Off in few minutes to lunch with Mom, Sister, and Brother-in-law for lunch at Spirit Mountain Casino. It is about a ninety-minute drive. The trek leaves very little time for a post today. However, since we are going to be in a car for three hours today auto safety is on my mind. The Center For Excellence In Rural Safety at The University Of Minnesota conducted a survey about what kind of safety features Americans would endorse. An article about their findings was in today's USA Today. How about you here? What would you be for. Here are some things reported on in the USA Today:
Eighty-eight percent were for ignition interlocks for those convicted of drunk driving, add me to the list, I'm all for this.)
Eighty-eight percent were for phased-in privileges for new drivers, (I'm there too.)
Eighty-four percent for mandatory helmet laws for motorcyclists, (hesitant to endorse this.I don't know why, I just am.)
Eighty-two percent were for sobriety checkpoints, (against this, this kind of violates the right to search and seizure.)
Seventy-two percent for police being able to ticket someone for not using seat belt (in most states this is a secondary offense meaning that they can't stop you just for the seat-belt, they can only ticket you if they stop you for another offense. Make it a primary offense)
Sixty-four percent where for using cameras and radar to ticket people. Cameras at red lights for instance. (I'm against this due to there being to much room for error. What if you loan your car to your children or a friend?)
Things not mentioned in the article that I would be all for:
Blind spot sensors in all cars.
National ban against cell phone use and texting in cars.
How many of the above items would you be for? What items would you add to the list? Drive safely today and watch your blind spot!
resources for today's post:
http://www.ruralsafety.umn.edu/
http://www.usatoday.com/
WHO AM I?
Yesterday's answer was Jane Addams.
Even the owner of The Dahn Report has heard of me? Isn't that novel? I do know a lot more about little women then he does. Although you have already been given enough information to solve this riddle shouldn't you learn more about me? I was born in 1832 and died at the young age of 55. I was influenced by Emerson, Thoreau, Dickens, and others. My birthday was the same as my father's and I was the brother-n-law of a noted abolitionist. I was dad's second daughter. Second of four. My early education included lessons from the Thoreau. I also received instruction from writers and educators such as Ralph Waldo Emerson, Nathaniel Hawthorne, and Margaret Fuller. I later described these early years in a newspaper sketch. As an adult I was an abolitionist and a feminist. We even housed a fugitive slave for one week. Poverty made it necessary for me to go to work at an early age as an occasional teacher, seamstress, governess, domestic helper, and writer. My first book was originally written for Ellen Emerson, daughter of Ralph Waldo Emerson. When the American Civil War broke out,I served as a nurse in a Union Hospital. I wrote passionate, fiery novels and sensational stories under another name. My protagonists for these tales were willful and relentless in their pursuit of their own aims, which often include revenge on those who humiliated or thwarted them. I alos produced wholesome stories for children. The heroine in my most famous novel is based on myself. The only difference is the heroine married and I remained single. I explained being single all of her life with the quote "... because I have fallen in love with so many pretty girls and never once the least bit with any man." When my sister died I took in her two year old daughter. I became an advocate for women's suffrage and was the first woman to register to vote in Concord. I continued to write until my death despite chronic health problems. I died of what was thought to be at the time mercury poisoning. Later reports said I suffered from Lupus. The man that wrote a book about my father and I won a Pulitzer Prize for that book. Who Am I?
About Me
- William J.
- First, I think the birth sign is wrong. 6-21, some papers say Gemini, some Cancer. Guess that means I have so many personalities that I can do group therapy alone. For those that don't know how to read Google profiles I have put what I really mean in ( ). Hot (Good looking enough to be in movies(if I buy at ticket). A body like a God (Buddha). Romantic (Thinks begging is foreplay.) Physically fit (Heart trouble. Put 911 on speed dial before we get initmate.) Good Provider (has good life insurance in case you forget to put 911 on speed dial.) Loyal (has reference letters from Mom and parole officer.) Intelligent (scored 1600 on his SATS but you have to total the scores of the four times that I took the test.) Looking for someone compatible (Be between 30 & 99 and not inflatable.)
6 comments:
Well, let's see... first, I am all for banning cell phones and texting while driving, with VERY stiff penalties attached.
Ignition interlocks for convicted DUIers? Sure.
Phased-in privileges for new drivers? Absolutely.
Mandatory helmet laws for motorcycles? Probably, though I always twitch a bit at mandatory safety stuff, since all the airbag laws put us shorties in jeopardy, at least until 2007, when "intelligent" airbags were mandated. I don't have stats on whether they still kill or cripple short people.
Sobriety checkpoints? Probably not. A guy on radio here broadcasts where they will be so people can avoid them. Don't know if that means he's for drunk driving or just against intrusiveness. I hear they cause traffic jams, though I've never seen one.
I think they've already changed the law so they can stop you for no seat belt.
With cameras, if they don't have a clear photo of you, you can say you loaned out the car but don't remember to whom. Or so I've heard. I'd not like to have to defend that in court.
