The official "Ask a cop/deputy anything!" thread

[________]

Originally Posted by Killramos

I’m saying prevention via technology doesn’t seem like a feasible option

I'm saying exactly that. Only if it were feasible would I be behind it.

[Killramos]

Originally Posted by Onesie

I'm saying exactly that. Only if it were feasible would I be behind it.

Fair enough.

In the meantime let’s lock ‘em up and throw away the key

[Joekerr]

Murf993 and Sedan_Clan:

Sedan, you may not know much about it since different country and all, but, what are your guys take on the feds proposing to do away with minimum sentences for crimes committed with firearms (first time, non violent, etc...not sure how non violent it is if you have a firearm but whatever)...they are suggesting that they do away with minimum sentences here (also same thing for drugs as I understand).

In the next breath however, the same government also prohibited a bunch of firearms for legal owners who are law abiding citizens, and are continuing their efforts to make it harder and harder to own a gun in Canada (legally speaking anyway...if you are a criminal, its pretty easy and no minimum sentences if they have their way).

It's messed up. IMO.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Onesie

Understood both of you, it sounds like you two are conflating hogging the left lane with driving inebriated. But I'll keep my opinion. There are a number of things we do because of other people (voter ID, background checks, passports, medical cards, etc.)

Driving is not a privilege and driving drunk isn't acceptable regardless of the situation (as opposed to speeding).

I didn't conflate anything. Voter ID, background checks, passports, etc. aren't punitive. Requiring everybody to have interlock devices is. Furthermore, you have is wrong. Driving IS a privilege. It's a privilege that comes with adherence to certain laws. If you are adhering to the laws (..e.g….not driving while intoxicated), you shouldn't be subjected to the punishments that come with a failure to abide by that law. Should your insurance fees be increased because a company pays out too much money for the damages caused by impaired drivers? Absolutely not, which is why there are incentives for good driving behavior. The whole shouldn't be punished because of the few.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Joekerr

Murf993 and Sedan_Clan:

Sedan, you may not know much about it since different country and all, but, what are your guys take on the feds proposing to do away with minimum sentences for crimes committed with firearms (first time, non violent, etc...not sure how non violent it is if you have a firearm but whatever)...they are suggesting that they do away with minimum sentences here (also same thing for drugs as I understand).

In the next breath however, the same government also prohibited a bunch of firearms for legal owners who are law abiding citizens, and are continuing their efforts to make it harder and harder to own a gun in Canada (legally speaking anyway...if you are a criminal, its pretty easy and no minimum sentences if they have their way).

It's messed up. IMO.

Liberty, civility and law & order are currently under significant attack by those in power who want to use anarchy to push an agenda (…all while employing and enjoying classism/elitism to safeguard themselves from what they'll willingly subject everybody else to). In a sane world, criminals wouldn't be given carte blanche……


…but we no longer live in a sane world (…for many of the reasons you've mentioned).

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by bayarea328xit

In practice, the systems are likely just going to track driving behavior to see if it falls out of norm (e.g., driver is having trouble keeping steady in lane, driver can't maintain forward focus out of the windshield, etc.). The issue could be DWI, could be sleep deprivation, could be meds, could be heart attack, etc.. The system won't care.

If the system flags a driver as being inattentive, the car could navigate to the side of the road/exit. System can ask driver if they need assistance - if driver agrees, system can call for help (e.g., ambulance); if driver refuses, car just stays put.

Assuming this is the system behavior and technologically feasible, do people still object making this type of system mandatory?

Yes! I don't need third party entities having control over, or being able to intrude on my decisions in every aspect of my life. There are already systems in place to assist with the things you've mentioned (..as it pertains to driving). You cannot control human behavior and it's troubling that many of you are willing to give the government so much control over your lives over an ideal. If many of you get what you're asking for, you're going to regret it.

[bayarea328xit]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Yes! I don't need third party entities having control over, or being able to intrude on my decisions in every aspect of my life. There are already systems in place to assist with the things you've mentioned (..as it pertains to driving). You cannot control human behavior and it's troubling that many of you are willing to give the government so much control over your lives over an ideal. If many of you get what you're asking for, you're going to regret it.

