|
|||||||
![]() |
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Search this Thread | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
|
|
#1 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Shakopee MN
Posts: 1,293
|
Parents can Buy Black Boxes for Kids Cars
http://www.msnbc.com/news/963677.asp?0cv=CB20
280.00 USD gets you a basic driving habits tracker, and in three months another 200 dollars wil get you a GPS tracker in real time. Yeah here are privacy issues here , enter the lawyers.... |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
I am, in reality, a moose
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: RTP, NC
Posts: 2,439
|
From a parents point of view: its MY car, its MY insurance and if the kid wrecks the car due to speed or stupidity, its MY wallet on the line (plus I love my kid and don't want anything to happen to them that I could prevent)
Kids will act like it is a great invasion of privacy, but refer back to above. Monor children should have the illusion of privacy (from their parents) but not the reality. from an adult point of view: you want to pay for the machine and give me a break on my insurance for having this in the car and driving safely, why not. From an employers point of view: It is my (the company's) car and like anyother piece of company equipment, i have a right to know that it is being used for the purposes intended and in the manner intended. I would make sure my employees signed an agreement to that effect so they can choose whether or not they want to have access to this piece of equipment. Do i want the government to mandate this piece of equipment in my car NO. They have no need to have any of this information. Should the government have access to the information if I choose to put it in my car? not without a compelling public safety reason and a court order. |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Shakopee MN
Posts: 1,293
|
mbossman2
taking you paragraphs in turn 1) Yup totally agree 2) Ditto 3) Was hopeful for that 4) Totally agree again 5) I'll have to take this one in pieces - A mandate may be deemed part of 'public safety' , I do not know enough about law so I will leave this one as 'iffy'. It is probably something we all want IF we are being sued for something that this would be the proof we need to prove our innocence. See my last comment below. Government Need to know - only in a court of law as a subpena item to prove/disprove claims. (negligence-product design etc) Govvernment access - If it is a court then see above (remember that the courts are government too), if it is anyone else I agree. . . As with the downloading music thing, I see technology redefining how we live in a greater and greater way, while we appreciate some of it, older economy models are going to be changed and challenged. In any case where change occurs, where 'my' profits are at stake 'I' will fight tooth and nail to protect 'my' interests, while others take advantage and profit from it. Adapt or close shop. The big problem now is the pace of change is so great.... |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Premium Member
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Burb of Detroit, Mi
Posts: 873
|
I see nothing wrong with black boxes for tracking children.
Just one little note, here in Michigan about 6 months ago (Maybe longer) I saw a news telecast where a local city's police put a tracking device on a person's car and the person was later arrested (can't remember the crime). Well, of course the defense lawyer challenge the legality of the tracking device, the judge threw the challenge out the window stating the tracking device was put on the car in a public place with no breaking into the car with the reasonable assumption that a crime had taken place. The judge also compared it to putting a pamphlet on you car, if found the person could have just toss it out. So if you think that the police can't put a tracking device on your car, think again (of course this might not be legal if no law was broken, but since I'm no lawyer I don't know).
__________________
Life is a Fig Newton of Your Imagination! |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,729
|
These things are a great idea, not only for children but for company vehicles too. Also I Personally think this kind of thing should be mandated on semi-trucks and coupled to an engine limiter device to stop reckless semi drivers.
__________________
Better to use a Mac and be THOUGHT a fool, than to use Windows and REMOVE ALL DOUBT |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Resident AMD enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,445
|
I thinks it's abesolutley stupid. For an employer, it makes sense, but to keep track of your kids? No.
If your that worried about them doing something bad in there car/your car, don't let them drive. I know people who don't drive because they got in trouble driving. Everyone deserves some privacy, and by the time your old enough to drive, you should have some privacy. Maybe if you let a 14 year old drive(yes, around here I was even driving at that age)... Even if a 14 year old here gets a license, they may only legally drive out in the country...If you cant trust your kid, don't let them do it. Next will be seeing GPS trackers standard in cars so cops can know exactly when you were speeding, how would you like that? L J
__________________
Main: Gigabyte GA-770T USB3 - Phenom II 840 - 4GB DDR3 - Radeon 5750 1GB HTPC: MSI K9N6PGM2-V2 - Athlon II 250 - 4GB DDR2 - Radeon 5670 512MB HTPC: Zotac GeForce 6100E-E - Athlon X2 5800+ - 4GB DDR2 "Play a Windows CD backwards and you'll hear satanic voices, thats nothing, play it forwards and it installs Windows." |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Member (10 bit)
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Ontario
Posts: 636
|
I don't think it is invasion of privacy - given that it does not record what is going on in the car (audio for instance). Especially if the parents own the car they want to know their kid is responsible. If all that it reports is illegal behaviour, fine - its your fault if you get caught.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: NJ
Posts: 1,099
|
Thank goodness I don't have 1 like that on my civic. I drive 70-75 mph on highways sometimes.
