already dead, technically he didn't die in the Tesla.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[timrod]

He didn't die in the car itself, but he died of injuries sustained from the car crash. The summary makes this distinction by saying "in a Tesla automobile crash", but the article itself does not.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Whorhay]

The Business Insider link said that he was resusitated but died later.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

Loking at those pictures, while bad it was probably survivable if he had been wearing a seat belt. It was being ejected that killed him.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

Indeed. You can't blame Tesla for the fuckhead not buckling up.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[BradMajors]

No. The article says that he died at the scene, but was later resuscitated. He died twice.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[tempestdata]

" Emergency responders suspected that Slot was already dead when they arrived at the debris-littered scene. But he wasn't. Perhaps it's a testament to Tesla's safety measures that Slot remained alive and was briefly resuscitated en route to the hospital"

From the article...

Holy crap. perhaps he died of medical malpractice :O

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

One death isn't good enough for some people. What a waste (of a beautiful autombile).

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[GameboyRMH]

Yep you could die in an F1 car if you get thrown out (although it would take a very odd impact - if you don't wear your seatbelt in an F1 car, because of the shape of the cockpit and seat, in a frontal impact you'll become a gross puddle in the footwell).

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Nonac]

There have been two deaths resulting from a Tesla crash.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[interkin3tic]

I'm imagining the guy who designed the Ford Pinto reading this and getting very excited. "When I point that out, they're SURE to give me my job back! So long dry cat food for dinner, hellooo purina select!"

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Pope]

There have been two deaths resulting from a Tesla crash.

Serious winning.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

In a frontal impact, there wouldn't be a footwell anymore. The car would be pulverized into a bunch of small pieces of metal, and you'd be pulverized into a fine red mist.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Tablizer]

Two half-people dying equals one whole person dying.

except on Tuesday during Fizbin games.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[beelsebob]

Incorrect, in modern F1, it's virtually unheard of for the monocoque (the footwell, plus the rest of the area the driver sits in) to be compromise in any way. This includes head on into the barriers at 200mph type crashes. At the British grand prix last week, Kimi Raikkonen walked (with a sore ankle) out of a 47g impact. The monocoque was perfectly in tact.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[beelsebob]

Another example https://www.youtube.com/watch?...

In this crash, Kubica hit the wall at 300km/h. While the car was completely destroyed, the monocoque was again, completely in tact.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[K. S. Kyosuke]

The guy was a serial killee! Isn't there a death penalty for such people or something?

Re: Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

Intact

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

They must make them out of the dolls that survive airliner crashes.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[GameboyRMH]

Yep that's why we buried Kimi Raikkonen in an urn last week.

OH WAIT

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[buckfeta2014]

For the love of god, people need to stop pointing their cameras at their TV. Just buy a capture card, damnit!

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[bill_mcgonigle]

So, assuming he wasn't already dead, technically he didn't die in the Tesla.

Musk can still say, "no Tesla owner has ever died driving one of our vehicles," too, because he wasn't an owner, he was a thief.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[beelsebob]

They make them out of carbon fibre, layed up in interesting ways usually involving a honeycomb sandwich between two layers of flat carbon fibre.

Re: Thrown from the vehicle

[gTsiros]

how do you know that he wasn't, an owner of a tesla vehicle?

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Immerman]

I would have thought the point is that, unrestrained, you would find yourself traveling at 200mph into a footwell that is suddenly no longer doing so. And, unlike the safety harness, the footwell isn't designed to decelerate you gently.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Maxo-Texas]

Hmm.

It sounds more like a half death and a full death.

So there have been one and a half deaths as a result of Tesla automobile accidents.

I wonder if the tesla team will get to analyze the wreckage?

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[marciot]

Loking at those pictures, while bad it was probably survivable if he had been wearing a seat belt. It was being ejected that killed him.

It was the sudden stop after being ejected that killed him.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[gigne]

"The Tesla was made to last sir, this old baby's crashed more times than a ZX81. "

Re: Thrown from the vehicle

[gigne]

and he stole another because he needed spares maybe?

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

I wanted to see pictures of the corpse so I could laugh while pointing.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

well, his family is certainly not going to be able to get a Jewish lawyer for the malpractice lawsuit.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Neil Boekend]

If I were a manager at Tesla I'd want to know how the car got stolen. Is the range on the keys too big? Does the car stop if it drives out of that range (which would mean the current driver has no access to the keys)? Were the electronics damaged before the crash? Was there a remote hack?

The crash, well, that is not as interesting. Most 100 mph crashes result in a mess. Not much you can do about that (unless you count limiting the max speed or adding so much support and crumple zones that it can't go 100 mph anyway)

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[bluefoxlucid]

A testament to Tesla's safety measures? He died of impact sustained while not in the car... what brain damaged retard wrote this?

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[coinreturn]

There have been two deaths resulting from a Tesla crash.

And one temporary zombie.

Re:Thrown from the vehicle

[Anonymous Coward]

Offtopic, but "intact" is one word.

Why is this news?

[Meshach]

This has nothing to to with the Tesla; wouldn't matter what was being driven.

Re:Why is this news?

[aevan]

Three cars, two poles, a building, 100mph..and even then, died later?
*amused* give some credit to the Tesla for him lasting that long

Re:Why is this news?

[danomatika]

He probably wasn't wearing a seat belt. Judging from the pictures the driver's compartment and front seat were intact, so the crash would have probably been survivable if he was buckled up.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Because Teslas are evil, dangerous cars that are upsetting the status quo by selling direct to the customer. Only manufacturers that sell cars though a dealer are safe enough to be driven without killing anyone.

(in other words, all bad news about Teslas are exaggerated beyond belief, kind of how like cyclists are a menace on city streets due to all of the traffic laws they break, even though cars kill tens of thousands of people a year).

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, just reading the description, most american and asian cars wouldn't have lasted that long. This car was split in half and still managed to embed itself in a building. The car thief must have been going well over 100mph to have a substantial amount of kinetic energy to do that.

Re:Why is this news?

[HuntingHades]

Unless he was unconscious from the impact and then died in the fire (as reported the front end caught fire) if no one bothered to rescue him.

Re:Why is this news?

[Sowelu]

Cyclists ARE a menace, to themselves. I nearly killed one two years ago because he blew a stop sign coming down a hill, swerved in front of me, hooked his tires into a trolley track and fell over about 20' in front of my car. If I hadn't been driving below the speed limit he would have been street pizza.

Biking in hilly, high density areas (like downtown Seattle) should require a license. One that can be revoked.

Re:Why is this news?

[parkinglot777]

(in other words, all bad news about Teslas are exaggerated beyond belief, kind of how like cyclists are a menace on city streets due to all of the traffic laws they break, even though cars kill tens of thousands of people a year).

Wait... What 'cars kill tens of thousands of people' has to do with 'cyclist are menace on city'? They are 2 completely different stories. In other words, even though the statement about cars kill a lot of people is true, the statement does NOT make the cyclist are menace to be false.

Re:Why is this news?

[greenwow]

So in other words, Musk turned the car into an oven. That makes sense given his Nazi view and hatred of Jews. He, well seriously like everyone else that wealthy, is a disgusting hateful man. Just last week he said something positive about John McCain. That proves he has no morals whatsoever.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Finally someone with some common sense! Cyclists should also be required to carry insurance to cover the damage they could do to other people, cars, and buildings that they will likely run into. I'm no actuary but I'm sure a monthly premium of $1 should be enough to cover that. /sarcam

Cars are big, heavy, and hard to control. They have a lot of mass so therefore they have a lot of momentum. Momentum that is created via an internal combustion engine rated in terms of how many horses it is equivalent to. Bicycles are a lot lighter and carry a lot less momentum and are usually stopped quite easily when they hit something hard or fall over. Dial it down a little and stop getting pissed that driving is annoying and that you have to pay attention to any object that may pass in front of your car, even those that are not bicycle-shaped.

Re:Why is this news?

[gstoddart]

Cyclists ARE a menace, to themselves.

I recently saw a cyclist come from the sidewalk on my right, cross an intersection diagonally across me (between two left-turning lanes of north/south traffic), get back up onto the sidewalk, and then later get into the bike lane going the wrong way, at an alarming speed.

As a motorist and a cyclist, I was completely stunned. It's cyclists like that why motorists hate cyclists.

Nobody can avoid killing you if you don't even pretend to follow the rules of traffic. But many many drivers forget that they are required by law to not run over cyclists, even if they are inconvenient.

I have seen more cyclists do ridiculous things than I could count. I give them a wide berth, but, I have to admit, some of them seem like they're trying to get killed.

Likewise, a lot of drivers more or less don't give a damn and will practically run them over, or off the road, or door them. Sometimes buses don't even obey bike lanes.

I won't ride a bicycle on city streets anymore.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

He wouldn't have made it to 100 mph and likely wouldn't have been able to evade the cops in a Smart car. It matters a little bit what was being driven.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Cyclists have to obey the same laws of the road that the rest of us do. But like motorcycles, they offer no protection. When a car or truck hit them the person is usually badly injured or killed. Then the driver of the car or truck goes to jail in most states. Bicycles and motorcycles should be made illegal IMO. They do not belong on the same streets as trucks and cars. If you are going to keep them legal, then anyone killing one should not be found guilty of anything unless it can be proved the driver intentionally aimed for them.

Re:Why is this news?

[EvilJoker]

Even better is the reason why cyclists have to use the street, vs the sidewalk - Cyclists are expected to be predictable, and follow a set pattern (i.e. the rules of the road), whereas pedestrians are presumed to be completely unpredictable.

Do the crazy cyclists just not grasp the physics of getting hit by a car?

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Automobile drivers ARE a menace, to themselves. I nearly killed one two years ago because he turned right from the left turn lane right in front of me, in the middle of moving traffic! If I hadn't been driving below the speed limit he would have been street pizza.

Please. People are idiots. Whenever you get any collection of them in some common place you will see stupid shit. Don't blame it on bikers -- people who drive cars are just -- if not more stupid.

Re:Why is this news?

[pkinetics]

In most cases it boils down to risk versus reward. The negative reinforcement, it worked the last time, leads to taking bigger risks.

And some just don't care cause they think they will sue the pants off of you later. Won't do a lick of good paralyzed from the waist down, but hey, they can sue!

And then there are those who are just a-holes, who don't give a crap about what their actions may cause to anyone else. They are right, everyone else is wrong, regardless of physics.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, well I recently saw a guy drive down a street at reckless speed, had to be going nearly 100MPH. Eventually colliding with three other vehicles and a pair of street poles. The final impact was severe enough to split the car in half and eject the driver from the car's remains. The front section wound up in the middle of the road and caught fire. Its rear portion flew through the air with such force that it slammed into the side of a local Jewish community center and became wedged there.