Do you also object to automated braking systems (for collision avoidance/mitigation) if they were made mandatory in cars? Again, assuming they were technologically feasible and reliable.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by bayarea328xit

Do you also object to automated braking systems (for collision avoidance/mitigation) if they were made mandatory in cars? Again, assuming they were technologically feasible and reliable.

Yes! I don't want a car doing the braking for me. I don't want the car doing the driving for me either. I'm all for assisting features that can be disengaged however. Rather than automate everything (…which IMHO impacts skills and abilities over generations), prioritize driver education and driving behavior. Technology is both a blessing and a curse.

[bayarea328xit]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Yes! I don't want a car doing the braking for me. I don't want the car doing the driving for me either. I'm all for assisting features that can be disengaged however. Rather than automate everything (…which IMHO impacts skills and abilities over generations), prioritize driver education and driving behavior. Technology is both a blessing and a curse.

Such systems are not mandatory yet but many manufacturers have made similar systems standard, including BMW (Active Driving Assistant).

Would you not buy a model if this type of system is standard/included?

Don't worry - Porsche's PAS is still optional on the 911.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by bayarea328xit

Such systems are not mandatory yet but many manufacturers have made similar systems standard, including BMW (Active Driving Assistant).

Would you not buy a model if this type of system is standard/included?

Don't worry - Porsche's PAS is still optional on the 911.

I buy all of my cars absent features like lane change assist, blind spot monitoring, the vibrating steering wheel lane warning crap, etc. I'm not a lazy driver (…which isn't meant to imply I think those who like the systems/features are). I am old school; I know how to set my mirrors properly (…most people do not) and I take the half second required to look over my shoulder before I merge into a lane. My commuter Corolla has all of those safety/warning features as standard options and I disabled all of them. I have never opted for those features on any M car and I didn't opt for them on my 992 either.

[M5Rick]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

I buy all of my cars absent features like lane change assist, blind spot monitoring, the vibrating steering wheel lane warning crap, etc. I'm not a lazy driver (…which isn't meant to imply I think those who like the systems/features are). I am old school; I know how to set my mirrors properly (…most people do not) and I take the half second required to look over my shoulder before I merge into a lane. My commuter Corolla has all of those safety/warning features as standard options and I disabled all of them. I have never opted for those features on any M car and I didn't opt for them on my 992 either.

+1

[bayarea328xit]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

I buy all of my cars absent features like lane change assist, blind spot monitoring, the vibrating steering wheel lane warning crap, etc. I'm not a lazy driver (…which isn't meant to imply I think those who like the systems/features are). I am old school; I know how to set my mirrors properly (…most people do not) and I take the half second required to look over my shoulder before I merge into a lane. My commuter Corolla has all of those safety/warning features as standard options and I disabled all of them. I have never opted for those features on any M car and I didn't opt for them on my 992 either.

Not sure if you are aware, but BMW ADA is standard on modern M cars, too. Not sure if emergency braking can be turned off.

ABS systems automate emergency braking. Would you disable yours if you could? If not, I guess there is a threshold above ABS-type intervention/assistance that you object to between your driving and the car's control system.

I think it is helpful to think about the continuum of car control systems that help the driver stay safe. I understand that different people may have different thresholds for acceptable intervention.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by bayarea328xit

Not sure if you are aware, but BMW ADA is standard on modern M cars, too. Not sure if emergency braking can be turned off.

ABS systems automate emergency braking. Would you disable yours if you could? If not, I guess there is a threshold above ABS-type intervention/assistance that you object to between your driving and the car's control system.

I think it is helpful to think about the continuum of car control systems that help the driver stay safe. I understand that different people may have different thresholds for acceptable intervention.

You said automated braking, not anti-lock braking; two ABS acronyms that mean different things. I don't want anything automated. Would I disable my anti-lock braking if I could? No!

[bayarea328xit]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

You said automated braking, not anti-lock braking; two ABS acronyms that mean different things. I don't want anything automated. Would I disable my anti-lock braking if I could? No!

I was distinguishing between automated braking (collision avoidance/mitigation) and anti-lock braking (ABS).

