Big Brother will be Watching

[DAVID GAGNARD]

I wouldn't mind a black box being used if there was an accident in contention or someone was injured.

Up to now,in some states, this has been a point the courts have been looking into. Who/whom has the right to download this data???? The ECM belongs to the owner of the car as it is part of the car, can law enforcement just go in and retrieve the data without a search warrant????? Can the owner refuse law enforcement access to this data????
Lots of legal questions, lots of opinions........

The data has been retrieved by law enforcement personnel in serious accidents involving fatalities to help find out what really happened and as a result people were found guilty of serious crimes and went to jail, now they are suing becasue they claim they "own" that data and others have no right to it.........It's a legal nightmare and will not be quickly or easily resovled.......

David

[thorconstr]

Originally Posted by Paul F

It's a good thing. Vehicles are the most lethal item most Americans use every day. The least we can do is have accurate data about the use of them. It beats the heck out of eyewitnesses.

Traffic fatalities per year - 40,000
Airplane fatalities per year - 1000

If you want privacy;

Use cash - they monitor your every purchase for habits
Turn your cell phone off. They can track your position with some accuracy by triangulating your signal from the towers, in or out of your car.

Turn your computer off. They know every website you visit.

And put tape over your computer camera and break the microphone.

They ought to put black boxes on people that smoke before they do cars!

In the United States, tobacco use is responsible for about one in five deaths annually (i.e., about 443,000 deaths per year, and an estimated 49,000 of these tobacco-related deaths are the result of secondhand smoke exposure).

Alcohol related deaths are greater than vehicle deaths, black box?

Alcohol linked to 75,000 U.S. deaths a year - Health - Addictions - msnbc.com

[mreid]

Tom, please install one of these in 690 for me. I want to be first!

[Paul F]

Alcohol unfortunately, does not always cause self-inflicted harm and there are indeed innocent persons killed or injured by intoxicated people. It would be absolutely brilliant if there was an accurate way to keep people of out cars when they are drunk.

Your link provides some important information. Of those 75,000 deaths, 41,000 are due to traffic accidents and other mishaps. It sure would be great if police didn't have to call people because someone killed their spouse or child.

[jmimac351]

Isn't it so much easier to attempt to disparage and marginalize people trying to protect their liberty by suggesting they're irrational than it is to rationalize to a free people why it's preferred they sacrifice more and more of their liberty because arrogant elitists think they know what's best?

When you're on the wrong side, you're only real option is to disparage when you can't win on ideas. Nothing new here.

[BOURRET]

Originally Posted by Paul F

It's a good thing. Vehicles are the most lethal item most Americans use every day. The least we can do is have accurate data about the use of them. It beats the heck out of eyewitnesses.

Traffic fatalities per year - 40,000
Airplane fatalities per year - 1000

If you want privacy;

Use cash - they monitor your every purchase for habits
Turn your cell phone off. They can track your position with some accuracy by triangulating your signal from the towers, in or out of your car.

Turn your computer off. They know every website you visit.

And put tape over your computer camera and break the microphone.

And how many domestic (home ) fatalities.
In France: population about 60 millions. Road fatalities: 4000 and home(domestic) fatalities: 20 000!!!

[jmimac351]

Originally Posted by BOURRET

And how many domestic (home ) fatalities.
In France: population about 60 millions. Road fatalities: 4000 and home(domestic) fatalities: 20 000!!!

There's a joke in here somewhere.

[Paul F]

Originally Posted by jmimac351

There's a joke in here somewhere.

Yep, you're leaving yourself wide open with that line!

[Paul F]

Originally Posted by jmimac351

Isn't it so much easier to attempt to disparage and marginalize people trying to protect their liberty by suggesting they're irrational than it is to rationalize to a free people why it's preferred they sacrifice more and more of their liberty because arrogant elitists think they know what's best?

When you're on the wrong side, you're only real option is to disparage when you can't win on ideas. Nothing new here.

No one is doing anything here to defend their liberty in this thread. Tom dropped a link with the title 'Big Brother will be Watching' with no other comment. The rest of us chimed in with our own discussion and Tom has said nothing further.

And now suddenly there are sides and liberty is threatened? Wow! Things escalate quickly. I fear this thread will soon be closed. Maybe it should. But let's see if we can keep it open with some humor and intelligent discussion.

[Paul F]

....and no, my discussion is not intelligent.

[jmimac351]

Some don't get it, and I don't always have the patience to explain it.

[thudmaster]

Want a little humor. OK, if you are involved in a wreck refuse to turn off you car for fifteen minutes. The computer will clear itself...........I think.

[vettestr]

You can bet big bro and others are using data you have never even know was being collected. One auto insurance company is now suggesting you plug a monitor into your cars data port for 30 days. Then send it to them with a recording of your driving habits and they base your payments on the factors monitored. Just one example of many, ever wonder why your TV sat. box must be hooked to a phone line even if you do not download extra programs? The TV sat company collects all your viewing habits and sells and trades this info as demographics and marketing info. It goes on and on and on.