As a cyclist and motorist I too was completely stunned.

I have seen more motorists do ridiculous things than I could count. I give them a wide berth, but, I have to admit, some of them seem like they're trying to get killed.

Re:Why is this news?

[ultranova]

In other words, even though the statement about cars kill a lot of people is true, the statement does NOT make the cyclist are menace to be false.

"Menace" is a subjective value judgement. "Cars kill a lot of people" does affect "cyclists are a menace" because both are statements about the dangers of various forms of locomotion. Locomotion itself is unavoidable, so the question becomes which form is safest, and "menace" implies cycling is far from it.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Not sure how we got on to cyclists in an article about a Tesla, however, let me fix this for you:

[Cyclists | pedestrians | drivers] ARE a menace, to themselves. I nearly killed one two years ago because he [blew a stop sign coming down a hill, swerved in front of me, hooked his tires into a trolley track and fell over about 20' in front of my car | blindly stepped out in front of my car while texting | blew a stop sign into the path of my oncoming car]. If I hadn't been driving below the speed limit he would have been street pizza.

[Biking in hilly, high density areas (like downtown Seattle) | walking anywhere | driving anywhere] should require a license. One that can be revoked.

And, last but seriously not least, reproducing should require a license and proof that your genes are worth propagating.

Re:Why is this news?

[turp182]

This is why I have a dash cam. Aside from evidence it can capture some very cool road trips.

Re:Why is this news?

[K. S. Kyosuke]

If I hadn't been driving below the speed limit

Wow, this from a guy calling others a menace. How poignant.

Re:Why is this news?

[tepples]

Nobody can avoid killing you if you don't even pretend to follow the rules of traffic.

I'm a cyclist, and I follow the rules of traffic to the extent that I can. But the metal rims of my bicycle don't have enough surface area to consistently trigger the vehicle-sensing induction loops at intersections. At some intersections in my home town, I've seen even a bicycle and a motorcycle put together fail to trip it. So in the 35 states that haven't passed dead red laws, I don't understand how to follow the law against crossing the street at a red light, other than by not traveling at all.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

<cynicism>...and you would probably have been found at-fault and sued for wrongful death, even though he was the one breaking the law and riding recklessly.</cynicism>

Re:Why is this news?

[DMUTPeregrine]

I step off my bike, hit the walk button, and wait for the walk signal. Then I walk the bike across the crosswalk and get back on. It's really easy to become a pedestrian with a bike, and therefore be subject to the laws governing pedestrians. Just get off the bike!

Re:Why is this news?

[Sri Ramkrishna]

Or only pitbulls can kill people, cars, and rain.

Re: Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Nice entitlement. "Car users shouldn't be held responsible for their negligence." Why? If a driver isn't paying attention, drifts on to the sidewalk, and kills a 5-year old girl eating her ice cream cone, does he get off too?

Re:Why is this news?

[Anguirel]

Likewise, a lot of drivers more or less don't give a damn and will practically run them over, or off the road, or door them.

Or do give a damn and do those things on purpose. Or will throw things at them. I've only had one or two cases in several years of daily commute cycling where I suspect a driver was maliciously trying to edge me off a road, but in some regions its apparently a frequent hazard, and if anyone brings it up, a lot of victim-blaming happens (e.g. cites story of a time they saw a crazy cyclist similar to yours, then claims the person being harassed by a motorist was probably doing something similarly bad, or attempts to charge the guy for inciting the incident in some fashion (see previous link)).

I try to call out cyclists behaving badly, but I find it isn't all that common. When I'm out and about I notice a lot of cyclists behaving perfectly well -- it's just that the odd one or two that don't are the ones that stick out and you notice. The same is true of any vehicle operator -- it's just that people have gotten so used to seeing several dozen traffic violations every day (e.g. failing to signal, running red lights or stop signs, improper turns, failing to leave appropriate space, various parking offenses) without even touching speeding (which would bring it up to likely some 95% of the traffic on the road -- people failing to exceed the speed limit are more likely to be noticed and considered out of place than people speeding). That one cyclist being crazy (and I agree they exist -- I've seen some pretty egregious cycling behavior before) sticks out more since cyclists in general are more rare, but I suspect fewer cyclists in total behave badly with regard to traffic safety (probably because of the inherent additional danger to cycling).

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

"I'm a cyclist, and I follow the rules of traffic"

I live in Boulder, I bet you don't. I've seen cyclists thrash the rules of the road, confront them 10 minutes later, and they'll swear on their mothers grave that they follow every law. I also ride a motorcycle and run into where lights don't change all the time. I bet nobody complains about me, because I stop, check the road, make sure no cars are coming, and if it's clear, then I'll go, but only have waited twice what the usual time it takes for that light to change (yes, I keep track of that). Most cyclists I've come across (and I'm not talking 1 or 2, but in a typical day, 30 or 40), slow down slightly for an intersection, some check to see if it's clear, some don't, and then blow straight through it. If you don't stop, and you don't wait, and you go before checking if it's clear, yes people are going to bitch about you. But if you do all that, then they won't ever see you do it, and there will be no grounds for them to complain.

Re:Why is this news?

[serviscope_minor]

I can only imagine the massive shitfit drivers would throw if they were told the might have to get out of the car to press a button.

And actually, as a driver I have been stuck at dead reds before. Onlyoption was to break the law and go through, after waiting 15 minutes.

Re:Why is this news?

[istartedi]

dead red laws

I see Virginia is listed. I wish there had been such a thing back in the 80s. I sat for what seemed like 5 minutes on rt. 50, waiting for a left turn arrow. It was mid-day so there was very little traffic (it's a parking lot during rush). I had at least 1/4 mile line of sight, maybe more. I honestly thought the signal was broken, and that's what I told the cop who was either behind me or camped under a tree where I didn't see him. There was no arguing on the spot, and it's the only time I ever went to traffic court, where the excuse didn't fly either. But hey, at least the 70 year old half-blind lady who caused an accident got to keep their license. I learned a lot of lessons that day.

To this day, I also wonder if that cop was dicking with the signals to make his quota.

Re:Why is this news?

[tepples]

I too use walk buttons where available. But the intersections with which I've had the most problems have no marked crosswalk, no pedestrian signal, and no walk button.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Where are you living? There are many, many places without crosswalks, even more without buttons, and less without sidewalks.

There's a shopping mall near me that's completely inaccessible by foot. It's on a hill next to a stream. Little bridges are the only way in or out and the railings are right up against the street lanes. Try to walk next to the railings and you'll be squished as there isn't enough room for a car to move around you and not get hit by traffic form the other direction. Walk in the middle of the road and the jackasses try to get as close to you as possible and hold down their horn.

I'd rather have cyclists trying to kill themselves than drivers trying to kill everyone else. We need more people losing their licenses for unsafe driving.

Re:Why is this news?

[TapeCutter]

I step off my bike

I was stopped at some lights one time and there was a guy next to me on a pushbike doing the balance thing where the bike is upright but not moving. He suddenly lost balance and fell on the side of my car, no damage to anything but his dignity. I only wish I had a photo of his face because the mental image of it sliding down the passenger window still makes me laugh.

Re:Why is this news?

[Immerman]

Clearly Tesla is guilty of producing an excessively dangerous armored land-missile and the industry should be regulated to mandate less indestructible vehicles ;-D

Re:Why is this news?

[DNS-and-BIND]

What a bunch of B.S. You run red lights because you're on a bicycle and you know you won't get pulled over for it. Gimme a break with playing the victim! Bikes obey traffic laws only when it's convenient.

Re:Why is this news?

[PrimaryConsult]

Adding to this: some towns will have laws that allow bicycle riding on sidewalks provided they travel no faster than jogging speed. So you can "become a pedestrian" without even getting off the bike. At some of the more problematic "smart" lights, cyclists simply slow down and use the crosswalk, then back into the road.

That said, ones that run red lights while in the road annoy me. It usually means I have to pass the same cyclist *twice*, since they will have passed me at the red light.

Re:Why is this news?

[loosescrews]

You can increase the cross sectional area of your bicycle by getting off and holding it horizontally. That should be enough to trip just about any sensor.

Re:Why is this news?

[Imrik]

You can still pretend to be a pedestrian, there's effectively a crosswalk there even if it isn't marked and the green light is effectively a pedestrian signal if there isn't a separate one.

Re:Why is this news?

[tepples]

That's the problem: the lane doesn't get green lights. Oncoming traffic gets left turn arrow after left turn arrow, which last the whole phase.

Re:Why is this news?

[haruchai]

So do car drivers as I've noticed over the past 40 years. Take away the insurance requirements & penalties and North American drivers will behave just as badly, probably worse and definitely far more lethally.
Auto drivers aren't better people than cyclists; they're merely under greater external control. Period.

Re:Why is this news?

[lucien86]

Its either busses or trucks that are the number one killers of cyclists. Heavy, slow moving and surrounded by blind spots, and if you go under the wheels of a truck or bus there's pretty much no coming back. Squelch! Very often the driver wont even know they've hit someone.

Re:Why is this news?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shitheads like you are the real menace. Get the fuck off the roads you entitled twat.

Re:Why is this news?

[bluefoxlucid]

Did he have a nice bike? If you hit him, can you try not to mangle the frame? I'm always looking for new bikes when their former owners learn about traffic safety.

Re:Why is this news?

[bluefoxlucid]

The best part about cyclists running red lights is they still get there faster than they would, but you still beat them there. This is great because a lot of people are still thinking about queued cars and, once in a while, someone will complain loudly about how the cyclist isn't getting there any faster because they passed him.

Then you have two idiots to gossip about.

Re:Why is this news?

[JimFive]

How about pushing the pedestrian cross walk button? If there isn't one then probably the only "legal" way to cross is to dismount (become a pedestrian) and walk across. Also, I think there is a law for dealing with lights that are not functioning properly which probably says treat it like a stop sign.
JimFive

fr0sty p1SS!

[Anonymous Coward]

frosty p1SS!!!

another tesla fire

[Noah Haders]

from summary: The Tesla's front section wound up in the middle of the road and caught fire.

Yup, another tesla fire.

Re:another tesla fire

[CanHasDIY]

Arg, beat me to it.

Re:another tesla fire

[Anonymous Coward]

I can't think of many cars that wouldn't be on fire after being in a 100 MPH+ crash, split in two, and then thrown with enough force to get wedged into a building. Not unless the engineering team is led by Michael Bay...

Re:another tesla fire

[harrkev]

And how many cars do you think are completely safe from fire after a 100 MPH collision?