My point in raising ABS (anti-lock braking) was to indicate that there is a level of automation/intervention that people are willing to accept even if they are not willing to accept automated braking (collision avoidance/mitigation).

ABS (anti-lock braking) and automated braking (collision avoidance/mitigation) are both part of the driver assistance system - just different level of intervention.

[________]

Trying again.
I did make a typo error when I meant to say "driving is a privilege", and said "not a privilege" (meaning not a right).

That said:

There's a difference between "the government" mandating our lives and regulations that are meant to prevent issues and fatalities.

I agree I don't want automated systems that measure or track how I drive, let alone interfere with it.
Because I can choose to drive in a way that is responsible and safe, even if outside of the "safe borders" set by such systems if they do exist. You can't 1) "choose" how to drive responsibly if you're drunk, 2) it isn't about how "you" drive, because you're sharing the road with others. It's not about you. Driving drunk should never be permissible. It frustrates me that an officer that sees tragedies would feel that a drunk driver was just exercising their preferences.

I do agree with setting baselines, to regulate things. E.g. speed limits, anti-trust laws, protectionism, taxes…

I think you're missing the point in that an interlock is a punishment if done in the way I described.
It'd be the same as saying that having the key to the car a punishment to us that are not thieves…

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by Onesie

Trying again.
I did make a typo error when I meant to say "driving is a privilege", and said "not a privilege" (meaning not a right).

That said:

There's a difference between "the government" mandating our lives and regulations that are meant to prevent issues and fatalities.

I agree I don't want automated systems that measure or track how I drive, let alone interfere with it.
Because I can choose to drive in a way that is responsible and safe, even if outside of the "safe borders" set by such systems if they do exist. You can't 1) "choose" how to drive responsibly if you're drunk, 2) it isn't about how "you" drive, because you're sharing the road with others. It's not about you. Driving drunk should never be permissible. It frustrates me that an officer that sees tragedies would feel that a drunk driver was just exercising their preferences.

I do agree with setting baselines, to regulate things. E.g. speed limits, anti-trust laws, protectionism, taxes…

I think you're missing the point in that an interlock is a punishment if done in the way I described.
It'd be the same as saying that having the key to the car a punishment to us that are not thieves…

We disagree, and that's fine. You have your position and I have mine (…and this is coming from a guy who despises, and regularly arrests, drunk drivers and people who drive while impaired by drugs). These systems are not going to stop people from making stupid decisions. If jail/prison time doesn't stop them, why do you think the interlock systems [that are already installed on many of their vehicles] will?!? You're being idealistic rather than realistic. Just because I enforce the law doesn't mean I am on board with arbitrary measures and relegating everybody to a standard they didn't do anything to deserve.

We should move on from it.

[Murf993]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

We disagree, and that's fine. You have your position and I have mine (…and this is coming from a guy who despises, and regularly arrests, drunk drivers and people who drive while impaired by drugs). These systems are not going to stop people from making stupid decisions. If jail/prison time doesn't stop them, why do you think the interlock systems [that are already installed on many of their vehicles] will?!? You're being idealistic rather than realistic. Just because I enforce the law doesn't mean I am on board with arbitrary measures and relegating everybody to a standard they didn't do anything to deserve.

We should move on from it.

Arent' crimes already banned?

[///d]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

Yes! I don't want a car doing the braking for me. I don't want the car doing the driving for me either. I'm all for assisting features that can be disengaged however. ]B]Rather than automate everything (…which IMHO impacts skills and abilities over generations), prioritize driver education and driving behavior. [/B] Technology is both a blessing and a curse.

THIS!

I posted something about this a while back on my Facebook and got a surprisingly large amount of kickback. I even posted about how to properly set your side mirrors and received kickback as well. I agree that some features are very helpful, but at what point are we taking away from attentive driving and skill and relying too much on automated systems? I think we crossed that line long ago.

Take a rear camera for example, simple feature that can be a big help, but I've witnessed too many people not physically look while backing up and strictly rely on the camera. The camera is there to assist, not be your only set of eyes.