Hope you had a lovely and safe drive and a delightful lunch.
Auto safety. Yes to ignition locks. Not sure about phased in privileges for new drivers, as I'm not sure what that means.
Yes to mandatory helmet laws for bikers, whether motorcycles or manual. After ten years in the foothills and mountains, I've seen too many of both do too many stupid things and helmets have saved a lot of lives, while lack of same have killed a lot of people.
No to sobriety tests, for the same reason you give. Also no to seat belt violations being a primary offense, although I know they save lives and we have too many one car accidents here where a seat belt would have made a difference.
Yes to cameras and radar, especially cameras at red lights. A cop here could make his salary in one day, ticketing people who run red lights. (Yellow, here, means punch the pedal and GO and I've literally counted as many as four or five cars going through a light that's turned red, often if they're making a left turn. Often with disastrous.
Yes to the blind spot sensors.
Ambivelant on the cell phones. Texting should not be allowed. There's no way in God's green world you can tap the keyboard of a phone, have both hand on the wheel and concentrate on what you're doing. My waffling comes from whether or not the call is "hands free" and the duration. Blue tooth earphones are cheap. I call home to tell Himself I'm two minutes out and get the dogs in. He may make a two minute call to tell me they've run into traffic or an accident and he won't be home as scheduled. My niece might call her Mom to tell her pick something up on the way home. Anything more than a minute or two, I'm against. You want to chat or conduct business or it's a call from a doc or whatever, tell them to hold on until you find a place to pull over or can call them back.
I'd like to see some method of ticketing for tailgating, especially on 70 mph freeways, especially by trucks. If I'm going slower than the rest of the traffic (which means running 5 mph over the limit in the far right lane), don't get on my bumper. Back off or go around, darn it. Remember the old rule of "one car length for ever ten mph?" Boy, try finding anyone who follows that dictum these days! Yes, I have little patience with people doing 35 in a 50 zone and no way to pass, but riding their bumper isn't going to make them go any faster! We've had so many accidents on I-85 and 385 and the majority of them have been a semi tailgating a vehicle and you just can't stop those suckers on a dime.
Hi Pat
I agree with stiff penalites for cell phone and texting.
Mandatory stuff bothers me a lot too and there have been incidents in accidents where seat belts either wouldn't have helped or in even fewer cases hurt.
They used have the checkpoints her but the Oregon Supreme Court ruled them unconstitutional.
Bill
Hi Dr
We had a nice time and I came out twenty dollars ahead after paying for lunch. Fun trip and Mom enjoyed it.
We all agree to the ignition locks. Phased in privileges usually work something like this: if you are a first time driver you can't have anyone your age or younger in the car without another adult in the car. You can
t driver after a certain hour at night until you had your license for a year. Things like that.
I agree that helmets save a lot of lives it is just the word mandatory that bothers me. Also the helmetless usually hurt themselves and the drunk drivers usually hurt someone else that is where I can of separate the mandatory line.
You are the only one for the cameras. I don't mind radar, in fact it slows traffic down. The cameras, however, bothers me because it might get the wrong people. Here when the light changes red three more people go through it. They deserve a ticket but I'd rather may for a motorcycle cop to sit at the intersection and ticket the people, they can move from one intersection to another.
Hands free should a minimum be a requirement. I also think distract driving should be outlawed. Shoot I've seen people using laptops, send faxes, and read the newspaper while driving.
And do I ever agree with you about tailgaiting!! Death sentences for people that tailgate would be fine with me.
Bill
Okay, I can see where phased-in driving might have some benefits, especially for the teens, but probably anyone not used to fielding traffic.
Helmets being mandatory isn't much different from the mandatory seat belt or mandatory on cell phones in some ways (although I still think texting is definitely out). I remember taking a cab into Manhattan twenty years ago - a guy in a car beside us was driving and playing a trumpet at the same time on a six lane road into the city. Not *that's* scary!
The cameras don't bother me. They pick up the license plate. If, in fact, you weren't driving the car, then it's a case of having an alibi (someone knew where you were at the time), saying who had the car and whether with or without your permission and the prosecution has to prove it was you, which they can't do, unless the cameras are rigged to take a photo of both license in back and driver (which some systems are set up to do). Our city/county budgets just don't run to including motorcycle cops in any numbers, let alone those who could be assigned to intersections, unfortunately.
Hi DR
See that is the think the red light cameras are almost as or more expensive then having another officer. They are either rented or purchased from a firm back East. Several cities here that used quit using them because they didn't pay for themselves. There are also some weird rules associated with them, like a warning sign has to be placed so many feet before the intersection. One driver took them to court because the sign was three or four inches from where the sign legally should have been. They had to overturn every ticket given in the previous three years. Not to mention the administrative costs with issuing refunds. Rather than budget for the cameras I'd rather see them budget for another officer.
Bill
Post a Comment