This does nothing to tarnish the safety of a Tesla, in my mind. I still would not buy one, but mostly because I can't afford it.

Re:another tesla fire

[neminem]

You're saying Michael Bay's engineering team designs ways for cars to *not* catch on fire? I would think rather the exact opposite would be true.

Re:another tesla fire

[Noah Haders]

cmon man, have a laugh.

Re:another tesla fire

[Sechr Nibw]

I'm pretty sure he meant that Michael Bay's designed car would be on fire before going 100MPH+, crashing, splitting in two, wedged into a Jewish community center...then exploding (with an impractically large explosion) then transforming into a semi and driving into the sunset.

Re:another tesla fire

[rahvin112]

Split any gas car in half and you will have a fire because the fuel lines will be severed if not the fuel tanks.

Re:another tesla fire

[Anonymous Coward]

Modded flamebait, lol.

Re:another tesla fire

[ericloewe]

You forgot the part where the smoke chokes an attack helicopter loaded with ordnance that ends up crashing into the car, in the most awesome Tetris move ever.

Re:another tesla fire

[Anonymous Coward]

Lots actually. A collision even high speed one doesn't cause fires like a these tesla death traps.

Re:another tesla fire

[Anonymous Coward]

tesla fanbois don't know how to laugh is somebody dare ridicule their god.

I'm catholic but some of the jokes people make about the religion are still funny. The smug just can't take a joke I guess.

Re:another tesla fire

[Cabriel]

No, see, if the cars catch fire *before* the explosives go off, that makes the scene less exciting. If the cars don't catch on fire, well, pyrotechnics can take care of that.

Caught Fire. AGAIN

[Anonymous Coward]

See??? These cars are unsafe!

Anti-Theft

[Anonymous Coward]

Sounds like an anti-theft feature.

Oh yes he can.

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, he was ejected from the Tesla, so I think we cannot say with certainty he died 'inside' the Tesla... Also, who isn't to say this was a terrorist suicide mission to destroy the Jewish community center??

Obama!

[danomatika]

It's Obama's fault!

Great Story!

[rullywowr]

Well, that was an electrifying story! I really got a charge out of it.

Re:Great Story!

[DJCouchyCouch]

I'm shocked, SHOCKED, at your use of puns.

Re:Great Story!

[exabrial]

I don't get why slashdotters are magnetized to such stories...

Re:Great Story!

[rullywowr]

It must be the POLAR attraction to slashdot stories about electric cars. Don't worry, you can always DISCHARGE these as just more abuse of puns.

Re:Great Story!

[Anonymous Coward]

It hurts! It hurts! Please stop!

Re:Great Story!

[Anonymous Coward]

Left me amped up.
Sorry, I couldn't resist making that revolting pun. You can charge me with battery.

Re:Great Story!

[Anonymous Coward]

You killed it.

Re:Great Story!

[Anonymous Coward]

Shocking. Poor conduct.

Re:Great Story!

[CauseBy]

Agreed. This news item had a lot of impact.

It left me with one burning question: what was the last thing to go through that guy's mind? I mean, other than a lamp pole.

Hi speed chase, hum?

[Koyaanisqatsi]

So, in who's interest is it that the police perform these "for show" stunts?

Wouldn't it be much better to deploy a helicopter, drone or other means of tracking the car from a distance, and not risk killing several bystanders in a crash? This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[maroberts]

Having had the experience of having my own performance car stolen temporarily, and damaging it to the extent of needing a new engine and reupholstering, at the time I felt capital punishment is not enough.

You may think this is a little severe, but people who are into cars feel they have had part of their soul ripped out of them if it is stolen and trashed, especially if it is their personal hobby and they are doing it at the limits of their budget.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[bondsbw]

capital punishment

Well that's one way to rewrite the story. Why don't we just go ahead and say he driving an electric chair?

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[viperidaenz]

And not for endangering the lives of everyone else in the city while he was speeding on his joyride either?
Stealing a car is the least of his crimes.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

you forgot the fact that the car is connected and has a gps. I'm sure with a warrant they could easily get the location from Tesla with out a problem

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

When the police called off the chase (for other reasons) and he kept going at 100+mph, there's no "punishment" involved, let alone capital punishment. This is a Darwin Award pure and simple, pure suicide-by-stupid.

I do agree that police chases are a spectacle who's time has long-sinced passed, but you mention drones as a means of tracking them, and they're now "teh new evil" no matter what purpose they're put to by authorities, so until the country gets a little less schizophrenic I don't see that changing.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

And that is a mechanism making it okay for innocent people to die because _______________?

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

Imposed by .. himself? Fucking good riddance, burn in Hell, is all this jerk gets from me.

1. His actions (speeding and dangerous driving) endangered everyone else on the road
2. See #1

What's the difference between someone waving a gun in public and speeding down the road? You don't generally go to jail for 2nd one and murdering people in the 2nd one is called "an accident".

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not saying he deserved to die, but the cops didn't force him to run.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[tipo159]

Did you read article? The police had given up on the chase before the guy crashed the Tesla that the final time.

According to the source, "the pursuit was terminated because there wasn’t enough time or police resources in the area to catch up with the vehicle." It didn't help that the pursuing officers were involved with a minor collision of their own.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[jeffb (2.718)]

Having had the experience of having my own performance car stolen temporarily, and damaging it to the extent of needing a new engine and reupholstering, at the time I felt capital punishment is not enough.

You may think this is a little severe, but people who are into cars feel they have had part of their soul ripped out of them if it is stolen and trashed, especially if it is their personal hobby and they are doing it at the limits of their budget.

I understand that many people attach a lot of their self-image to their vehicles, and devote disproportionate time, attention, and money to them. That doesn't mean that their priorities should be encoded into law.

Your hobby is not more important to society in general than human life. Yes, it may be more important to you than some other person's life. Laws exist partly to mediate between people's conflicting self-interest.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[StikyPad]

A) Police can't initiate a high speed chase without someone that's already fleeing at high speed.
B) The police stopped chasing him.
C) He kept fleeing!

"Approaching" 100MPH is what many people do on the way to work every day where the speed limits are 75, and Tesla's should easily be able to handle that speed. Definitely operator error all the way in this case.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Correct, he did not deserve capital punishment for stealing a car. And .. that's not what he got. He received [sadly] the consequences of his choices to drive recklessly in a stolen vehicle. Capital Punishment would have been delivered from the court system. This was delivered by his feet/hands and obstacles in his way.

The tracking via helicopter or drone is a decent idea ... but how do you track until you can get one on site to do said tracking? Backdoors in all cars for law enforcement to use [ bad idea]?

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Clockwurk]

Your car is a mass produced automobile, it's not part of your soul.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

So, in who's interest is it that the police perform these "for show" stunts?

Wouldn't it be much better to deploy a helicopter, drone or other means of tracking the car from a distance, and not risk killing several bystanders in a crash? This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

Did you read the article? The police stopped pursuit because they felt it was too dangerous.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Huge_UID]

Article? He didn't even read the summary!

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[gman003]

Minor collision? The BusinessInsider source claims the pursuing officers had to be hospitalized. That doesn't sound "minor" to me.

And they only broke off pursuit when it became impossible for them to continue, not when it became unsafe. Many police departments now have a policy of not performing chases for non-violent crimes because, statistically, you're more likely to kill bystanders by chasing than by letting the criminal drive off.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

He didnt deserve to die from his own stupidity?

I dont agree. Im glad the wanker is dead.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[interkin3tic]

Are you suggesting the police pursuit DIDN'T cause him to drive over 100 mph? Because I think the police chase still motivated him to drive that fast. Even if they pulled off at the end, that still doesn't explain why they had to do it in the first place. There was no threat of violence here except for the reckless driving that predictably occurs during a high-speed chase.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[suutar]

So's your house and all your stuff. Doesn't stop people from feeling violated when their home gets robbed. People are not always strictly rational, and any successful society has to recognize that and deal with it.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[interkin3tic]

Sure, but what does that have to do with law enforcement? They're not the "car enthusiast revenge squad."

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

That guy got exactly what he deserved, Period. There will always be asshats like that and the best we can hope for is that they die before they kill somebody. In this case everything worked out just fine.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[sunking2]

Don't need a warrant, just permission of the owner.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

his hobby is however more important than the human life that steals his hobby from him and i cant blame him for feeling that way. car thiefs should be put down for the safety of the population

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

He's not innocent, he just stole someone's car and then sped it around on the public streets. That's unacceptable behavior in a civilized society, and stealing someone's car could mean the victim losing a year or more's wages that went to the car in addition to loss of job and other things not having a car could cause.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[neonKow]

You don't get the death penalty for robery either. And no one is trying to justify it by saying someone robbed their soul.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Which innocent person died in this case? The criminal killed himself. No one else died.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Lazere]

You don't generally go to jail for 2nd one and murdering people in the 2nd one is called "an accident".

Actually, you do. If you kill someone because you were driving recklessly, that's called "involuntary manslaughter" and you do go to jail for it.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[whisper_jeff]

Wouldn't it be much better to deploy a helicopter, drone...

And, as soon as they deploy a drone, you'll be raging about the police flying big brother over your head.

No. Seriously. Do you honestly think people's reaction would be "hey, that's a smart idea" or do you think people would lose their shit? I know which one I would expect.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[gbjbaanb]

don't even need permission of the owner....

said owner will be calling constantly with location updates.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[AnOnyxMouseCoward]

What's the solution? Not chase after him? Chase after him following speed limits and thus losing him?

The OP has a good point, it's technically better to deploy a helicopter. The problem is how long will it take to call for and have that helicopter chasing the car, and will you have lost all traces of it by then? Assuming the car stops on the side of the road then, without a car chasing it, are you going to then land the helicopter and arrest him, and how many people are in that helicopter in the first place? How much does it cost to field a helicopter, how many were available, and what were the chances of a real high-speed pursuit?

Those are just questions I have, but with my current lack of knowledge and information, I assume a car chase is the most practical thing they can do if they don't want to let a criminal go, even if they have to call in reinforcements (flying or otherwise).

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[suutar]

Unless I'm misreading it badly, he's not trying to justify the death penalty for carjacking; he's explaining why he wouldn't mourn for a carjacker. And I bet the typical just-robbed homeowner would agree.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[fyngyrz]

This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

Nature -- specifically evolution -- disagrees. You don't get a vote.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[tlhIngan]

Minor collision? The BusinessInsider source claims the pursuing officers had to be hospitalized. That doesn't sound "minor" to me.

Or, basically if you're going 100mph, sideswiping the median, while normally a recoverable incident, becomes one where you can get hurt. Physics! (Remember, the energy in an object increases by the square of the velocity - go twice as fast, energy in the system quadruples).