I believe that speeding is not a huge problem. I know most of you will disagree. Driving habits is more of a bigger issue. I would think that a guy on his cellphone or eating his lunch while driving is most likely to get in an accident rather than some 1 doing 130mph. The guy who's doing 130 will have his attention focused on driving. His adrenaline is pumping. He won't be thinking of work or anything else. Nothing else matters other than staying on the road.
__________________
P4 2.6C @ 3.12 || ASUS P4C800-E Dlx || Antec SOHO File Server w/ 5 case fans || Antec TruePower 430w PSU || 2 x 512MB Crucial PC3200 DDR || 280GB of total storage 7200rpm ATA100 8mb cache || LiteOn CDRW 52x32x52 || LiteOn DVD+/-RW SOHW-812S || WinXP Pro || Solarism 15" TFT LCD || 500VA TrippLite UPS || Logitech MX-700 Duo || ATI 9800 AIW || Sennheiser HD-555 |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Resident AMD enthusiast
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Kansas
Posts: 1,445
|
This is not fair to the people who abide by the law. Forget thinking, just let the law take care of you...
![]() As stated before, I would rather see someone driving 100+MPH than someone talking on a cellphone. I will admit that I don't really mind either of the two activites, so long as you can safely drive. L J |
|
|
|
|
|
#10 |
|
Member (8 bit)
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: "Boondocks", KY
Posts: 184
|
I'm a bit conflicted about this issue, because I can understand how the invasion of privacy issue can grate on a kid's nerves.
However, I think that if you accept money from someone, you accept the fact that you owe them something back. If a kid is given a car or has their insurance paid for them, then I think the parents are entitled to the security of their "investment," besides the obvious safeguarding of progeny. As for the government, there should be absolutely no oversight. Ideally, someone should have to do something wrong before coming under scrutiny. While that is certainly not the case (and seemingly less and less so), that does not justify further violating privacy. If the government paid for the entire transit system (i.e. mass transit) I would accept the spying, but since they only pay for the roads they should continue to patrol only the roads, not the vehicles. |
|
|
|
|
|
#11 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,652
|
It's hard to choose a side on this issue, both side have very good points, I can somewhat agree with the 100+ MPH in that the diver is sane and under no influence while doing it, along with so many other factors. But to the people who are wholey against the boxs, it's not somthing the gov is MAKING you put in you car, ...yet. I would like to think that boxes, when put in a car of a new and inexperienced driver that it would help them become a more aware and safe driver. I would rather see a driver with 5 years experience going 100+ than a 16 yr old. My 2cents.
|
|
|
|
|
|
#12 | ||
|
I am, in reality, a moose
Staff
Premium Member
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: RTP, NC
Posts: 2,439
|
Quote:
Yes, children need some privacy but the need for privacy stops at the door that leads to things that can kill or serious hurt them. trust is something that is earned not automatically given. Quote:
Last edited by mbossman2; 09-10-2003 at 09:26 AM. |
||
|
|
|
|
|
#13 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,652
|
mbossman2,
No, i was mearly expanding on james post, I don't think anybody should be driving 100+ in as heavy of traffic as you are describing, I'm just stating that when I was 16 I didn't know as much about how a car handles as I do now, and i still don't know enough to be driving nascar. I was just giving an I had to choose answer. I still belive it should be up to the parents and the parents who decided if this is an invasion of privacy. Kids these days expect to many things, I sure some of you older folks didn't have a $20,000+ car when they were 16. |
|
|
|
|
|
#14 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Shakopee MN
Posts: 1,293
|
When it comes to knowing the driving habits of anyone I would pose this question.
1) There is a police strike and so there are NO poliice any kind. Do your driving habits change? 2) Your parents are in the car. Do your driving habits change? 3) There is a police cruiser behind you, just because he happened to be there, Do your driving habits change? 4) You are taking the driving test for your license. Do your driving habits change? A truthful yes answer by anyone, and not just you Colonel is why something like this is available. Last edited by sdkfz; 09-10-2003 at 12:05 PM. |
|
|
|
|
|
#15 |
|
Member (11 bit)
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Iowa
Posts: 1,652
|
Good point sdkfz, I don't think anybody can't answer yes.
|
|
|
|
![]() |
| Bookmarks |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|