Post #29,345
2/22/02 9:13:10 AM
|
Remember the car renter guy who got docked for speeding?
He finally got some justice:
[link|http://news.com.com/2100-1040-842821.html|story]
Car renter ticketed for spying on speeders
By Reuters
February 21, 2002, 10:15 PM PT
NEW HAVEN, Conn.--A Connecticut car rental company that used satellites to track customers and then charge them for speeding was ordered Wednesday to pay back the $10,000 total to the drivers it fined.
The Connecticut Consumer Protection Commission said that Acme Rent-a-Car's practice of assessing customers $150 each time they crossed the speed limit violated the law.
The company tracked the customers' driving habits through global positioning devices that many rental agencies use to locate their vehicles in case they are stolen or taken across state or national borders.
James Fleming, the consumer protection agency's commissioner, said the company violated Connecticut's unfair trade practices act by not properly notifying consumers of its policy.
He ordered Acme to pay back "every single consumer who they took money from illegally."
Acme's attorney Max Brunswick said the company will appeal the decision.
Brunswick said the rental agreement is a private contract with the renter, that the policy helped keep Acme's accident rate down last year and that signs have been installed at its offices clearly notifying customers of the policy.
The company's practices came into the spotlight after a New Haven man rented a minivan in October 2000, and later found that the company deducted $150 from his checking account three times. The fines kicked in each time a driver's speed exceeded 79 miles per hour.
At the time, James Turner, the New Haven man who was assessed $450 after journeying through seven states, said the thought of the company tracking him made him feel "queasy."
Acme has until May 20 to pay back its customers the amount it assessed them, which Fleming estimates would roughly total about $10,000.
Story Copyright \ufffd 2002 Reuters Limited. All rights reserved.
BConnors
"Prepare for metamorphosis. Ready, Kafka?"
|
Post #29,387
2/22/02 1:01:24 PM
|
You call that justice?
Personally I consider that policy quite reasonable on their part. You put their property at risk and hell yes, they should have the right to charge you for it.
If they don't then I, as a driver who doesn't drive that fast, wind up having to pay a premium for the ones who do. And if it makes a couple of people reconsider the merits of speeding, well all the better!
When the speed limit is 55 in the state, 65 in some neighbouring states, with a fair amount of traffic, then maintaining a sustained speed of 80+ really is dangerous. Their method of catching people was based on GPS. If you happened to hit 80 in passing, that is fine. You had to hold 80 for an extended time for them to care. Seems reasonable to me.
And if you think that this is a big privacy issue, well I disagree. Personally if I am in a rented car, I don't mind the car being tracked for legitimate purposes. In fact I would hope and expect that they track them so that they can recover stolen cars.
Cheers,
Ben
PS A vague memory says that this jackass was breaking 100. In which case I want people to stop blathering about his rights, and pay attention to everyone else's. At 30 MPH above the typical traffic flow he doesn't belong on the road. Period. In a rental car or otherwise.
|
Post #29,390
2/22/02 1:06:53 PM
|
Not quite correct
When the speed limit is 55 in the state, 65 in some neighbouring states, with a fair amount of traffic, then maintaining a sustained speed of 80+ really is dangerous. Wrong. Not maintaining a speed comparable to the general speed of the traffic around you is more dangerous than trying to maintain whatever the legal speed limit is. I've been on some stretches of Interstate where, if you drove at the 55 mph speed limit, you'd run a real risk of being creamed. I'm not saying that this is necessarily the case in this instance, but it really *might* be safer to drive at 80 mph than to drive at 55 mph. Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt, from his Recluse series
|
Post #29,405
2/22/02 1:57:57 PM
|
Re: Not quite correct
Wrong. Not maintaining a speed comparable to the general speed of the traffic around you is more dangerous than trying to maintain whatever the legal speed limit is. Agreed 100%. I drive on two interstates on my way to and from work daily. Normal speed ranges between 70 and 80. Multiple times on my drive home, I've been doing 80 in the center lane and been passed by an Illinois state trooper in the left lane going at least 90. Without his lights/sirens on. -YendorMike
Real programmers use "vi a.out".
|
Post #29,743
2/26/02 9:05:02 AM
|
Agreed!
I know those Interstates! (I88, I294, if I'm not mistaken).
Travelling them at speeds less than 65 mph is about as safe as playing Russian roulette with an automatic. (Posted limit is 55).
jb4
(Resistance is not futile...)
|
Post #29,749
2/26/02 9:36:12 AM
|
Close...
I-88, I-355.
-YendorMike
Real programmers use "vi a.out".
|
Post #29,795
2/26/02 1:01:07 PM
|
Worse than worrying pretty little head about 'speed' is -
the &^I#$%^ Idiot Tailgaters - every time. These folks haven't the brains of a Tse Tse fly, and are guaranteed to screw You up first.. should you have to avoid *anything*.