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ddt]

How was the thief to know they called off the chase? For all he knew, he just ditched them and needed to keep going fast to keep them off his tail.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[maroberts]

Your car is a mass produced automobile, it's not part of your soul.

My car was anything but a mass produced automobile, maybe this will help you

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[maroberts]

Sure, but what does that have to do with law enforcement? They're not the "car enthusiast revenge squad."

Of course they are; the middle classes pay taxes to try and get a police force which frowns on this sort of thing and reacts accordingly.
Actually when it happened to me they chased the car intermittently across 3 counties and couldn't catch it.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[maroberts]

And that is a mechanism making it okay for innocent people to die because _______________?

It is not a mechanism for innocent people to die. It is a mechanism for me to be indifferent whether criminals die whilst committing a crime.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[stephanruby]

Wouldn't it be much better to deploy a helicopter, drone or other means of tracking the car from a distance, and not risk killing several bystanders in a crash? This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

The police did stop the chase.

In any case, who needs an helicopter, or a drone, when the Tesla car itself is equipped with remote gps tracking.

I'm just surprised the Tesla doesn't have an owner-initiated remote kill-switch.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

I was unaware only criminals died during high speed car chases. I can't believe there's not a single shred of evidence on the entire internet ever showing that an innocent person died in a car crash during a police pursuit! Thank you for correcting my stupid beliefs!

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

You don't get the death penalty for robery either. And no one is trying to justify it by saying someone robbed their soul.

It would have to be a pretty heinous robe to justify the death penalty though. In fairness, usually imagery of that degree is due more to the physique under the robe than anything else.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[nitehawk214]

Every car with heated seats technically has an electric chair.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ultranova]

Nature -- specifically evolution -- disagrees.

Evolution doesn't deal with life or death, it deals with the relative abundance of properties in populations. If anything, our innovation - cultural evolution - is such success precisely because it removes death from the equation. Now the main thrust is on the evolution of our various superorganisms - cultures - rather than our bodies, thus allowing adaptation at blitzkrieg speeds compared to even bacteria, much less any other complex organisms.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Innocent? They are car thieves!

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[steelfood]

the pursuing officers had to be hospitalized

Police offices can be hospitalized for even minor injuries, largely because of liability concerns. Just because they're in a hospital doesn't mean they had limbs amputated or third degree burns or severe trauma or some such. It could very well have been whiplash or cuts and bruises or smoke inhalation or even concussion-like symptoms.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[tomhath]

Your hobby is not more important to society in general than human life.

The US has a long tradition of hanging horse thieves.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[steelfood]

especially if ... they are doing it at the limits of their budget.

You're attributing far too much value and putting far too much importance on money.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Most police departments have demonstrated that writing traffic tickets is more important than preventing violent crime.

But to the "minor collision" v.s. "hospitalization" argument, well, you'd be a damn fool to be in any incident to not go to the hospital, as there is a significant financial reward for any work-related injury claim, and hospitals have a financial incentive to identify potential injuries.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[PPH]

Stolen from a Tesla service center. As such, they had possession and responsibility for the car. Probably no warrant needed. A simple call from the service department to Tesla's IT department would suffice.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[sootman]

> When the police called off the chase (for other
> reasons) and he kept going at 100+mph...

Just to play devil's advocate here, it's not like they informed the guy via their loudspeakers that they were calling off the chase.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[rk]

Quit being dense. He was specifically referring to the person that jacks the car, not bystanders.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

The suggestion was that capital punishment was suitable for car thieves. You are the only one that seems to think this has anything to do with killing innocent people. No one else suggested doing it through car chases. Pull your head out of your ass.

Re: Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

I felt like that when my bike was stolen

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

The innocent people the parent referenced are bystanders.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

you'll note that he said "at the time". Not that he feels absolutely that it would be appropriate, just that when he lets his emotions get the better of him, that's how he may feel. But then he calms down, and accepts that no, it's not acceptable. Christ, do you people just always need to get up on your soap box?

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Teancum]

> When the police called off the chase (for other
> reasons) and he kept going at 100+mph...

Just to play devil's advocate here, it's not like they informed the guy via their loudspeakers that they were calling off the chase.

I presume that the guy had a rear view mirror to look at. Then again, when you are traveling at 100+ mph through urban streets with cross traffic and parked cars, you likely aren't spending much time looking at what is going on behind you.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Jeremi]

Many police departments now have a policy of not performing chases for non-violent crimes because, statistically, you're more likely to kill bystanders by chasing than by letting the criminal drive off.

Given that it's a Tesla (and a dealer-owned one at that), was a chase necessary at all? I suspect that Tesla Corp could have given the police a live feed of the car's GPS co-ordinates at any time?

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[mirix]

So would anyone that had just been wronged by a criminal. That's why we have a judge and jury give out punishments, and not the victim or vigilantes.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[CauseBy]

I understand your critique but if you read the story I think the police did what you want them to -- try to pull him over then retreat when he starts a high-speed chase. The article specifies that he continued at high speed even though he was not under pursuit. That is the same policy adopted by my hometown police department and I think it is pretty common.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Your hobby is not more important to society in general than human life.

Depends. Is that human life going to be a drain on the resources of society, or contribute to them? Is it going to steal, destroy, and perhaps be incarcerated at great expense, or is it going to create, build, and teach? For most crims I'm betting on the former, so I think that yes, his hobby IS more important to society in general than some leech who gets his kicks stealing cars.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Maybe he was already driving 100mph when the police started the pursuit - that is often the case. And he could have just pulled over (me carrying my wallet also "motivates" thieves to steal it - that is a horrible argument against police intervention imho) - at a certain point i agree the police should break off, but they should not stand idly by in the first place.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

...but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ..

Fuck off you bleeding heart liberal - he stole something, he DESERVED to die - or be killed, whichever comes first.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

He was specifically referring to the person that jacks the car, not bystanders.

And yet the original post in this thread specifically mentioned the risk to bystanders.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Many police departments now have a policy of not performing chases for non-violent crimes because, statistically, you're more likely to kill bystanders by chasing than by letting the criminal drive off.

Not if you know how to shoot. The Tesla may be fast, but bullets are faster. Don't chase them, kill them!

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[abigsmurf]

It's probably pretty standard practice to send officers involved in accidents to hospital unless it's incredibly obvious that there couldn't be anything wrong with them.

Cheaper for them to have half a day's downtime and the price of going to ER than for them to have a non-obvious or seemingly minor injury that becomes serious because it didn't get treated (with all the lawsuits that go with it).

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

In udots there is no such thing as an innocent person. We are a nation of cars and guns and police and irs agents. And insurance salsemen and bankers. If you are not breaking the law in udots you are not trying very hard.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

He changed what we were talking about in mid-stream, and you apparently were unable to go up to the beginning of the discussion and determine this for yourself as well. I'm glad some random anonymous person already mentinoed this...

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

The conversation was a conversation specifically about the risk to bystanders. Go read the fucking thread and pull your head out of all of OUR asses.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

This time only the bad guy died, but even him did not deserve capital punishment for a car jack ...

at the time I felt capital punishment is not enough.

And that is a mechanism making it okay for innocent people to die because

So to sum up: Koyaanisqatsi says "good thing only the bad guy died, but he didn't really deserve it", maroberts suggests that he did deserve it. You read that and seem to think people wanted to kill car thieves in ways that endanger others. That was not the case, it was quite the opposite. I did read the thread, that's why I pointed out that you, and only you, seem to think people want to use car chases as a mechanism for killing car thieves. Other than your influence on the thread, the idea was "car thief died. is it good or bad?". Nothing to do with bystanders since the OP where they were only mentioned in the context of "good thing no of them got hurt".
Are you up to speed yet?

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

I do support execution for grand theft, however, now that there are cell transmitters and drones, it is possible to track stolen vehicles, and have the drone pilot shoot the thief *after* they stop and try to run on foot, or spray bullets through the roof of the car when it's not likely to cause massive amounts of death and destruction.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[rpstrong]

"Horse thieves aren't hanged for stealing horses. They're hanged so that horses won't be stolen."

  - unknown

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[haruchai]

Thanks to Castle Doctrine & Stand Your Ground laws, that's not true in a lot of places in America.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

"Wouldn't it be much better to deploy a helicopter, drone or other means of tracking the car from a distance, and not risk killing several bystanders in a crash?"

*other guy responds, more or less stating non-death penalty crimes should be death-penalty crimes because people like their cars, despite the risk of innocent bystanders being killed which that was the initial and main point of Koyaanisqatsi's post, and the first thing he talked about*

Are you up to speed yet? I can't help it if there are multiple people in the thread whose heads the point whooshed over. I've always reviled my fellow americans for being so incredibly over-punitive as to actually blind themseles to the unintended consequences; and it's been a problem in American history, especially the last 2 generations. But I didn't know that it worked online, too. So blinded by the punitive aspect as to miss Koyaanisqatsi's central point.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[AK Marc]

So your argument is that police should shoot to kill if someone fails to yield. That's the best solution to these. The case here was someone who was not being pursued was still afraid of being caught, so they endangered others, until they crashed. "safer" is to shoot the car/driver until it stops. Is that really what you are advocating? Because it's either that, or abolishing all traffic stops.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[fyngyrz]

Evolution doesn't deal with life or death

You lack a realistic understanding of evolution, I'm afraid. Time for some remedial study.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

No, my argument is not that. At the point where your first sentence is you shoving words in my mouth via a false dichotomy you just made up, should I even bother to type this conversation? Nevermind the fact that he *was* being pursued. They stopped. That doesn't mean it did not start. He would not have been driving like that if they had not started an unnecessary (in this day & age of technology & tracking) chase. That was the original comment that started this entire thread -- someone questioning the wisdom that this is how we handle the situation. At some point, this morphed into you telling me that I'm asking for police to shoot people for not yielding. Go fuck yourself.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[AK Marc]

If the police try to pull someone over, there's a non-zero chance they'll run, and keep running long after the police stop giving chase. So the *only* way to protect the innocents is to kill the driver if he fails to stop. So, do you want to protect the innocents? Then why do you allow the runners to run until they kill, even if they are not being chased?

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

No, that is not the only way to protect the innocents. You make it sound like once someone starts driving, there is no way to protect innocents. I don't know if you're incredibly unimaginative or a deliberate asshole. Many departments don't give chase for certain offenses. For instance, private property theft of already-insured property is not worth violence over. (Oh sure, for the *owner* it is, not for the rest of us.) Most stolen cars are not recovered via a dramatic and dangerous chase. You can surveil a vehicle and wait until the driver gets out on foot. The gas tank wont last forever.

