[ExI] Driverless cars for law enforcement

[Dave Sill]

On Tue, Feb 17, 2015 at 9:56 AM, William Flynn Wallace <foozler83 at gmail.com>
wrote:

>
> I have the suspect if all laws were uphold and enforced, there would be
>
>> a lot of problem driving around with or without driverless cars.
>>
>> Mirco
>>
>> ​Well, finally. A way to cut down or even eliminate deaths from cars.
>

It's be pretty easy to combine maps and GPS automatically limit cars to the
speed limit.


> I am a libertarian,
>

Really?

but it is just stupid the way Americans view their cars.
>

Lots of Americans and citizens of other countries are stupid about lots of
things. Is a super-nanny-state the best solution?

  Long ago we could have passed laws so that a car could not go faster
> than, say, 75.  How many are dead because we never did that?
>

Excessive speed is one only factor contributing to auto fatalities. There's
also lack of seatbelt use, mechanical failure, impairment, poor driving
ability, distraction, road rage, etc.

In my younger days I hated it when a car was going faster than me.  So I
> sped up and passed them.  Yes, I have gotten numerous tickets but it never
> stopped me.  Extremely irresponsible.
>

Irresponsible, yes. But speed limits are sometimes ridiculously low and
speeding isn't *always* unsafe.

So make cars that get radio signals mandating a certain speed limit and so
> cannot go faster than that.​
>
> ​  Put alcohol testers in every car so that they won't start if the driver
> is impaired.
>

And make drivers demonstrate real competence regularly. And mandate passive
restraints. And rigorous annual vehicle inspections. And cell phone
jammers. And wait we need a way to test for pot, meth, coke, opiate, ...
impairment. And I'm sure I'm missing some things...

Clearly we won't stop speeding and drinking by ourselves, so let's force
> ourselves to do it.
>

Kindly return your libertarian membership card in the envelope provided.
:-)

So - no more reason to own a Corvette or Ferrari.  Good.  Let those people
> act out their fantasies off the roads.
>

 Right, because no sports car owner ever behaves responsibly. Yes, racing
should be off-road, and that's currently the law everywhere.

There is no justification for other people paying, often with their lives,
> for some others' testosterone-fueled speeding and reckless, drunken driving.
>

Do you really want to go down the path of government preventing every
possible accidental death? What's the justification for the death of person
who's killed sitting at home reading a book by a plane that crashes into
their house?  Some big shot executives had meetings to get to? They can't
telecommute? Some package needed to be delivered faster? They couldn't
wait? Really?

Why haven't we done this before?  Because men won't grow up.
>

No, because people value the freedom to take risks and they don't want to
live in protective bubbles for the rest of their lives "for their own
safety".

-Dave
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.extropy.org/pipermail/extropy-chat/attachments/20150217/a91d6882/attachment.html>