Is it creeping native dumbth, utterly inept driving schools or just sloth? (and the impatience of the terminally pampered, natch)
Hmmm the trunk in my present wheels opens remotely: mayhap a damn Realistic looking LMG (light machine gun) with a big sign hanging from barrel, (side-lit for effect)
BACK OFF!
..as the barrel traverses slowly towards driver side..
(Since it would be a dummy - the liability might be attenuated: in case of massive freak-out and another UAV behind.. turning turtle because of a walnut in the road)
{sigh}
Ashton
|
Post #29,540
2/24/02 3:54:32 AM
|
Perhaps I should add...
The general traffic pattern in the area in my experience exceeds those nominal limits only modestly.
See my longer response to Ashton for more on this.
Cheers,
Ben
|
Post #29,597
2/25/02 6:30:18 AM
|
In general, true
It has also been my experience that 80 mph'ers are exceeding the general speed of the flow of traffic. *However*, I have also been (rarely, but it has happened) in situations where 80 was pretty much the general flow of traffic. And it wasn't in Nevada or Montana, this was across Indiana. Go figure.
Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt, from his Recluse series
|
Post #29,442
2/22/02 5:56:10 PM
|
A punctilious attention to one datum..
What do we call that?
The 'speeding' rubric is directly related to its 'digital convenience' - for no saner purpose than: the levying of fines for an arbitrary 'transgression'.
There are many places (and traffic conditions, ie. nil or very few cars anywhere) where a modern vehicle driven by an alert and competent driver: is quite safe at 80 mph, even faster (try empty Nevada, for one obvious Ex.)
Maybe the question of "reduced driver discretion" VS a stated rental contract.. might [??] be valid in just that context of a rented car. But you would make that the camel's nose in the tent for something quite analogous to Tee Vee surveillance cameras Everywhere = a precise analogy to GPS 24/7 surveillance.
If you really believe that "speed kills" then I disagree pointedly and counter:
Incompetence / Ignorance Kills. Every time. And you can't legislate Discretion: the single largest ingredient to the accomplishment of a lengthy accident-free driving life = like mine.
Experience and discretion are, IMhO the criteria for regulating one's speed - and yes! that means - Of Course! you do not weave in and out of traffic at 20 mph over the current flow. You cannot codify 'safe driving' except to weed out the truly lunatic fringe AND to facilitate revenue for the EZ tickets:
75 in a 65 zone = a ticket, even if it was just you and the police car on an MT road. I would bet $$ that THIS is the most frequent 'speeding ticket' issued.
ie. your rationale sucks; it's terminally simplistic and is unrelated to the causes of accidents: dumbth much more often than mech. failure (or 'speed' per se).
Ashton
there are very few "accidents" - mainly there is Inattention.
|
Post #29,539
2/24/02 3:53:54 AM
|
Pay attention to all significant data, please
The rental company in question is in Conn. I live in NYC with occasional trips to, eg, NH and MA. I used to live in NH. I have done my share of road trips through that state and surrounding areas.
My observations of traffic speeds and volume are representative of what I have encountered in that area. I know damned well that Nevada is different. I would hope that a rental company based on Nevada set policies appropriately to their conditions. But in that area speed limits are 55 to 65 (mostly 55), there is a fair traffic volume on the interstates, and when I drive them I usually feel comfortable in the range 60-70, sometimes 75. The vast majority of the time when I see someone at 80+ on those roads they are being obviously aggressive and I sure as hell wouldn't want them driving my car. (OK, wouldn't have when I owned one. Or when I am renting one. Or wouldn't when I own one again.)
If I wouldn't want people driving my car at that speed in usual traffic there, I can understand a business coming to the same conclusion. And for evidence that my estimate is reasonable, consider that the total amount of money this rental place had fined people is $10,000. At $150 per incident this is about 70 incidents. 70 incidents among all of the cars rented at multiple stores over a period of time of a few months? With at least 3 of the incidences being one person. Dunno about you, but that tells me that either they are going out of business through inability to pay rent (let alone salaries) or else the portion of renters who run into trouble is pretty darned small. The fact that the portion of people who hit that limit is small is independent confirmation of what I have seen while driving there.
As for surveillance of the positions of cars, if I ran a car rental I would have already implemented that for a different reason. Normally I would just collect that data and forget about it. But as soon as there was a report that the car was missing, the police would have exact coordinates, a description, and a license plate. Seems to me to be plain common sense. Before you whine about Big Brother, go read the article. Apparently car rental companies already do this routinely. And, much publicity about privacy violations notwithstanding, nobody seems to be complaining about it.