Casual googling seems to imply that about 1/3rd of deaths in police pursuits are people not in the fleeing vehicle. If this is to recover already insured, stolen vehicles, these people died to help an insurance company CEO stay rich. And oh, I guess the cars got back to the original owner, bashed up. Protecting private property shouldn't involve the deaths of anyone other than the criminal. Especially if it's already insured.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[AK Marc]

You make it sound like once someone starts driving, there is no way to protect innocents. I don't know if you're incredibly unimaginative or a deliberate asshole. Many departments don't give chase for certain offenses. For instance, private property theft of already-insured property is not worth violence over.

So, jackass. Tell me what you want the police to do when they see a stolen car drive past? Check its insurance status, or try to pull the guy over?

Protecting private property shouldn't involve the deaths of anyone other than the criminal. Especially if it's already insured.

Again, your statements are in line with executing the criminal when they start endangering others, not "chasing" them.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Minor collision? The BusinessInsider source claims the pursuing officers had to be hospitalized. That doesn't sound "minor" to me.

You should have seen the other guy!

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

Again, there are options other than executing and chasing, and you're an asshole for repeatedly arguing a false dichotomy to create a strawman out of what I said. Repeating yourself like a broken fucking record. Go fuck yourself twice.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

I do support execution for grand theft, however, now that there are cell transmitters and drones, it is possible to track stolen vehicles, and have the drone pilot shoot the thief *after* they stop and try to run on foot

Or we could, you know, catch them and put them on trial, and (if it was made a capital offence as you suggest) maybe execute them after going through all the proper procedures.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hmmm.... No, no fuck you for misusing the word "schizophrenic" here. I believe you mean "paranoid"

~ A Schizophrenic AC, Cowardly Because The World Labels and Shunts Us.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[AK Marc]

Again, there are options other than executing and chasing,

And you've not named any. Aside from 100% CCTV coverage, there's no practical way to stop someone without chasing them.

and you're an asshole for repeatedly arguing a false dichotomy to create a strawman out of what I said. Repeating yourself like a broken fucking record. Go fuck yourself twice.

And you are repeating yourself, and never commenting on anything I say that proves you wrong. Care to try? No, you are a lying piece of shit asshole.

The cop sees a speeder or stolen car go past. He pulls out and puts on his lights to stop the car. The driver takes off at 12,322 mph in a 30 mph zone. The cop, unable to pursue, pulls over and radios it in. The car, traveling faster than a bullet, rams a mall, killing 10,000. In this scenario, you'd blame the police for "chasing". The cop didn't "chase", but "tried to stop". What could the police do to perform their "regular" duties without ever trying to pull over anyone for any reason? After all, any attempt to stop someone by coming up from behind (the most common method, by far), could be considered a "chase".

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

I actually don't need to name any. The fact that I believe there are other options means that when I say the words I'm saying, I'm saying what I'm saying, not what you're trying to say I'm saying, and shoehorn in my mouth. You don't get that privilege.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[ClioCJS]

p.s. i see in your logic trying to stop and chase mean the same thing. Another very convenient mechanism.

Re:Hi speed chase, hum?

[AK Marc]

i see in your logic trying to stop and chase mean the same thing. Another very convenient mechanism.

How do you catch up to someone to try to stop them without "chasing" them?

It's not a "convenient mechamism" it's reality. You should try visiting sometime.

Software for the win, again....

[Anonymous Coward]

Now THAT is an antitheft system......

Why so much hate for Tesla?

[Agares]

Seriously why does Tesla always get so much flak? My guess is that somone out there doesn't like the idea of a car that doesn't need oil and can charge from solar energy.

Re:Why so much hate for Tesla?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's really only through the media. EVERYONE I talk to about Tesla thinks they are incredible and are proud that the car is an American car. I think Tesla is what an American car should be, and not the government motors garbge out tehre.

Re:Why so much hate for Tesla?

[Anonymous Coward]

Two reasons:
1) The Slashdot userbase is pretty rabidly in favor of Elon Musk and anything he does, so any story about his endeavors (or setbacks) is ad-view gold for Dice.

2) As you are a part of the rabid fanbase mentioned above, neutral stories will appear hostile to you. Jokes and sarcasm will appear to be direct personal attacks.

See if you rage at this summary: "For the first time someone driving a Tesla has died as a result of a Tesla crash, a car thief who was driving at minimum 50% over the speed limit and had successfully outrun the nitro-boost-capable police cruisers that had attempted to pursue him."

Re:Why so much hate for Tesla?

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously why does Tesla always get so much flak?

Because he's rich and not a sports or entertainment celebrity.

Re:Why so much hate for Tesla?

[Anonymous Coward]

Electric vehicles can also use nuclear electricity. Unfortunately, non-polluting carbon-free energy isn't enough to satisfy the green ideology; it must be "renewable" wind, solar, or biomass (read: burning trees). (Not even hydro is good enough...)

Re: Why so much hate for Tesla?

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, but the real question is do you really like that cock in your mouth? It seems to be the only thing that you really ever care about.

Too bad about the car, not the person

[Anonymous Coward]

It's too bad the car was destroyed, that is the true loss in this story. The person driving it obviously did not like living in normal society so at least he removed himself from it.

Ejected from car -- seatbelt?

[Anonymous Coward]

Moral of the story: If you are going to steal a Telsa and drive it through the streets at absurd speeds, then be sure you buckle up! You can't expect Elon Musk to do it for you.

Re:Ejected from car -- seatbelt?

[Dins]

...be sure you buckle up! You can't expect Elon Musk to do it for you.

Don't give anybody any ideas!

Re:Ejected from car -- seatbelt?

[Anonymous Coward]

...be sure you buckle up! You can't expect Elon Musk to do it for you.

Don't give anybody any ideas!

Hmmm... Teslas might be a bit expensive, but if Elon Musk buckled me up every day, it might be worth it!

Re:Ejected from car -- seatbelt?

[Anonymous Coward]

Some people would quote this joke at you:

Car accident. Police officer describes the scene: Driver A wasn't wearing a seatbelt. Flew through windscreen, hit a tree, split his head open, his brains are all over the place. Driver B was wearing a seatbelt. Look at him. He looks almost as if he's still alive.

Re:Ejected from car -- seatbelt?

[Anonymous Coward]

Hey, an automatic seatbelt using modern sensor technology that doesn't suck would be pretty cool.

Fuck! - was he thrown here, or there, or through..

[Anonymous Coward]

.. the looking glass itself?

ItS SlAsHdOt!

ItS tEsLa!!

ItS a FuCkInG sToRy, MaN!!!

Remote Kill Switch.

[Deathlizard]

I thought Tesla's had remote kill switches.

Couldn't the police just call Tesla and have them disable the car?

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[operagost]

Well, I hope not.

Seriously, aren't we already close enough to a literal police state? As a manufacturer, I would refuse to enable such an option for the police without a written warrant in my face. Is that feasible during a car chase? Too bad; that's the price of liberty.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[AnOnyxMouseCoward]

Considering he stole the car from a Tesla service center, I'm pretty sure the police doesn't need to call Tesla to have them disable the car, so I doubt that kill switch exist. What do you think this is, a cellphone?

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[Plunky]

what about for the owner, who presumably knew that it had been stolen by this time..?b

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[weiserfireman]

Since GM runs ads about how they can remotely kill OnStar equipped vehicles, I am sure that if the capability exists in Tesla Cars, they wouldn't need a warrant to do it. They would only need authorization from the owner. Only time Tesla would need a warrant from the police is if the police are chasing the Owner and the Owner won't grant authorization

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[neonKow]

The owner knew it was stolen from a service shop? I doubt it.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[Anonymous Coward]

If you look at the arguments they make for requiring remote kill switches in cell phones, what part of that same argument couldn't be applied to cars? With older technology cars, such a switch could be fairly easily bypassed, but once the car is dependent on software controlled fuel injection or a software controlled transmission or software controlled electric motors, a kill switch built into that software can be made much more challenging to defeat.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[preaction]

Didn't we discuss, here, how a remote kill switch is AMAZINGLY DANGEROUS? Does it just turn off the ignition? In the middle of the highway? Do the brake lights come on to show I'm slowing down because the car is now off? Does the kill switch wait until I come to a stop to simply choke the car dead? Am I still stopped in the middle of a road with no way to move out of peoples' way?

No, the remote kill switch is a horrendous idea.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[bbn]

Said kill switch could just limit engine power, tell the driver to stop safely before bringing engine power down to zero in steps. Basically what happens if you run out of fuel (charge). People usually do not get hurt from that.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[ericloewe]

The car's systems are advanced enough to force a controlled deceleration while maninting everything else (they might want to disable the infotainment, no point in giving the thief access to that...).

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[Anonymous Coward]

Huh? GM does this, and I have never heard anyone complain. They unlocked my doors for a car theif that called them claiming to be me, and the government protects GM from liability when they intentionally help car be stolen. GM knows that the more cars they help Republicans steal, the more replacement cars we have to buy. They want the cars to be stolen. Making money dishonestly is the Republican way. That is why they are doing this to us. Tesla, with their Nazi leanings, are just doing what their kind does.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[Anonymous Coward]

You're a dumb faggot. Don't ever reply to another one of my posts again, faggot bitch.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[kesuki]

"The car's systems are advanced enough to force a controlled deceleration while maninting everything else"

until that Blue screen of death comes up, doh!

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[Anonymous Coward]

I thought Tesla's had remote kill switches.

Yes, the driver was ejected and killed.

Re:Remote Kill Switch.

[jakabjack]

I think that's technically 100% possible, the reason Tesla doesn't have such kind of thing in their cars, is because of a marketing decision. Just think about it, how the idea of Tesla being able to control and stop any of their cars remotely would scare off a potential buyer. People are so stuck into their old value system, they cannot easily get accustomed to the idea their car getting remotely controlled by a third party at an arbitrary time.

Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Rone]

So at times the Tesla was being driven at speeds up to 100 MPH, collided with three cars and two utility poles along the way, and eventually suffered an impact that split the car in two, immolating the front half and embedding the back half within a nearby building.

Can't people see how dangerous and unsafe these vehicles are?!?

If something as trivial as multiple high-speed impacts can lead to driver fatality, imagine what could happen in a REALLY serious accident!

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[mlw4428]

I get what you're saying, but if the "high speeds" were "nearly" 100MPH it's not unreasonable to wonder just how the car got literally ripped in half. I do wonder about the safety of a car like that. A lot of the US's top Interstate speed limits are between 70-80MPH. You're not talking a huge difference in speed at that point, so it's not unreasonable to at least question the safeness of the car and ask for some additional testing/data.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

And look how instead of bursting into flames like a proper vehicle, it split into two. What, so the owner has to pay taxes on TWO cars now?

