Big Brother getting Bigger... again...

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Bob O

...A little disagreement........Speaking of the constitution.....I have to disagree slightly with MNboxster. The constitution, and the bill of rights, don't explicitly guarantee the right to privacy. (Go read, or remember if you're old enough , the transcripts of the Bork Supreme Court hearings if you think otherwise, or those of any of several other recent nominees.) The inalienable rights you're referring to are "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. ", not privacy. I've had this discussion with several attorney friends........and they agree, rather adamantly in fact, that the right to privacy doesn't exist, explicitly anyway, and questionably in the abstract. Hence, the occasional "discussion" in congress about this issue. It generally comes up in Supreme Court nominee hearings.

And on a similar note, the taping of the taco drug dealer was most certainly done with a warrant, and you happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong trime. Why would you feel intruded upon in this situation? You were taped buying a taco, by a legal surveillence. They weren't interested in YOU,, they were interested in the taco stand and its drug dealing customers. You didn't buy any drugs from him, as evidenced by the tape, which, in and of itself clears you of any illegal activity. Yes, you are on tape, but, fortunately, or unfortunately, depending on your point of view I guess, it was legal. Was it disturbing to find out you were on a surveillence tape??? SURE!!!!! BUT... what if your friends hadn't told you? (hmmmm if a tree falls in the forest....) You'd be none the wiser, and nothing, absolutely nothing, would result from it, as is the case now. Forgive me, but, personally, I'd forget about it, or tell a really interesting story to the grandkids. (oops.. sorry. I forget, everyone isn't as,, ummmm "experienced" as I am)


Bob

Not looking for a fight.. just an observation or two

Hi,

You're absolutely correct. Law Enforcement had prior permission in the form of a warrant to do what they did. I merely recounted the story to show how an innocent person can end up on the bad end of a stick through no fault of their own. That a device like this further increases that potential, such as only the car, not the driver is identified, but the owner would be cited.

But what if a tree falls in the forest... Scenario: I'm looking for a Gov't. job, or any job for that matter. Someone sees this tape and is acquainted with the person who decides whether I get it or not. He casually says "I saw that guy on a Drug Surveillance tape..." Farfetched? Perhaps, but stranger things have happened.

This EDR device will increase this potential, to say nothing of simple error. Suppose your insurance is denied because of faulty information derived from one of these boxes? Ever try to fix an error on your Credit Report or Credit Card statement? Will we now have to audit the files kept to insure that it contains no errors? How do we prove that we weren't going such and such speed on such and such day and time - 6 mos. ago? We're soon going to have to spend all our leisure time making sure that our lives as represented in the various data banks truly reflect who we are...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Grizzly]

Originally Posted by MNBoxster

But How do we prove that we weren't going such and such speed on such and such day and time - 6 mos. ago?

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

... but your Honor, I couldn't possibly have been speeding in that part of St. Paul on that date and time. I was clear across town buying dope at a Taco Van. I can prove it! Here's the tape!

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Grizzly

... but your Honor, I couldn't possibly have been speeding in that part of St. Paul on that date and time. I was clear across town buying dope at a Taco Van. I can prove it! Here's the tape!

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99

[Bob O]

True.. errors do happen (ever had an electronic problem with your car, ever had a GPS tell you that you were at sea level,or close to it, when you were in the mountains, how accurate is your electronic speedo???? remember, these devices AREN't being designed for the aviation industry, where double and triple safety devices are in place) and I didn't take that into account. But I do agree that your scenario is just a smidge far fetched. Not that something like that couldn't happen, sure it could. Unlikely, but not inconceivable.

But back to the topic......yes... errors in the black box could (would?) be rampant and the effects of THOSE errors are potentially enormous. You name just one example but there are innumerable others. And you're example of the credit reporting is to the point. Let alone trying to prove that, yes I was speeding, but the accident was unavoidable, disregarding the speed, because driver X ran the stop sign, driver X crossed the double yellow, driver X ????????????.

Not to be a Chicken Little but, big brother is getting verrrrrrryyyyyy close, or appears to be anyway. (George is shaking his head, saying, "see, you thought this was fiction!)

Bob O

[MNBoxster]

Originally Posted by Bob O

True.. errors do happen (ever had an electronic problem with your car, ever had a GPS tell you that you were at sea level,or close to it, when you were in the mountains, how accurate is your electronic speedo???? remember, these devices AREN't being designed for the aviation industry, where double and triple safety devices are in place) and I didn't take that into account. But I do agree that your scenario is just a smidge far fetched. Not that something like that couldn't happen, sure it could. Unlikely, but not inconceivable.

But back to the topic......yes... errors in the black box could (would?) be rampant and the effects of THOSE errors are potentially enormous. You name just one example but there are innumerable others. And you're example of the credit reporting is to the point. Let alone trying to prove that, yes I was speeding, but the accident was unavoidable, disregarding the speed, because driver X ran the stop sign, driver X crossed the double yellow, driver X ????????????.

Not to be a Chicken Little but, big brother is getting verrrrrrryyyyyy close, or appears to be anyway. (George is shaking his head, saying, "see, you thought this was fiction!)

Bob O

Hi,

Hail Hail Napoleon!! But, errors aren't as farfetched as they may seem. Back in the '80's I bought a new car (the 1st Merc. Sable delivered in IL, 6 weeks before the Dealers got them in) and got it insured through my Agent. Called him from the Dealership, supplied the VIN and got a policy # and was told I was good to go.

5 weeks later I get a letter from the Ins. Co., along with a refund check, saying my policy was never activated because an invalid VIN # was submitted with the application. Turned out that their Data Base hadn't been updated with the VIN sequence of the new models at the time my application was submitted.

I called my Agent and was told that essentially I had been driving for 5 weeks with no coverage. That had I had an incident, I would have been unprotected.

It finally got straightened out, but not without numerous calls from both my Agent and I to the Parent company. Then, to add insult to injury, I got a citation from the State of Illinois citing me for driving without insurance and suspending my driver's license and registration. It took a trip to Court to get those charges dropped. Finally, I got a letter from the Finance Agency saying they had been notified that the Insurance on the Car had been cancelled which I fixed with a call to the Agent.

Ironically, the car was totalled 3 weeks later by an intoxicated off-duty Chicago Police Officer while it was parked overnight on the street outside my Girlfriend's apartment. Guess it just wasn't meant to be...

Happy Motoring!... Jim'99