"But..." you say? But nothing. My wife and I probably have about a dozen more car rentals to our names this year than you do. If the prospect of someone finding out that my rental car drove to Sacramento saved the car rental company a few bucks (some of the savings of which presumably I got), then I don't mind. (Incidentally I drove faster in CA than I would feel comfortable with in Conn. *shrug*) If that bothers you, then you don't need to rent a car. As for me, it is a minor thing to worry about. After all the motel already appears on my much more widely logged credit card. I carry an easily traceable cell-phone that kept better track of me. The car is minor by comparison.
And about the question of whether or not speed kills. Notwithstanding that last week someone probably got killed outside my window while driving too fast, I am well aware that that is not true. (I don't know for sure that anyone did, but when one of those flimsy sportscars gets in an accident, manages to overturn, skid a heck of a distance on the roof, and the ambulance doesn't seem to be in much of a hurry when they pulled the body out...well one tends to assume.) Interstates are one of the safest places to drive. Much better than those lousy regular highways or (shudder) an intersection. Of course it seems likely that people who are aggressive on the interstate are also aggressive at intersections...
Cheers,
Ben
PS An amusing piece of trivia. Combining the risk of car accidents, murder, and terrorist attack, NYC was one of the safest places in the USA to live in 2001. The primary cause being, of course, the wide-spread non-ownership of automobiles and motorcycles here.
|
Post #29,541
2/24/02 5:09:51 AM
|
GPS re speed.. not re location.
My complaint about the GPS had to do with that ancient bugaboo, formerly prohibited to traffic cops: the time + distance measurement (I know I know - WTF IS 'speed' but the scalar quantity of ds/dt - still, the speedometer is a 'ratemeter' and that seems to be the idea: cop had to pace you; not time you over a road with one entrance + one exit).
Using the GPS for this purpose is the camel's nose.. not, using it to locate a missing car. No objections to that - it's obviously a sane action. The court appears not to have cared about the "time/distance" calculation but - about the kangaroo-court, "punishing speeders" when you aren't in that business.
I'm not sure that "taking proper care of a rental car" implies any authority to limit its speed except in the case (and after the fact) of an issued citation - and even there, the court seems to be saying it is the Only agency to punish. Gets stickier if an accident and you're partly culpable - then it's lawyer territory before it's rental agency territory IMincompetentO.
In any event - I'll bet you that, if some rental co. begins putting speed clauses in contracts (and enforcing) .. their competition will reap a windfall of new business.
Speeding in town is reckless driving - so the guy going fast enough to upend his (low CG too) 'sports' car was guilty of that before he expired. Wonder what his hurry was? terminal impatience over a (brief) lifetime?
Glad you found it comfortable to go with the flow in CA. I tend to think that that 'flow' is in fact - what one best goes with. Dunno how it is to drive in your bailiwick; last time I skirted NY was on I-95 enroute from Boston to Miami. Didn't run into many yahoos then.
What I notice locally that's disturbing, is the increasing number of tailgaters: dumbth. Another sign that HS physics isn't taught or the students are unteachable. Here in wine country, as the City folk head north for kultur - people are often going 55-60 facing each other on a 2-lane. For similar weight cars, a collision is ~~ same as running into a wall at same speed. My imagination is good enough to multiply in my head the carnage if.. such a head-on is accompanied by a tailgater too.
So I leave space, and sometimes gently educate the driver behind.. to do similarly. (It even works about half the time. ;-)
As to motorcyles, and today - I wouldn't Think of commuting on one, despite my lengthy experience and decent reflexes.. Too many people taking out (what I imagine to be) 'cubicle resentment - revenge' and too many &^$&# unstable UAVS. I hear the radio reports.. motorcycle down at __. Maybe the poor bastard had no choice, for $ reasons.
Be very pleased not to need to drive every day, maybe even a little smug is OK :-)
Ashton
PS If ya rent my new wheels, feel free to drive it at any speed of which you are capable (it is capable of more) - long as yer insurable (and insured) :-\ufffd
(I read that the governor cuts off fuel at 134 mph or 7100 rpm; haven't verified this yet)
|
Post #29,542
2/24/02 5:58:29 AM
|
A modest proposal for new drivers
In the 70's when they were pushing for seatbelt laws, they had this neat device. It was the frame of a car on a little ramp, with two seats and a dummy. The human sat in the driver's seat, was strapped in, the ride went, and the human got to see exactly what 20 MPH was like, up close and personal. Complete with feeling helpless and watching the dummy go flying.
I believe that this ride should be a mandatory part of driver's education. Failing that, if I was involved in, say, life insurance I would suggest offering better rates to people who took a brief survival course hitting on the basics. This ride being one of them.