I mean, come on!

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

How many normal cars have been split in half when they hit a pole going at a high rate of speed? OHHHH NOES CARS = UNSAFE. GET ME THE DATA TESTS.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

I'd like to see your car after hitting a pole sideways at 100 mph. Why don't you go try it and post a picture after so we can see? If you don't post one we'll just assume that you're dead.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

Concern troll is obvious.

"You're not talking a huge difference in speed" but you're talking a huge difference in Kinetic Energy. Cars are designed to take 90mph crashes, >100mph is beyond most safety standards.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Xylaan]

Actually, since energy goes up at the square of velocity, a jump from 100 to 70 is double the impact energy.

Also, getting your car ripped in half after hitting a pole apparently is "normal", in that it happens to many cars. https://www.google.com/search?... It's unfortunate, but physics isn't your friend in situations like this.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

It's not a huge difference in speed but it is a very significant difference in collision force. 20 mph faster is the same difference between leaning on a parked car and having it run you over at 20 mph.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[rfrenzob]

This is why we need local dealers only, not direct sales. Local dealers insure safety. Think of the children.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[dunkindave]

My guess is the Tesla hitting one of the "street poles" (telephone pole?) mentioned while sliding sideways at a high rate of speed was the cause of the car being split in two. This differs from Interstates in a very important way, namely, most poles on or near highways are designed either to break away if struck, or have crash barriers around them to absorb the crash energy. Poles on city streets on the other hand are designed for impacts at city street speeds, not highway speeds. At city street speeds cars crumple, not subdivide. An aluminum light pole with a breakaway is a lot different than a one foot diameter wood pole cemented into the ground when hit.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[AnOnyxMouseCoward]

Look, pretty much all cars split in half when they hit a pole at 100 MPH.

http://articles.latimes.com/20...
http://www.autoevolution.com/n...
http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news...

How much are you betting that in that last article, the driver of the Maxima wasn't driving 100 MPH? Most highway limits are 65 MPH, you're talking 50% faster, which is perhaps not a "huge difference" but it's not negligible. It also doesn't matter if the car splits in half, as long as the driver is protected within the cage (look at how F1 cars crumple when they crash, without a pole, but protect the driver). What matters more is someone probably not wearing a seat belt...

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

100MPH is over twice the kinetic energy of 70mph. Furthermore, what split it in half was the utility pole, not hitting another car.

I'd be interested to see what Tesla's black box reports the actual speed at before the collision.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[tlhIngan]

I get what you're saying, but if the "high speeds" were "nearly" 100MPH it's not unreasonable to wonder just how the car got literally ripped in half. I do wonder about the safety of a car like that. A lot of the US's top Interstate speed limits are between 70-80MPH. You're not talking a huge difference in speed at that point, so it's not unreasonable to at least question the safeness of the car and ask for some additional testing/data.>blockquote>

The problem is energy. It increases with the square of velocity. (you know, (1/2)*m*v^2).

The survivability of a crash drops greatly going from 35mph to 50mph, going to 70mph drops it even more. Plus, given it's a city street not designed for such speeds, the chances of surviving go lower still.

Next, he was ejected from the car - usually because he wasn't wearing his seatbelt. Seeing as the car split behind the front seats, that would indicate he was an idiot, and people can die at 35mph being ejected. I don't think it's even survivable at 100mph when the fundamental safety system in a vehicle isn't used (all the others, airbags, etc., derive their benefits only when seatbelts are worn).

Hell, cars split in two all the time, usually going no faster than 55 or less.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

A vehicle at 100mph has double the kinetic energy of a car at 70mph. That absolutely makes a difference in the severity of a crash.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Above]

I think I can help you out.

It's actually a rather common, and well studied occurrence. For instance here's a 70 MPH into a tree car split in half. Many cars have had extremely weak side impact designs for years. It's also one of the hardest things to protect against since there is no crumple zone on the side to absorb energy, unlike the front and back.

I bet across the country there are multiple cars split in half every single day, many from hitting narrow objects like light poles at relatively modest speeds, like 45MPH.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[marcosdumay]

You're not talking a huge difference in speed at that point...

Are you aware that the kinetic energy is proportional to the SQUARE of the speed, right? There is a huge difference in safety - much bigger than between 40MPH and 70MPH.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[operagost]

Well, that gives ammo to the wingnuts who think we should have governors to keep us under the speed limit at all times.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[whoever57]

get what you're saying, but if the "high speeds" were "nearly" 100MPH it's not unreasonable to wonder just how the car got literally ripped in half.

Last year in a town in California, someone who was not being chased, managed to split a compact car completely in half by hitting a tree. The two parts of the car ended up quite a distance from each other. He wasn't driving on a freeway, or a sidestreet, but was on a street with a 35 or 40mph speed limit. Reports said the speed was "up to 100mph"

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

It does make a big difference, since kinetic energy is proportional to the square of the speed. So, it's a collision around 77% more energetic than at legal speeds. And legal speeds aren't crafted to be non-lethal anyway.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

Can't people see how dangerous and unsafe these vehicles are?!?

And if the Tesla was sold from a dealership instead of direct from the manufacturer this problem would have never happened :)

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

Assuming the car was somehow designed to remain intact at a 100 to 0 MPH near instant deaccleration, the occupants would die,which is sort of defeating the purpose.

There are some badly placed tendons in the body that will slice apart very important internal organs upon very heavy deaccleration. Most people can't live with their liver split in half, beyond a few minutes. Why the car should remain in one piece for an occupant that will not live is quite a puzzle.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[mlw4428]

I'm not a troll...I actually love Tesla and hope they come out with an option in my price range. I'd certainly take a free one and happily drive it.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

You hit a steel pole at 100mph, there isn't a commercially available vehicle on the planet that's going to provide a high chance of survivability.

Re: Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

Paramount Marauder.

10 metric tons. Armoured STANAG III. Not even 7 lbs of TNT can scratch that thing. Not even an RPG. Or any gun.

You can drive through walls with that beast. More torques than a lorry.

I would wager it would make mince meat of a pole.

Commercially available for everyone (requires background check and £300000)

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

You may not be a troll, but you are dangerously uneducated.

Do you understand how K.E. = (1/2) * mass * velocity^2
applies to your situation?
Of course you would happily drive off with a free Tesla and experience similar results.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

There's a difference between driving 100 MPH on an interstate highway and driving 100 MPH in a 25 MPH zone in town.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Tablizer]

Uh, I don't see a lot of halfies in your link. A front engine block may be preventing an outright split, while in a Tesla the "engines" are more distributed. Whether this means gas cars are "safer" or not in practice is another matter.

Maybe the distributed nature of Tesla's engines means that side impacts are safer at the expense of front impacts.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

I spend about 40,000 miles per year on US interstates. I've seen MANY accidents. There has never been a car made that can withstand a 100mph impact without killing the occupants aside from professional racing vehicles and even then you're rolling the dice.

Most 80mph accidents involving stationary objects or traffic in the other direction are quite fatal as well. That's why you see all those crosses on the side of the road in my state. Plenty of dead state troopers as well. Training is not a factor. If you hit a stationary or near-stationary object at 80mph+..... consider yourself dead. If you don't die, you will soon wish you did because you will never be the same and will be dependent on society for your lifelong care.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Wookact]

-1 No common sense would be the correct modifier for you. Take ANY car, and hit a light pole going nearly 100mph sideways and see if it gets cut in half. I bet you cant find one consumer mass produced vehicle that can handle that.

Re: Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[queazocotal]

'at 100MPH' - 'Performance Max Speed-Road: 100 to 120 km/h (tyre dependent)'=74

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Twinbee]

Just out of interest, if it takes the same energy to accelerate from 0 to 10mph as it does from 90 to 100mph (assuming zero wind resistance), then aren't we creating more energy than we put into the system by crashing? What gives?

Re: Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Sabriel]

Video of it on the Top Gear channel: http://youtu.be/cDoRmT0iRic

Dear Zombie Santa...

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[MrLogic17]

>My guess is the Tesla hitting one of the "street poles" (telephone pole?)

Normally these poles are called "utility poles", because most of the time they are installed & owned by the local power utility. There are folks in the electric industry that get down right bristly at the term "telephone pole". Telephone service is inferior (lower down the pole) to power, which is at the top of the pole. (Lowest of all, in every sense of the term, is cable TV service.)

Source: I work at a power company
 

Re: Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

You can get a performance upgrade from the extensive option list.

Re: Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[KevReedUK]

Actually, according to the summary, one half DID catch fire, the other half briefly became an aircraft (and let's not dwell on the fact that it did so with neither a properly filed flight plan, nor any communication with any form the air traffic control).

Re: Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[KevReedUK]

Local dealers insure safety? Personally, I'm no fan of any insurance company, but I'd still rather get insurance from them than from any dealer... Or did you mean ensure?

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[bn557]

the difference is, it doesn't take the same energy. In the kinetic energy equation, look at the V^2 term. If you start at velocity X, and increase your speed A, your resultant velocity component will be (X + A)^2. Multiplying that out, you get X^2 +2AX + A^2. To go from 0 to 10 mph, you have to add 2 * 10 * 0 + 10 ^ 2 = 100 units (I don't remember the American unit applicable here). To go from 90 to 100, you have to add 2 * 10 * 90 + 10 ^ 2 = 1900 energy units. It takes 19x as much energy to increase speed 10 mph at 90mph IGNORING DRAG.

The X^2 gets ignored because we're only considering the amount of energy we have to ADD to go from X to X + A, and the KE at Vx will end up canceling out the X^2 in the resulting equation subtractions.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Twinbee]

Interesting. I'm confused now.

To simplify, let's assume it's in space. To go from 0 to 10mph (relative to a stationary object, say a satellite near Earth) surely requires as much thrust, as going from 90mph to 100mph. In fact relative to the position of the sun, it's like comparing 67,000 mph to 67,010 mph with 67,090 to 67,100, which works out about the same in energy requirements. But relative to the Earth's satellite, and according to your kinetic energy equation, that'd be a massive difference in energy required (0-10mph versus 90-100mph).

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

Will someone explain to me why "a high rate of speed" is used rather than "a high speed"? If a high rate of a rate means anything it should mean acceleration, but no one reoprted he was accelerating before he died.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Anonymous Coward]

It also doesn't matter if the car splits in half, as long as the driver is protected within the cage

Yeah, good riddance to those annoying brats in the back seat...

