Bonneville America Forums Forums Off Topic Discussion Forums Lounge EDRS-how before they are on motorcycles?

Check Time magazine August, 2006 "Pssst, your car is watching you." According to this story 64% of this years cars contain a Event Data Recorder that records the last 20 seconds before the air-bags deploy. Granted, some justices were served in the article, but if they can sneak that into cars, how long before bikes have them? Cop pulls you over, plugs his little computer into your outlet and says, "Let's see, 65 MPH in a 55; excessive acceleration..." Insurance company wants to see an ongoing record before they renew...Too much chance for abuse for me.

Unbeleivable this has been going on and no one thought to tell us-just an over site I'm sure. Of course good old anti-motorcycle foe Joan Claybrook is in their pitching.

Read the article.

I agree. Excessive acceleration in a school zone... busting the legal speed limit...

Red's comment "Too much chance for abuse for me" is right on. Maybe knowing that an EDRS is in a vehicle might keep a driver/rider from killing more kids... or themselves.

We must always keep in mind that we do not have a "right" to operate vehicles on public property. We are granted a license to operate on public property subject to certain requirements several of which are obeying laws.

Way I look at it, if you crash doing 65 in a 55 zone, and the insurance company can show via the EDRS that that is a fact, your claim should be denied as you were breaking the law at the time of the crash - criminal activity is usually not covered by most policies.

Bring 'em on!

I'm pretty sure the whole idea of speed limits is BS anyhow, no body does the speed limit. If they do the speed limit everyone is pissed at them and accidents start happening.

Keep your GD kids out of the road. Natural selection at it's finest...

Yes, I have a little one that will be playing in the road in just 2 or 3 years.

The point is that each and every day we are coming closer to a combination of George Orwell's 1984 and Terry Gilliam's Brazil societies.

Soren

Sounds to me like there is soon to be a really big demand for older motorcycles. That's a good thing, I might be able to use that to justify the cost of equipping my shop.

I've already pulled the fuse on the On-Star system in my Blazer and if someone puts any other surveillance equipment in my vehicles I’ll disable that too.

The idea that driving is a privilege rather than a right is a fiction made up by control freaks in government. Unfortunately they have sold it to the public. Imagine, its 150 years ago, and some sheriff stops a traveler and asks to see his horse permit. “Sorry mister, you can’t ride that horse without a government permit, and show me the registration on that Conestoga.” At what point did we give the government the right to restrict our travel?

Speed limits are usually completely arbitrary and unrelated to safety. Actual driver behavior seems never to be taken into account. I think the vast majority of drivers travel at the speed that is comfortable and safe for them. If 90% or more of the drivers on a given road are traveling at a certain speed then that should be the speed limit, not some arbitrary number plucked from the air by a revenue hungry bureaucrat or control freak cop.

Of course the story opened where two kids are racing-a Corvette and a Mercedes- and both hit a Jeep and kill everyone inside. The kids claim they were going 55-some cop remembers the EDRS in the 'Vette and finds out it was going 139 prior to impact.

Now, even Barney Fife could figure out from the damage the difference to the vehicles between 55mph and 139mph. This sounds like the insurance companies are behind it-and Joan Claybrook who is on record wanting to ban motorcycles (See Cruiser this month about some states and excessive noise bans).

There are irresponsible bikers and there are bad drivers but who is viewed as the bad guys in our society? So let's electronically monitor everyone and the insurance companies will be able to slide out of more claims.

Quote:

---

This sounds like the insurance companies are behind it

---

I'm sure they have a hand in it. After all, insurance companies are in the business of collecting premiums and denying claims.

At the moment, EDR's can be 'accidentally destroyed' without
disrupting the vehicle's other systems. As they make it an integrated, rather than an add-on system, it will be much harder to get around. Don't worry too much though, what technology can create, technology can defeat. You just have to pour money/ingenuity on it. Either that or only drive vintage rides.

Breaking a law and enforcing a law are two very different things. The first is based on the rote application of a rule, the second includes human beings. The law says "thou shalt not drive over 65 MPH on this highway," and if you do 66 MPH you "break the law," even if no-one is there to see it happen. However, if you are "gunned" by the local law enforcement folks going 66, they can choose NOT to enforce. They may, in fact, choose not to enforce if you are going way over that limit. The point is that a human agency has to be involved in the enforcement.

