[delta_echo]

[quoteAccording to Joe Osterman, director of highway safety at the NTSB, the recommendation was inspired in part by a tragic auto accident involving a 86-year-old man who drove his car into a crowded Santa Monica farmers' market last summer, killing 10 and injuring 63.


[/quote]

How does this have anything to do with this? He's talking about senility, the black boxes are about 24 hr. monitoring of everybody, regardless of age. No thanks is all I can say. By the way, would it be illegal to remove them from your own vehicle? What if it was damaged in an "accident"[}:)].

[Paco]

Anyone want to make any bets on how long it will be before there are wireless transmitters in the black boxes in cars that can send signals to police officers?

[Harley]

Heck they'll be able to kill your motor remotely and cut down on the high speed pursuits too.  GPS transmitters and the whole nine yards.

[Cochise]

"...in all new cars manufactured in the United States. "

Does that mean imports are exempt?  
[sarcasm on]
That should help the US auto industry.
[sarcasm off]

[Raith]

"<i>Do you hear that, Mr. Anderson? That is the sound of inevitability...</i>"

FTS.

[Screwloose]

Just one more reason I don't like American cars.

[Paco]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Cochise</i>
<br />"...in all new cars manufactured in the United States. "

Does that mean imports are exempt?  
[sarcasm on]
That should help the US auto industry.
[sarcasm off]

<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Good point - I didn't catch that.  However, aren't foreign cars like Honda's, Toyota's, etc, still manufactured in the US?

[KamikazeSM]

It looks like we'll all have to start importing BMW's direct from Germany.  That's pretty scary... I wonder what the law will be regarding the continued maintenance of the black box? Like Delta said, I wonder if it would be possible to "remove" them.

Wow, Kalifornia actually did something right: "Currently only California has a law requiring car dealers to notify buyers when their cars are outfitted with an EDR."

[shoule02]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Paco</i>
<br />Good point - I didn't catch that.  However, aren't foreign cars like Honda's, Toyota's, etc, still manufactured in the US?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

My parent's Toyota was made in Ohio.  As far as I know GM still has factories in Mexico (unless that also got too "expensive" for them).  Their Ford F-150 was also made in the USA but I can't remember where.  That just means that Ohio or wherever was just the point of final assembly.  We could probably assume the individual components are imported from all over.

Traffic accidents kill more people my age than anything else.  If it helps prosecute people who break the law and operate their vehicles in a reckless manner then I don't see any problem with it.  If they are used to track the location (GPS?) of law-abiding citizens then that crosses the line.  They put data recorders in airplanes because of safety concerns so why not cars?  GPS could be nice though if someone stole your car.

[Cochise]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Paco</i>
<br />

However, aren't foreign cars like Honda's, Toyota's, etc, still manufactured in the US?
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

I think you are right for the most part.  I know my Subaru was made in Japan though as it arrived during the dock strikes in CA.  It got delayed 3 weeks []

[Harley]

We should have the right to decide if we want it in our cars, not to have the federal government decide for us.  If you want GPS and theft tracking you can get that with OnStar and other companies that sell that service.  My ex-wife works for a company that sells that service.  You can set up your home computer to monitor your car with it.  Set up a zone for the car like an invisible fence for your dog.  If the car crosses that GPS boundry the car is instantly disabled.  The government doensn't need to have that capacity as far as I'm concerned.

[shoule02]

I agree with you Harley.  I think that the government should not be able to mandate any sort of tracking devices for those who are law-abiding citizens.  The article states that the devices currently being installed only record data like speed, brake pressure, seat belt use and air bag deployment.  This data would be vital to determining the cause of crashes and also to determining whether or not the drivers were operating their vehicles in an unsafe manner.  A teammate of mine in High School was a passenger in a vehicle involved in an accident.  The driver was racing another car and lost control.  My teammate is now paralyzed from about the belly button down.  He will never ever walk again.  The driver was never prosecuted for endangering the lives of his passengers and ultimately causing the serious injuries.  The police determined the cause of the accident to be excessive speed.  Data recorders would have been able to PROVE that the driver was operating the vehicle without regard for the safety of others.  Since motor vehicles are the cause of so many deaths in the U.S. why should we not subject them to stricter safety satandards like we do with airplanes and other forms of transportation?

As for disabling vehicles involved in police pursuits.  That technology exists and is completely independent of whether or not the "black box" is installed.  They are currently developing a sort of "ray gun" which would disable the computer which controls almost all the functions in recently manufactured vehicles (thusly stopping your vehicle from functioning).  I belive it is a variation of EMP.

[Harley]

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by shoule02</i>
<br />I agree with you Harley.  I think that the government should not be able to mandate any sort of tracking devices for those who are law-abiding citizens.  The article states that the devices currently being installed only record data like speed, brake pressure, seat belt use and air bag deployment.  This data would be vital to determining the cause of crashes and also to determining whether or not the drivers were operating their vehicles in an unsafe manner.  A teammate of mine in High School was a passenger in a vehicle involved in an accident.  The driver was racing another car and lost control.  My teammate is now paralyzed from about the belly button down.  He will never ever walk again.  The driver was never prosecuted for endangering the lives of his passengers and ultimately causing the serious injuries.  The police determined the cause of the accident to be excessive speed.  Data recorders would have been able to PROVE that the driver was operating the vehicle without regard for the safety of others.  Since motor vehicles are the cause of so many deaths in the U.S. why should we not subject them to stricter safety satandards like we do with airplanes and other forms of transportation?

As for disabling vehicles involved in police pursuits.  That technology exists and is completely independent of whether or not the "black box" is installed.  They are currently developing a sort of "ray gun" which would disable the computer which controls almost all the functions in recently manufactured vehicles (thusly stopping your vehicle from functioning).  I belive it is a variation of EMP.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Unfortunately with all good intentions there are almost always "unintended consequences".  Heck we have video cameras at almost every major intersection which do pretty much the same thing.  Ever notice all those cameras mounted up on the poles, not the "red light cameras".

[sNiPeRWoLf88]

American cars suck anyways (I know that sounds immature, but through my family's experience, it is true).  But, for those who like big pickups and gigantic SUV's, I guess the US is where to buy those.  But honestly, black boxes?  Most of the time, people live to tell the story (the black box's only purpose is to tell the untold story of what went wrong)in accidents, so it is essentially, pointless.  Soon, the government truly WILL be able to controll EVERYTHING.  Lock your house doors from a satallite signal being broadcast from D.C., turn your airconditioner on and off, and of course, cut your power with the flip of a button.

The only vehicle that needs a black box, or anything of that sort, is a large semi.  Which already have them.  They are used to track the semi's carrying dangerous or important cargo, and via satellite, the company sending out the semi can cut the gas flow to the engine, lock/unlock the doors, or of course, track the truck.  But why, does a college girl driving a Ford need this?!

[shoule02]

You mean those little ones that sit on top of the poles next to the lights?  For some reason I thought that those weren't cameras.  I was under the impression that they were some sort of recevier that allowed emergency vehicles to change the lights at the intersection to allow them to pass through without getting into an accident themselves.  Regardless, if they are indeed cameras they are there to monitor traffic conditions.  Should we have to put a person at each intersection with a walkie-talkie to report in traffic conditions?  Why can't we use cameras to observe what is happening in a very public place?