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[fisted]

Nope.
Suppose a car of m=1000kg mass.
Kinetic Energy E_kin = m/2 * v^2

E_kin(standing car): 0 J
E_kin(20mph ~= 9 m/s): 40.5 kJ
E_kin(80mph ~= 36 m/s): 648 kJ
E_kin(100mph ~= 45 m/s): ~1 MJ

Difference between the first two: 40.5 kJ
Difference between the latter two: ~352 kJ

I take the 20mph one, thanks..

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[marcosdumay]

What may help you is realising that classical mechanics do not hold for acelerating referentials. And, yes, the added energy varies with the choosen referential.

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[Twinbee]

Okay, fair enough.

But then going back to my original point, if it takes the same energy to accelerate... *in space* ...from 0 to 10mph as it does from 90 to 100mph, then aren't we creating more energy than we put into the system by crashing? What gives?

Re:Unsafe at any speed (above 100 MPH)...

[marcosdumay]

You can't change the referential during calculations. Not on Classical Mechanics, because referentials can not accelerate, and in general relativity things are much more complex. Thus, no, it does not take the same amount of energy to accelerate from 0 to 10mph as it does from 90 to 100mph.

Well out running the police ...

[wisnoskij]

Is a win for the Tesla, but it sounds likes it pretty spectacularly failed when he hit something. Was he not wearing a seatbelt? Since the car was split into pieces that then caught fire, would he of died either way?

Re:Well out running the police ...

[Anonymous Coward]

I doubt collisions at 100 MPH are taken into account for the safety ratings of commuter cars.

Re:Well out running the police ...

[Dins]

Is a win for the Tesla, but it sounds likes it pretty spectacularly failed when he hit something.

...while it was going 100 mph. I'm all for safety but I don't expect ANY car company to design a car that will keep occupants safe in a crash with enough kinetic energy to embed half the car in a fucking building...

Re:Well out running the police ...

[Whorhay]

From the pictures I saw it looked like it was survivable so long as you weren't in the rear seats. The front of the passenger compartment was intact and whatever fire there was doesn't look like it was very extensive. There might be some melting of the upholstery.

Re:Well out running the police ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Except there are people who survived crashes at much higher speeds.

http://jalopnik.com/5786094/turbo-corvette-z06-crashes-and-rolls-at-texas-mile

Richard Hammond of Top Gear UK fame survived a crash at 288 mph

Just two examples

Re:Well out running the police ...

[geekmux]

Is a win for the Tesla, but it sounds likes it pretty spectacularly failed when he hit something.

...while it was going 100 mph. I'm all for safety but I don't expect ANY car company to design a car that will keep occupants safe in a crash with enough kinetic energy to embed half the car in a fucking building...

Exactly. And with the amount of deaths recorded every year, only the truly ignorant would assume that driving anywhere is a safe activity.

Oh wait a second, I forgot...we already have the truly ignorant behind the wheel who thinks they can text, surf, and drive all at the same time.

Re:Well out running the police ...

[Anonymous Coward]

He was driving a stolen car. The chances he took the time to put on his seatbelt are roughly zero. Further, it didn't just hit "something". It slammed into a steel pole at 100mph. That will obliterate any car from any manufacturer. It's simply too much energy going into too small a space.

A guy driving a Tesla Model S in Mexico was going over 100mph and hit a curb, sending the car flying into the air and THROUGH a concrete wall, into a tree. That guy stepped out of the car and walked away. Survivability for an accident like that in most cars is exceedingly small, but that guy walked away. The difference here is that he had no seat belt and also that hit went sideways into a steel pole at 100mph. Nobody has ever manufactured a commercially available car that can deal with that.

Re:Well out running the police ...

[JustNiz]

>> I don't expect ANY car company to..

More to the point, no one who curerntly thinks they want it would actually want it once they found out the associated downsides of massive increases in weight and cost of every new car.

Re:Well out running the police ...

[Xtifr]

Except there are people who survived crashes at much higher speeds.

There are people who have survived jumping out of "perfectly good" airplanes without a functioning parachute. Doesn't mean you should take up skydiving-without-a-parachute as a hobby. :)

There's a reason cases like you mention make the news: surviving a crash at those speeds is an impressive and newsworthy feat. (The reason this case made the news was not the fact that the driver died, but the fact that a Tesla was involved. Otherwise, it seems like a pretty unremarkable story.)

Richard Hammond of Top Gear UK fame survived a crash at 288 mph

And I bet he was buckled in. Remaining in the vehicle during a high-speed crash greatly increases your chances of survival. Exiting a vehicle at 100+ mph is generally contraindicated! (Tip for future reference.) ;)

Re:Well out running the police ...

[bbn]

There was a passenger in the Tesla. He didn't get thrown out and walked away from the accident. Unburned.

Re:Well out running the police ...

[ericloewe]

He might not "of" died, but your english teacher would HAVE killed you.

Re:Fuck! - was he thrown here, or there, or throug

[Anonymous Coward]

Slot EjEcT!

- dIg ThAt DaMn, ThRo ThE AiR, tEsLa StEaLiN mOfO!

- man Slot, you lived the DrEaM - 1sT!!! To DiE iN a TeSlA, DoOoOoOoOdDdDdD!!!

I feel sorry about the car

[Anonymous Coward]

Seems like it's a scrapper. Too bad.

Re:I feel sorry about the car

[Dins]

That'll buff right out.

This is why LA is awesome

[Anonymous Coward]

see subject.

Electric Karma

[Anonymous Coward]

.. on demand

Re:Fuck! - was he thrown here, or there, or throug

[Anonymous Coward]

HA! - my first -1!

Slashdot, Tesla, go crawl up eachm other arses and die already, please.

I remember the days, when Ole Slot was a Pup.. but, fuck it, -1 for humour?

- Thats SaAaAdDdD. Seriously.

...but every Nice Morning Drive must be safe!

[jeffb (2.718)]

You can never have too many safety features!

His own fault

[Anonymous Coward]

Just another dead pothead who stole a car. A victim of driving while high, not by Tesla's engineering.

Died Outside a Tesla

[slashdice]

I guess they can also charge him with "leaving the scene of a crime"

FIRE!

[alta]

See, another one caught fire! These things are unsafe, they're constantly catching fire! This is just one of many smoldering teslas!

Curious about Tesla logs..

[Anonymous Coward]

It should have the exact details of how fast it was going when it crashed, no?

Considering Musk...

[Anonymous Coward]

has made several pro-Nazi statements, like all CONservatives do, I'm wouldn't be surprised if he celebrates this Tesla accomplishment. Those Republicans hate minorities and people that aren't xians. Just checking my Facebook page shows how happy their kind is by this. They love to see electric cars fail and t they even more love to see the murderers of their Jesus die. That is the way of their kind. They've had a bad week with the legalization of pot in WA so they are celebrating this hard. As the DJ on my local radio station said this morning, this was the only good thing that happened this week. I'll add for thier kind. They really do hate us.

Anyone who thinks

[future assassin]

or tries to blame this on the Tesla car killing someone in a 100MPH accident and not the car thief's actions, is a straight up retard

I have no illusions about Musk doing this to get richer but so far his shown that being a psychopath is not a requirement to being a CEO who might actually like to see the world change for better and move humanity forward.

Re:Anyone who thinks

[Gravis Zero]

If you research Musk, you will find that this isnt about the money. Making electric cars are an extremely risky endeavor and it almost ruined him. If it was for the money, he just would have made sporty cars.

Bang

[tsa]

Out with a bang, not with a whisper.

idiots with more car than they can handle

[Thud457]

Save the Enzos! whoops, Teslas started as Lotuses, right? same principle.

Re:idiots with more car than they can handle

[buckfeta2014]

Only the roadster, and because Musk couldn't afford(?) car body designers at the beginnings of Tesla.

Bet he wasn't buckled in...

[rahvin112]

I'm willing to bet the guy wasn't buckled up. Even when cars are tore in half in crashes if the person is buckled in they are usually still attached to the seat (even though they are sometimes dead from the car being sheared in half).

There is like a 95% chance that if he was ejected that he wasn't buckled up (the seat itself would've had to been sheared to cut the lap belt). I bet the final investigation notes that he wasn't buckled in (there is no guarantee of survival if the passenger compartment is compromised by ripping the car in half but it's still not likely). Seat belts are seriously strong and secure, even if the car is ripped in half the lap belt should have remained secure if it was buckled because it's anchored to the seat itself.

I personally wouldn't be surprised if the cops find that he would have survived if he'd been buckled in.

The victims

[wonderboss]

"Sgt. Chris Tatar, with the West Hollywood Sheriff’s Station, said five people in the three vehicles that were struck by the Tesla sustained “varying degrees of injury.” They were hospitalized, and had been released as of Monday, he added."

Wow!

[Hamsterdan]

I'm amazed at how the safety cage is still there, pretty much undamaged, even if the car was split in half...

Looking at the pictures from TFA, looks like he would still be alive if not ejected from the car (if he could've gotten out before it caught fire)

No wonder NHTSA broke their machine while testing roof resistance

http://www.roadandtrack.com/go...

More details.

[Anonymous Coward]

More detailed account of the story found here:

http://www.jewishjournal.com/los_angeles/article/tesla_violently_crashes_into_kol_ami

What tragedy?

[JustNiz]

>>> for this senseless tragedy

What tragedy? IMHO its actually a success in gene pool improvement. We all need to stop this 'every life is sacred no matter what' thing.

Re:What tragedy?

[Anonymous Coward]

The Tesla driver wasn't the only person injured.

Died Outside a Tesla

[HeX314]

Considering the crime began with the GTA, the moment he left the service center, he had fled the scene.

Only 100 mph?

[johanw]

" Reports claim he was traveling at speeds of "nearly 100 mph"

So, is that so special in the US? I drove much faster than that this evening on my way home from work on the highway (180 km/h on GPS = 113 mph), But then, I don't drive a Tesla.

Re:Only 100 mph?

[Ksevio]

Yes, the speed limit is typically a maximum of 65mph with a few of the big open space states that go up to 75mph. While people typically do drive 70-80, most people don't get experience driving 100, and the traffic certainly wouldn't have been giving way for him to be driving that fast in the left lane so he almost certainly would need to weave around.

Re:Only 100 mph?

[Anonymous Coward]

It's rather "special" when it's a street rather than a highway.

Re:Only 100 mph?

[Wookact]

Do you also slide your car into a light pole sideways, if so yours is the only consumer mass produced car that can handle that.

Re:Only 100 mph?

[TheSync]

is that so special in the US?

It is more rare for someone to do 100 mph where he crashed.

Re:Only 100 mph?

[swilly]

How convenient that Harry's Automotive and Collision Center is right there!

Re:Only 100 mph?

[MrLogic17]

In an urban area, where speed limits are typically either 25mph or 35mph, yes, that is special. (40 km/h and 56 km/h respectively)

This also explains the large number of other wrecks in the chase.