Now, the problem with "spy in the cab" monitors is that they can "see" you (and keep a record of you) doing 66 MPH, and should someone get to see that, then the law can be enforced. It would be no good saying "but I was the only one on the road, at 3:00 in the morning, with a clear view ahead."

This ends up in a system with no leeway - the "zero tolerance" option. Think carefully: Has any one of you ever accelerated out of a tricky situation to avoid being hit by a cager? Be honest. Did you - maybe - go a touch over the speed limit? Well, if so, your "spy in the cab" would know it. So would you want someone to see your recorder? I think not.

It's fine to go for the "well, if you can't do the time, don't do the crime" position, but we all know full well that some laws are good, some are bad, some get bent, and some are so twisted they beggar belief.

EDRs have all the potential to turn the spotlight of law infringement on to us all the time. If I get caught speeding by some guy in a black-and-white with blue lights, that's fair: but a form letter in the mail saying "Dear Sir, at 3:05 am, 12/12/21, your EDS tracked you doing 66 MPH for 5 seconds in a 65 MPH zone..." feels very, very wrong.

Siggy

I don't like the idea of being monitored, but it is a reality of the times, everything from diving computers to cell phones to the local redlight or toll booth keeps a record of where you are, how deep, fast or what direction you are traveling in. Get used to it, it's only going to increase. I've always been a fan of old and lo-tech anyway!

We all speed sometimes, and do other "criminal" things when the urge arises, so coming down on somebody for just breaking a law is only hypocritical. Society does have to have rules though, as guidelines for what is right or wrong, but we must leave room for differing of opinions. Like a really WIDE two-way street.

Sportbikes racing through traffic within city limits at speeds in excess of 100 mph is irresponsible. A burst to 100 with a clear lane ahead of you and then slowing down as you approach the next vehicle ahead of you is somewhat different. Same law broken, but not near the risk of harm being done.

Out of the city limits on open road (depending on the road), maybe a different set of rules should apply, but above all - common sense should prevail!

EBDS is also used by vehicle manufacturers to determine whether product failure was the result of abuse - i.e., defeating rev limiters, (or redlines), etc. Warranty is warranty - you have to draw the line somewhere. We all want our sh*t covered when it breaks just out of the warranty (by time or miles), and we have come to expect manufacturers, in the interest of goodwill and customer satisfaction, to blurr the lines sometimes when it is in our favor to do so, and they are better about it today than they were 20 years ago, to be sure.

Had a friend blow an engine in a DODGE Cummins diesel Ram 350 recently, with only 90k on the clock. They denied any assistance because of his aftermarket fuel-mapping system, even though it is a part they sell and install at the dealership! (His wasn't.) If there were no lines, there would be no limits as to the costs of goods and services sold.

I keep wanting to bring smoking into this somehow, i.e., tobacco vs. pot, but the legalization of ALCOHOL has me so hopping mad everytime I think about it I can only leave it at that.

Some laws were just made to be broken.

At the risk of sounding somewhat Nietzscheian (and pretentious) I think we all know, deep in our hearts, that ALL laws are just man-made prescriptions to keep the terrible, destructive forces of our Id from raging forwards and destroying civilization. And because laws are human in origin, they are as likely to suffer from absurdity as any other avenue of existence. Blackwind's example of the criminalization of smoking versus the acceptance of drinking is a classic example; arguments for the dangers of both are available, yet "we" choose to allow one and not the other.

We also know that folks will use the law for their own purposes (selfishness is at the core of our being whether we want to admit it or not) and those who defend a particular law usually do it because it serves their purposes; those who disagree with a law usually do so because it impedes what they consider a "freedom" or "right." I personally think that riding at 100 MPH is just fine and so long as I am doing no harm I don't think anyone should have the "right" to tell me not to do it. Yup, I might cause an accident - but then I might do that at 5 MPH turning a corner. That's the nature of accidents - they just happen.

Siggy