Motor Vehicle Safety Acy of 2010

Along the lines of another “big brother” thread we currently have running I though I would post some things that have made it out of committe.

Event data recorder time to will go from 15 to 60 seconds, mandantory, I say mandantory as some manufactures do it voluntairly.

The process of sending data from a vehicle in a wireless fashion has been given a name, it is called “telemetrics” One troubling aspects to telemetrics (maybe only troubling to some) is that your driving parameters will be sent wirelessly and this is one of the parameters used in establishing your insurance rates (not a section of the bill)

Sad to say but I think this increased monitoring of peoples driving habits and more mandated safety systems (or so called safety systems) are inevitable. On the other side, the car manufactures have always been hesitant to make certain safety changes unless motivated by a mandate

Seems so strange we are having such a controversy about the ability of police to ask if you are a legal citizen, yet this seems a much greater invasion of privacy.

If your interested in where this can go, check this website…

They use the term ‘Event Data Recorders (EDRs)’. This is actual case law on the books right now. Big Brother is upon us.

Again…as I stated in the other Big Brother thread…

These mandates are being pushed heavily by the insurance industry.

And the insurance industry wants to take this “Feature” even further.

IF the recording device shows you driving at a high rate of speed or some other erratic behavior…then they want to be able to DENY YOUR CLAIM.

So if you’re driving down the highway at 5mph above the speed limit and a tire blows out causing you to crash your car…then you may/will be denied a claim because you were breaking the law at the time.

You can say thank you to the politicians who accepted all this money from the insurance lobbyists.

What’s next? I guess we will have to wear event recorders while we are walking. This will determine whether we are able to walk and chew gum at the same time. When this happens, I intend to foul up the system by chewing laxative chewing gum.

I don’t see this as a bad thing…necessarily. Why should insurance companies have to pay insurance claims for people who were driving their vehicles in an illegal manner? Something like this could bring my insurance rates down and make the roads safer at the same time.

To solve the “Big Brother” issue, here’s an idea. Give heavy insurance discounts for people who volunteer to have these devices installed. This way, if you are willing to pay extra for your insurance, you can keep your freedom. Freedom has never been free, so why not continue to pay for it?

“I intend to foul up the system by chewing laxative chewing gum.”

Go, dag, go!
Note: This can be interpreted in any way that you like!

Well suppose you’re doing 66mph…Then does it matter if they deny your claim??

One thing the insurance company has been pursuing for years…if you get in a accident and NOT wearing your seatbelt…they can deny your claim to any injuries you might have incurred.

If I am driving in a 70 MPH zone, yes, it would matter.

My insurance company shouldn’t have to foot the bill for my illegal activities.

How would you feel if your rates went up to pay the claims of other customers who were operating their cars illegally? Are you willing to pay for that?

It happens all the time. Can you tell me what percentage of accidents happened when a car was driving OVER the speed limit???

Sorry…but I’m still not buying this. Insurance companies have a very very good idea how based on accident construction what cars were speeding and what weren’t. And that percentage is already built into the rates. I’ll bet you a years salary that if insurance companies were allowed to deny coverage for someone doing something illegal…you (the perfect driver) RATES WOULD NOT GO DOWN…NOT EVEN ONE PENNY. Instead that money would go right back into profits for the insurance company.

Sorry…but I don’t like this proposed monitoring…I think it’s too intrusive and don’t trust the government or insurance companies to “Do the right thing” with the data.

Okay, so in my proposed solution, you can forgo the discount on your insurance and pay extra for the privilege of driving your car in an illegal manner without having your claims denied.

Monitoring of individual behaviour certainly seems to be something that is both here to stay and on the increase in terms of what is monitored. These policies are “greased on the skids” of people that say “if you are not doing something wrong why should you care” Remember the Duke boys wern’t doing anything illegal. Those that sacrafice freedom for security soon will have neither (I did not think that up on my own).

What about the rights of innocent victims who don’t want to die at the hands of careless law breakers? Don’t their rights count for something? The rights to “life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness” can’t be exercised if you are dead.

What right, other than the right to break the law, would you lose if your driving habits were monitored?

The right to be protected from a form of search that is prohibited by the Bill of Rights.

Suddenly, everyone is a constitutional scholar.

I agree, the Bill of Rights protects us from illegal search and seizure. However, whether or not that applies to this discussion is a legal opinion. Have you even taken a course on constitutional law? Have you read the Bill of Rights and all of the Supreme Court rulings that have affected Amendments 1-10? If not, your legal opinion is worth bupkus.

FYI, the Amendment you refer to is #4.

To claim that you need to be a “constitutional scholar” too know when to call foul reaches the highest level of “bupkusness”.

Ammendmendts 1-10 have been refered too by our current Supreme Court as being necessary “controls” placed upon the States, without 1-10 it would be the States in the position on trampling on the 14th every day and everyway. You know it is so ironic that it is going to be the 14th that pulls the so poorly written 2nds tail out of the fire, and tell Palin she should be thakful for the 14th, not discredit it, also inform her the 2nd has nothing to do with hunting. My constutional studies take place every day, not confined to a classroom.

If you think you’re the PERFECT driver who NEVER EVER has broken ANY laws…or drive even 1MPH over the speed limit…then great…glad to hear it…But for the rest of the 300+ million people in the US…it’s damn near impossible to NOT break the law ALL the time in ALL situations…even if you’re trying to.

I’d LOVE to see you make it down I-93 from NH/MA border to Boston at 8am and drive the speed-limit…and NOT getting killed…I guess if you only drive 5,000 miles a year or less then it’s possible to NEVER EVER break any the law…but I live in the real world…NOT a fantasy world.

Don’t act like your decision to break the law is anything other than a choice you make. It isn’t something that is thrust upon you by others.

No, I am not perfect, but something tells me this kind of change could change the driving habits of the majority of Americans, who currently choose not to obey the law. You are talking about what driving is like now, while I am talking about how it would be. THOSE ARE TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

Geico offers a discount to drivers who are willing to install a wireless transmitter onto their OBDII port on their cars. It monitors the time of day that they drive, the day of week that they drive, the speeds that they drive, how far they drive, how hard they accelerate and brake their car, and possibly other things, that you can never quite be sure of. The data is then used to raise or lower your rates (hahahhaa).

So, how long before these devices are installed into cars, and the data is then transmitted directly to the police car sitting on the side of the road, who then pulls you over and issues you a ticket for a 5mph over the limit violation from a month ago, when your kid took your car for a drive?

I hate these slippery slope discussions.
Turns sane people into raving lunatics because if xx happens, then yy could be a possibility, but most likely won’t be.

As for the person talking about not wearing your seat belt, and either getting tickets, or having your insurance company deny your injury claim, why is that even a topic worth discussing? Everyone in a car should always be wearing a seat belt. Period. What good reason can someone come up with that they shouldn’t wear a seat belt?


No, I am not perfect, but something tells me this kind of change could change the driving habits of the majority of Americans, who currently choose not to obey the law.

Obviously you don’t drive much.

Sorry…but the VAST majority of American drivers to NOT obey the law…The average speed limit on my little commute is 75mph (10+ over the speed limit)…From my own personal observations…less then 5% of all Americans use their signals ALL the time…Sorry but you’re DEAD WRONG.