Here is link to insurance co. and the recording device ... Progressive Snapshot hardware details revealed - SlashGear

[Paul F]

Originally Posted by thudmaster

Want a little humor. OK, if you are involved in a wreck refuse to turn off you car for fifteen minutes. The computer will clear itself...........I think.

Why would you want to do that? It could have valuable information to defend your position.

There are 3 guys in the other car who we're going 80 mph and slammed into you. You are severely injured and will be in great discomfort for the rest of your life. You will lose your house and not be able to support your family. They have 3 witnesses with impeccable backgrounds as leaders of the community. It's your word against theirs.

....Or are you the driver in the other car?

As best I can tell, those who don't like the black box want to break the law or do something bad, and get away with it.

Oh sure, I understand the big brother thing. Who doesn't? We're all tired of regulation upon regulation making our lives more complicated and being more intrusive. But this one just doesn't fit the bill. It is tiresome to have improvements forced upon us on our cars. But for the most part, while costly, they have been very beneficial. We hated seatbelt laws when they came out and refused to wear them. But, after 43 years, we now have crush zones and air bag system. Brilliant.

Your on a computer right now. The government can track every keystroke, monitor you from your camera, and listen to everything going on in the room. Geez, they have satellites that can watch your every step outside. But the black box, that can defend you in an accident, is threatening our liberty?

Like lawyers, the black box is a neutral device. There is one (or presumably would be in the future) on each side of the courtroom. It could be your best friend.

[BOURRET]

Originally Posted by jmimac351

There's a joke in here somewhere.

These are official statistics meaning that it is 5 times more dangerous in home than being on the road. So, if officials want to take care about our safety, they have to watch what is going on inside our homes!!

[jmimac351]

Originally Posted by Paul F

As best I can tell, those who don't like the black box want to break the law or do something bad, and get away with it.

Paul, is your comment above based on the scenario you gave or are you suggesting that people who oppose this sort of thing do so because they want to break the law?

[patrickt]

Originally Posted by Paul F

As best I can tell, those who don't like the black box want to break the law or do something bad, and get away with it.

Uhhh, it would be pretty dumb to want to break the law, or do something bad, and not want to get away with it.

[jmimac351]

Why Privacy Matters Even if You Have 'Nothing to Hide' - The Chronicle Review - The Chronicle of Higher Education

[bobcowan]

Originally Posted by Paul F

As best I can tell, those who don't like the black box want to break the law or do something bad, and get away with it.

Oh sure, I understand the big brother thing. Who doesn't?

We hated seatbelt laws when they came out and refused to wear them. But, after 43 years, we now have crush zones and air bag system. Brilliant.

.

No, I don't want to break the law or do something bad. I just want to live my life without some gov't funtionary tracking what I do and coming up with something to do with all this new data. The gov't wants your car to download data to colelction points, so they can moniter what you do, where you go, and how long it takes you to get there. Can you imagine what would happen with this information?

For example, your cell phone probably has a GPS tracking device. The ostensable reason is for your own safety, so 911 can find you in an emergency. But, they also planned to seel that data to advertisers. As you neared the next burger king, they would call you with a recorded add: "Hungry? There's a juicy Whopper waiting for you at exit 159!" How many calls would it take before you threw the phone out the window?

Cops have a license plate reading device. It's a camera that's attached to a computer that recognizes license plates. Cops would drive down the street, scane every plate on that street, and record the location of every car, and therefore the general location of every driver. If your car was parked in a "drug Zone", you were automatically labeled as a supicious person. Does this sound familier, "Let me see your papers, old man"?

Statements such as yours usually indicate a flaming liberal, who believes the gov't knows best, and we should never interfere. Or it often indicates someone under the age of 25, who just hasn't been around long enough to see the excesses of our own gov't.

I'm not sure you really do understand the big brother thing.

Given the choice, I would eliminate the seatbelt law for all adults. Here in CO, we do not have a helmet law for motorcycle riders over the age of 18. Every once in a while, the bill manages to get on the ballot. I vote against it every time. Given the chance, I would also vote against the seatbelt law for adults.

Now, before you jump on your high horse and ride around the block a few times, Let me also say I never ride my motorcycle without a helmet. Never. And I never drive my car without my seat belt buckled. Never. IMO, to do either of those is just plain foolish.

But who am I to tell you what you have to do? Maybe you don't want to wear a helmet or a seatbelt, and you're willing to accept the additional risk. I don't think that's a smart decision. But I do think it's your decision, not mine. You're an adult, and you have a right to be foolish of you want to. As long as you're only putting yourself at risk, have at it.

[Jamo]

Provocative discusson...moved to the Lounge.