Re:Only 100 mph?

[swillden]

Yes, the speed limit is typically a maximum of 65mph with a few of the big open space states that go up to 75mph

Some western states are now setting 80 mph speed limits on freeways through long unpopulated stretches, and 90 mph is a fairly common speed there. But not 100.

Stole a Tesla? How?

[jmichaelg]

I thought Teslas had a literally encrypted key that all but guaranteed the car couldn't be stolen sans key.,

Did the service center leave the key with the car or is the car inherently insecure?

Idiots ruin safety records

[jandrese]

I think the real message here is that Tesla's stellar safety record is due at least in part to its exclusivity and high price tag. The kind of people who can afford it are generally safer drivers. It's not a used Dodge Charger that some 16 year old asshole with a shiny new drivers license and Dad's credit card can buy off of the lot for a few thousand bucks.

Re:Idiots ruin safety records

[Anonymous Coward]

The kind of people who can afford it are generally safer drivers..

Are you seriously saying rich douchebags are safer drivers than us "plebs"? What kind of elitist bullshit is that? Most rich assholes with overpriced exotic sports cars that I've met are borderline sociopaths that buy their way out of trouble and have no respect for anyone else.

Re:Idiots ruin safety records

[Anonymous Coward]

Insightful, but it also shines in safety testing.

Re:Idiots ruin safety records

[jandrese]

My point is that Tesla has a low douchebag factor.

Tesla's response

[gringer]

We apologise for the inadequacies of our car at high speeds, and are investigating ways to make it even safer. We have designed a flexible partitioning system to take some of the energy from a "car split" incident, and will be implementing it in all new Tesla cars, and retrofitting it to all drivers who want it. Additionally, the car will require that the driver and all passengers are wearing seatbelts when the car is driving at speeds exceeding 70 mph.

Re:Tesla's response

[Joe_Dragon]

driving at speeds exceeding 70 mph. welcome to IL tollway

Spinning your wheels, and your brochure

[Tablizer]

Elon Musk can no longer say that no one's ever died in a Tesla automobile crash [because a thief died stealing one].

Don't underestimate the adaptability of a good marketer:

"No owner has ever died in a Tesla crash"

Re:Spinning your wheels, and your brochure

[iggymanz]

waddya mean, he pw3n3d that car

Re:Spinning your wheels, and your brochure

[Tablizer]

Tsk tsk, Hipsters ;-)

And the battery is still under warranty...

[patniemeyer]

If we assume that the driver wasn't deliberately trying to wreck the car then technically that battery is still under warranty... even though it's been stolen, cut in half and set on fire. That's how good the Tesla battery warranty is.

Good riddance

[fyngyrz]

So Tesla's anti-theft system is 100% lethal?

No, but evolution's anti-massive-stupidity system is pretty lethal. Less so nowadays, but... still.

"Hey, think I'll drive triple digits in a randomly active urban environment in a vehicle I'm not familiar with, while (justifiably) paranoid!"

The police quit chasing him.

[jsrjsr]

He had gotten away before he crashed. Either he didn't realize that or kept driving fast for the hell of it.

so how many people...

[publiclurker]

did you think your friends should be allowed to murder before the adults decide to educate them?

Re:so how many people...

[Anonymous Coward]

How many people did those two disabled victims murder?

Oy Veh !

[Anonymous Coward]

I guess electric cars hate the Jews to :P

One more proof that Darwin was on to something.

[FaxeTheCat]

... Nuff said.

Did he die?

[Anonymous Coward]

There are conflicting reports here. Some say he's dead and others say he's alive, so it would be good to know who's right -

http://www.businessweek.com/news/2014-07-10/stolen-tesla-s-fatality-free-l-dot-a-dot-crash-surprises-experts

Re: Did he die?

[Anonymous Coward]

Quick, put him in a sealed box in space... Then we won't know forever!

Re:Did he die?

[OurDailyFred]

If his name were Schrodinger, we'd never know.

Why police does high speed pursuits?

[Anonymous Coward]

For a stolen car?

Looks like is better to protect few thousand dollars of property than the lives of peaceful driver's lives.

For God sake! Take note of the plate or the car id and investigate without risking anyone lives.

Thinking positive

[simon1tan]

We should all thank the asshole for stealing the care and providing Tesla with more crash data so that Tesla can make improvements. Plus, one more asshole has left this world.

What I'm taking away...

[Anonymous Coward]

Holy crap! I didn't know that commercial electric cars could go 100 MPH!

The odds suck, but you still play.

[charlesbakerharris]

Everyone knows Slot machines are a bad bet.

Oy vey! The sufferink!

[Anonymous Coward]

Hilarious: "Its rear portion flew through the air with such force that it slammed into the side of a local Jewish community center and became wedged there."

"It's like another 'Holocaust'! Haven't ve suffered enuff?"

LOL...

Is there a 'White community center', or would that be a 'hate crime'?

Steal a Tesla.....Die.

[wavswpr]

I can't think of a more fitting end to the thief.

Why can it go that fast?

[Anonymous Coward]

The highest speed limit in the entire country is 75MPH. Why is the car even capable of going faster than that? Why is ANY car even capable of going faster than that, for that matter?

Re:Why can it go that fast?

[marciot]

Well, at the equator, the Earth rotates at about 1000 mph underneath you, so your car has to go at least 1075 mph when driving west to exceed the speed limit. 100 mph is nothing... you're practically moving backwards.

Re:Why can it go that fast?

[pslytely psycho]

Parts of I-15 in Utah, I-10 and I-20 in Texas are 80 mph and a toll road in Houston Texas is 85 mph.

Has been for several years now.

Police in the adjacent lot

[tepples]

I live in Boulder, I bet you don't.

That'd be correct. I live a few states east of you.

I stop, check the road, make sure no cars are coming, and if it's clear, then I'll go

This is the stop sign maneuver, also used at a flashing red signal or a right turn at a steady red signal. At a stop sign, I make sure to slow enough to put weight on my foot before proceeding.

but only have waited twice what the usual time it takes for that light to change (yes, I keep track of that).

I too keep track of how many cycles have elapsed, and I report problematic intersections to the city's hotline once I do arrive. But in the 35 states without a dead red statute, even waiting an hour isn't good enough for the letter of the law. Until about a week ago, it was 36; Indiana's dead red statute took effect on July 1 of this year. Before that, there was one intersection on my way to work where I often had to wait over five cycles for some SUV to pull up behind my bicycle. Oncoming traffic kept getting green left turn arrows while I got an eight-minute steady red in the straight lane. I reported that one to the city and the state, which kept pointing fingers at each other.

But if you do all that, then they won't ever see you do it, and there will be no grounds for them to complain.

Treating a red light as a stop sign works unless there happens to be a police car parked in a nearby parking lot.

The individual did not die in a Tesla.

[Anonymous Coward]

He simply failed an applied physics exam.
 

3 For 1 trade

[JimSadler]

Injuring three people and denting a wall in order to get rid of a car thief sounds ok to me. Maybe we could design an electric device that simply cooks car thieves right in the driver's seat when they try to drive the car. But until then we can replace the innocents injured rather easily and just maybe other creeps will notice that car thefts often cause the death of thieves.

Re:Bang - requires a new warning label

[Anonymous Coward]

Tesla - don't drive it like you stole it.

Ah, yes, the oldest argument against seat belts...

[jeffb (2.718)]

Unless he was unconscious from the impact and then died in the fire (as reported the front end caught fire) if no one bothered to rescue him.

"I'd never wear a seatbelt! It might prevent me from being thrown to safety!"

He died in an ambulance !!!

[giorgist]

They are just covering up that he died in an ambulance. I vote that we take these dangerous ambulances off the road as to many people seem to die in them after a police chase or a road crash.

Slot Car Racing!

[Anonymous Coward]

-Electric.
-Too damned fast.
-Guaranteed to fly off the road.

This was Slot Car Racing

I cannot believe I'm the first to make that connection. I am NOT the only one here who grew up during the 70's and 80's.

Blame Tesla for not disabling the car

[Anonymous Coward]

I wonder why Tesla simply did not remotely disable the car ?
Dropped my car off at Queens SC, Monday at noon. From the App I saw that after 26 hours they opened the driver's door for about 1/2 hour and there's been no other activity. It's now in for service for 29 hours and I'd have been better off if I just had turned off access when I left the car so I wouldn't be so frustrated about it. I would have liked to imagine that they were taking the time to pore over the car making sure that when I get it back it's better than ever. But it's just sitting there, in the same place I parked it when I dropped it off. I'd call them and ask but then they'd just turn off remote access, and then where would I be?

Who is Joshua Slot?

[slick7]

If he is an American, he should have known better. If he is an illegal alien, they why wasn't he deported for commiting a crime against law abiding people? Where were our leaders?

First person to ever die..

[ssufficool]

Statistically apples and oranges when considering other cars. You have a class of person who has attained the wealth to buy a Tesla. I'm thinking that person may be a more responsible, less risk taking person than the burger flipping driver of that damned 1980's riced out Honda CRX that just cut me off.

shutdown

[Anonymous Coward]

Couldn't the service center have remotely shut the car down and locked the doors?

Is that a feature?

[GodfatherofSoul]

"In case of theft, car will split in half and eject occupant into nearest Jewish community center."

Seems a bit drastic...and antisemitic.

Tesla still has perfect record.

[myfacelaunchd50ships]

According to this poorly written article Slot survived the accident and Tesla still has a perfect record.

OTA Update Time

[r0kk3rz]

Queue an over the air update from Tesla requiring the drivers seat belt to be engaged for the car to run.

Remote shutdown?

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm surprised the police/owners don't have some sort of hotline to Tesla to enable remote shutdown or speed limitation of the individual vehicle.

Gotta say it. He died while...

[tgeller]

...Slot car racing!

DID ANYONE BOTHER TO CALL TESLA

[Anonymous Coward]

Did the police bother to call Tesla? Did the service station bother? Track and shut down the car. Easy.

... And it caught fire

[Anonymous Coward]

That's how you know it's a genuine Tesla.

Re:Fuck! - was he thrown here, or there, or throug

[Anonymous Coward]

That was supposed to be humor?

The point is that not all states have such a law

[tepples]

there isn't one

Correct.

then probably the only "legal" way to cross is to dismount (become a pedestrian) and walk across

Yet the city somehow can't spend money for a "CYCLISTS DISMOUNT" sign.

the 35 states that haven't passed dead red laws

Also, I think there is a law for dealing with lights that are not functioning properly which probably says treat it like a stop sign.

The source implies that only about 15 U.S. states have such a law about malfunctioning traffic signals.