Wanna bet that would do something useful for seatbelt usage?
About the unfortunate who expired, he wasn't exactly driving through town. My window overlooks the FDR, which is a highway even though it is within the bounds of Manhattan. (Complete with entrance and exit ramps.)
Incidentally the most amusing pileup that I have seen was at 5:30 AM on the FDR. For some reason - I don't know why - the highway was blocked. So there was a traffic jam. Only it is 5:30 AM, people are driving to work on an empty highway, no way are they expecting to round a curve and run into a traffic jam.
I was woken up by a minor fender bender. Then another. Then another. And another... :-)
Cheers,
Ben
|
Post #31,911
3/12/02 6:37:02 PM
|
Another reason to keep kids away from powerful vehicles
[link|http://enquirer.com/editions/2000/07/16/loc_pulfer_hill_hopping.html|Hill hopping.]
This particular link says they were going 60 mph; with the Jeep being airborne for 70 feet, that might be a bit low. Anyway, it's another reason to keep a teenager away from an SUV which, even in the hands of an experienced driver, is less stable than a normal automobile.
They're charging the driver with vehicular homicide. What I don't get is how her parents don't get slapped with something. Giving the keys to a SUV to a teen - a 16-year old teen, even! - is damn stupid.
Unfortunately, Ben, teens think it can't happen to them. I had a driver's education class where they showed bloody accident footage. Didn't stop those who were determined to be stupid.
Where each demon is slain, more hate is raised, yet hate unchecked also multiplies. - L. E. Modesitt
|
Post #32,102
3/13/02 10:17:01 PM
|
Foxtrot occasionally describes it very well...
For instance [link|http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/viewft.cfm?uc_full_date=19960412&uc_comic=ft&uc_daction=X|here], [link|http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/viewft.cfm?uc_fn=1&uc_full_date=19970112&uc_daction=X&uc_comic=ft|here], and [link|http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/viewft.cfm?uc_fn=1&uc_full_date=19970507&uc_daction=X&uc_comic=ft|here].
Of course I like foxtrot more for things like [link|http://www.ucomics.com/foxtrot/viewft.cfm?uc_fn=1&uc_full_date=19960520&uc_daction=X&uc_comic=ft|this]...
As for teenagers thinking it can't happen to them, the ride I was describing was quite convincing. Besides which, its main point is to get the teen to wear a seatbelt, which isn't the same as not being reckless and therefore might be more doable.
Cheers,
Ben
PS An exercise in illogic. Despite the fact that the craziest drivers in the city drive cabs, and the fact that for years every time you get in one you get a recording trying to get you to put on a seatbelt, virtually nobody actually does. :-(
"... I couldn't see how anyone could be educated by this self-propagating system in which people pass exams, teach others to pass exams, but nobody knows anything."
--Richard Feynman
|
Post #32,114
3/14/02 1:39:54 AM
|
That third one was in the vein of..
Got any naked pictures of your wife?
Want some ??
|
Post #32,138
3/14/02 8:47:54 AM
|
Another proposal
Most new drivers of any age have 3 stages of learning.
1. initial fear of controlling the vehicle, extremely cautious.
2. not killing themselves right away they get a confidence that they can handle the vehicle under unsafe conditions and push limits.
3. those that survive 1 & 2 tend to drive not too badly.
Lets mandate participation in a demo derby to get your license. Fear, lack of control and real danger "might" make them a little more cautious.
thanx,
bill
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
|
Post #32,207
3/14/02 3:04:56 PM
|
Motorcycles make these stages *much* clearer..
|
Post #32,229
3/14/02 4:46:18 PM
|
and faster, you are correct
There is no difference between a "settler," "soldier," "secular," or "Chassidic Jew." The target is the JEW.
\ufffd Harvey Tannenbaum
|
Post #29,400
2/22/02 1:45:25 PM
|
What I don't understand...
...is why the rental agencies don't just use regulators on their cars to prevent people from going beyond a certain speed? Simply setting an 80mph choke on the car shouldn't be too terribly difficult.
Then again, if we really wanted to get carried away, we could have digital transmission of speed limits via smart-signs on the roads. Then we could force detroit to build on-board computers that enforce the limit within certain constraints. :-)
|
Post #29,406
2/22/02 1:59:52 PM
|
Ryder does that.
Ran into their 70-mph max speed many a time on my two trips from Texas to Illinois.
-YendorMike
Real programmers use "vi a.out".
|
Post #29,409
2/22/02 2:09:56 PM
|
Didn't he sign a contract?
If he had no notice that the policy was in place, this may be considered justice. If, however, he knew what he was signing and broke that contract, he was at fault. Plain and simple.
With this much manure around, there must be a pony somewhere.
|
