Friday, December 2, 2005

Compliance is in your best interest

The majority of Canadian voters have no self-control so they willingly vote for masters who force them to abide by the rules.

Transport Canada doesn't trust you:

Canadian auto regulators are testing a system that would enforce speed limits by making it harder to push down the car's gas pedal once the speed limit is passed, according to a newspaper report.

The system being tested by Transport Canada, the Canadian equivalent of the U.S. Department of Transportation, uses a global positioning satellite device installed in the car to monitor the car's speed and position. If the car begins to significantly exceed the speed limit for the road on which it's travelling the system responds by making it harder to depress the gas pedal, according to a story posted on the Toronto Globe and Mail's Website.

[..] The agency is also testing another system that warns drivers with a voice alarm and a light whenever they start to speed, the newspaper said. Those systems are already on sale, according to the report.
Our public education system has raised a new generation incapable of reading an odometer.

HT: Raskolnikov of Dust My Broom

The Ministry of Transportation doesn't trust you either:
Ontario has a new tool to help prevent drinking and driving. As of December 23, 2001, individuals who are convicted of an impaired driving offence under the Criminal Code of Canada are subject to Ontario's Ignition Interlock.

[..] An ignition interlock device is an in-car alcohol breath screening device that prevents a vehicle from starting if it detects a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) over a pre-set limit of .02 (i.e., 20 mg of alcohol per 100 ml of blood). The device is located inside the vehicle, near the driver’s seat, and is connected to the engine's ignition system.

[..] Before starting the vehicle, a driver must blow into the device. If the driver’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is above the pre-set limit, the vehicle will not start.

Once the vehicle is started, the interlock device requires the driver to provide breath samples at random pre-set times while the engine is running. If a sample is not provided, or if the BAC exceeds the limit, the device will issue a warning, record the event and activate specific alarm systems (e.g., lights flashing, horn honking, etc.), until the ignition is turned off.
Coming soon as a mandatory feature to car dealerships near you.

7 comments:

Pietr said...

Speaking as a driver the alcohol system sounds excellent,but it won't detect other drugs.
Also the control authority is not taken away by the other system;here the original system was connected to the controls and actually made it impossible to speed, thus taking control authority away and increasing danger.

Variable control force has been used in aircraft since the fifties to protect pilots from breaking the aircraft up.

It sounds quite sensible, and follows proper engineering practice.

The Atavist said...

I don't want to be treated like a child, especially by government. The problem is twofold:
1. So many people behave irresponsibly that it makes things worse for the rest of us, and
2. There are too damn many meddlers around who just can't mind their own business and who lobby for more and more laws and regulations that limit our rights and then make us pay for that indignity through taxation.

Pietr said...

When your power-steering stiffens progressively, are you being treated like a child?

Pietr said...

I spend every day surrounded by people who think that they are good at driving, so good that they can go 60 in a 40 zone, 75 in a 50 zone and so on.
What these stupid bastards 'think' is not going to help anybody when they run out of talent.

Mike said...

"Government is that which supplants and replaces common sense." -- Jim Quinn

Pietr said...

Obviously the conflict is solved if all roads belong to somebody, not 'everybody'(nobody).
Then the right to set a speed limit is the right of the property owner, not the government,and if somebody voluntarily installs these devices, then they do so in order to avoid the sanctions of the road-owners.
Note, that if somebody on one stretch imposed 30, and further down another owner imposed 60, this would not lead to confusion;either the two would have to agree on a common limit(Anti-trust!) or another owner could supply a by-pass road which was all one, fast limit and would put the first two out of business(Anti-trust!).

Anonymous said...

Ontario needs to seriously overhaul there ignition interlock program and get them in offenders vehicles sooner like the federal legislation allows. This and this only will prevent repeat drunk driving which is a great percentage of charges. Why focus on punishment instead of prevention (i.e provincial suspensions that border on the extreme and highly unlikey to be followed)? This is the only logical solution and helps both future victims as well as offenders and there families. Seems all the other provinces got it right but not Ontario, which is why it is only going to be a nightmare for this province.