Years ago I had bad stomach pains and drove my self to the ER and wound up immediately going into surgery for appendicitis. I drove my 1989 Toyota rust bucket pickup. The gal I was dating was dropped off at the hospital so she took my truck back to my place to take care of my dog. She drove 10 miles in low light conditions without headlights because she didn't know how to turn them on, she has only ever had automatic headlights.

Another headlight story, a friend of mine whom I work on post with was driving home during heavy rain without her headlights on (it's law in MN to have headlights on during inclement weather and even overcast cloudy days). Later I told her she should have her lights on and she stated she can't, they are automatic. I tried to explain to her that there is still a knob or a switch to physically turn them on and she argued that there wasn't, and I had to show her how.

IMO it should be a requirement to drive a manual clutch with no automated systems to pass a drivers test. Never know when you might be in a situation that you need to do so.

[Sedan_Clan]

Originally Posted by ///d

THIS!

I posted something about this a while back on my Facebook and got a surprisingly large amount of kickback. I agree that some features are very helpful, but at what point are we taking away from attentive driving and skill and relying too much on automated systems? I think we crossed that line long ago.

Take a rear camera for example, simple feature that can be a big help, but I've witnessed too many people not physically look while backing up and strictly rely on the camera. The camera is there to assist, not be your only set of eyes.

Years ago I had bad stomach pains and drove my self to the ER and wound up immediately going into surgery for appendicitis. I drove my 1989 Toyota rust bucket pickup. The gal I was dating was dropped off at the hospital so she took my truck back to my place to take care of my dog. She drove 10 miles in low light conditions without headlights because she didn't know how to turn them on, she has only ever had automatic headlights.

Another headlight story, a friend of mine whom I work on post with was driving home during heavy rain without her headlights on (it's law in MN to have headlights on during inclement weather and even overcast cloudy days). Later I told her she should have her lights on and she stated she can't, they are automatic. I tried to explain to her that there is still a knob or a switch to physically turn them on and she argued that there wasn't, and I had to show her how.

IMO it should be a requirement to drive a manual clutch with no automated systems to pass a drivers test. Never know when you might be in a situation that you need to do so.

You've highlighted some excellent points/observations, both of which I see in play every single day. People driving around who don't know how to operate their headlights and people getting into minor fender benders because they rely on the camera instead of looking over their shoulder(s). People are extremely lazy and spoiled when it comes to driving; skill isn't taught anymore. Most people can't even parallel park. Driving a manual is a theft deterrent in and of itself.

[vanguard8]

Unfortunately, many people don't drive cars anymore, but giant SUVs.
This has made devices like TPM, stability control, backup cameras, even higher barriers on the road side, pretty much universal.
The people have chosen.

Gas tax increase, anyone?

[jamesinaz]

Originally Posted by Sedan_Clan

You've highlighted some excellent points/observations, both of which I see in play every single day. People driving around who don't know how to operate their headlights and people getting into minor fender benders because they rely on the camera instead of looking over their shoulder(s). People are extremely lazy and spoiled when it comes to driving; skill isn't taught anymore. Most people can't even parallel park. Driving a manual is a theft deterrent in and of itself.

I've spoken with a lot of Europeans in my travels. One thing the Germans have right is drivers license requirements. The testing one has to pass to get one there is in depth and difficult. On a brighter note it means most of the drivers there have a clue how to drive.

I'm one of those drivers that is constantly commenting about how other people drive. Irritates my wife. But it's how I vent. On the outside you wouldn't know because I don't need any road rage events. No finger or horn or tailgating. In fact if someone is driving like an idiot I try to stay as far away as I can. Well I am retired so I have all day to pretty much do nothing.

[vanguard8]

Originally Posted by jamesinaz

....
I'm one of those drivers that is constantly commenting about how other people drive. Irritates my wife. But it's how I vent. On the outside you wouldn't know because I don't need any road rage events. No finger or horn or tailgating. In fact if someone is driving like an idiot I try to stay as far away as I can. Well I am retired so I have all day to pretty much do nothing.

Whether it's me or my wife driving, I'm always saying, "Watch that car over there", or my favorite (before I floor it to escape the area), "Doesn't anyone here know how to drive?"