11–20 of 31 posts
At least people can sit on the side of the road and check their Facebook while waiting for the car to reset. Seems better than having them on the road doing it.
The actual law says that all cars after a certain date should have a system that can: "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired; and prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected" There is an OR for detecting high blood alcohol level. There are a few years to get input, come up with preliminary rules, get more i…
"But that is why we have a representative form of government, and input on regulations." Unless, you know, your representative doesn't listen to you. Or you've had a felony. Or you are 17. Or you live overseas. Or you are an immigrant (Some places allow immigrants to vote in local elections).
*Or, increasingly, they did not let you visit, but your co-ethnics in border states are impeding immigration enforcement so that you can stay regardless.
The actual law says that all cars after a certain date should have a system that can: "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired; and prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected" There is an OR for detecting high blood alcohol level. There are a few years to get input, come up with preliminary rules, get more i…
Why would I ever willingly buy a vehicle that I’m not fully in control of and that can force me to pull over whenever it wants? False positives are an inevitability; the best you can do is make them infrequent. Still, I would prefer to not have the system in my vehicle since I don’t drink and am at no risk of driving drunk.
If you need a car, eventually these will be the only options available. Tampering with or removing these misfeatures will eventually be classified as a felony, and suspicion that you may have done so will eventually be used to justify violence against you from the police.
I've had several different cars flash the "Do you need a break?" (with coffee cup logo) on the dash when driving through work zones where you are redirected and over various lane lines at odd angles. It would be really bad if the car automatically shut off in those situations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"But that is why we have a representative form of government, and input on regulations." Unless, you know, your representative doesn't listen to you. Or you've had a felony. Or you are 17. Or you live overseas. Or you are an immigrant (Some places allow immigrants to vote in local elections).
Immigrants can vote in their home countries, so they do have input. A nation is not obligated to give you democratic power over itself, just because they let* you visit. You may as well complain you don't have democratic input if you're a US citizen and can't vote in Mexican elections. *Or, increasingly, they did not let you visit, but your co-ethnics in border states are impeding immigration enforcement so that you…
I am American, and can vote in local elections in Norway because I've lived here, legally, at least 3 years. This isn't uncommon, and I find it fair since these are the things that impact me the most. I cannot vote in national elections. Also fair. On the other hand, the American voting forms for me make sure to ask if I ever intend on living there again. I have limited voting in the US, and I sure as heck don't expect any politician to do anything for me unless it'd look good for propaganda.
This is all besides the point: the original post was talking about folks that cannot participate in the democracy they live in.
I'm not even sure what you were trying to say with the last comment. Could you please explain it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"But that is why we have a representative form of government, and input on regulations." Unless, you know, your representative doesn't listen to you. Or you've had a felony. Or you are 17. Or you live overseas. Or you are an immigrant (Some places allow immigrants to vote in local elections).
Immigrants can vote in their home countries, so they do have input. A nation is not obligated to give you democratic power over itself, just because they let* you visit. You may as well complain you don't have democratic input if you're a US citizen and can't vote in Mexican elections. *Or, increasingly, they did not let you visit, but your co-ethnics in border states are impeding immigration enforcement so that you…
People have useful input about their communities, regardless of their citizenship
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Immigrants can vote in their home countries, so they do have input. A nation is not obligated to give you democratic power over itself, just because they let* you visit. You may as well complain you don't have democratic input if you're a US citizen and can't vote in Mexican elections. *Or, increasingly, they did not let you visit, but your co-ethnics in border states are impeding immigration enforcement so that you…
Are you sure immigrants can all vote in their home countries if they don't live there? I am American, and can vote in local elections in Norway because I've lived here, legally, at least 3 years. This isn't uncommon, and I find it fair since these are the things that impact me the most. I cannot vote in national elections. Also fair. On the other hand, the American voting forms for me make sure to ask if I ever inten…
https://www.fairus.org/issue/sanctuary-policies/do-you-live-...
The actual law says that all cars after a certain date should have a system that can: "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired; and prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected" There is an OR for detecting high blood alcohol level. There are a few years to get input, come up with preliminary rules, get more i…
Why would I ever willingly buy a vehicle that I’m not fully in control of and that can force me to pull over whenever it wants? False positives are an inevitability; the best you can do is make them infrequent. Still, I would prefer to not have the system in my vehicle since I don’t drink and am at no risk of driving drunk.
I drive a 20-year-old car because I can't stand the tiny windows, high hoods, giant A-pillars, and high seating positions on new cars. Modern safety regulations mean that I can't buy a new car with my preferred seating position and good forward visibility.
The bad news is, time exists. My car is 22 years old, but in 10 years it'll be 32 years old. All the other sedans with good forward visibility will be 30+ years old, too. Old cars get rusty and dry-rotted, and eventually they get scrapped.
The government doesn't need to force you into a car that takes away your privacy and agency- time will do the job for them.
The actual law says that all cars after a certain date should have a system that can: "passively monitor the performance of a driver of a motor vehicle to accurately identify whether that driver may be impaired; and prevent or limit motor vehicle operation if an impairment is detected" There is an OR for detecting high blood alcohol level. There are a few years to get input, come up with preliminary rules, get more i…