Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by martyb on Saturday October 20 2018, @11:13PM   Printer-friendly
from the Automated-Law-Enforcement dept.

Australian cities are working with several companies to install cameras to capture still images and video to detect drivers using mobile phones on the road to fine them in the same way automated speed cameras work. This is good news for local governments who desperately need an influx of cash in the wake of reduced intake from speeding fines. A recent report showed that there is limited evidence that cameras have led to a change in driver behaviour across the state by acting as a deterrent however it is expected that harshly fining drivers may work better than putting up signs informing drivers that speed cameras are installed ahead. The system for detecting mobile phone use in cars is currently being tested on the M4 motorway in Sydney.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Sunday October 21 2018, @04:13PM (3 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Sunday October 21 2018, @04:13PM (#751693) Journal

    You seem to be in a state of denial. The fatality rate on the highways is horrendously high. Every year, we have roughly as many fatalities on our highways, as out total losses during the Vietnam war. If people could just stop drinking when impaired, the fatality rate would drop ~1/3, by your own words.

    Note that I have not said "don't drink and drive". I much prefer that "drink responsibly" thing. People who can limit their drinking to one or two drinks, can probably drive safely with that quantity of alcohol in their systems. Alas - far too many people don't know how to limit their drinking. If they have been educated, then they lack either the judgement or the willpower to limit their drinking.

    I have little idea which category you belong in. You sound as if you may have been exposed to alcohol education - but maybe you weren't taught correctly.

    Know your limits. Seriously, know your limits. It isn't YOUR life at stake. The drunk almost always survives the crash. It's only when he wakes up that he learns that he has killed one or more other people. Know your limits, and don't test those limits.

    Starting Score:    1  point
    Karma-Bonus Modifier   +1  

    Total Score:   2  
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 21 2018, @04:56PM (2 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday October 21 2018, @04:56PM (#751713)

    As I pointed out explicitly, it drop AT MOST 1/3; that number 1/3 is inflated around the key word "related". It's not 1/3 of said deaths are caused by drunk drivers; it's 1/3 somehow involve alcohol.

    Alcohol is NOT a problem; there are clearly much more serious problems when it comes to safety on the road.

    • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday October 22 2018, @06:06AM (1 child)

      by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Monday October 22 2018, @06:06AM (#751882) Journal

      https://report.nih.gov/nihfactsheets/ViewFactSheet.aspx?csid=24 [nih.gov]

      Read. Basically, deaths related to alcohol have been just about cut in half since 1980. About 60% of highway deaths were alcohol related in 1980. Today, you say they are about 1/3 of all deaths - that is roughly half, and the article confirms that.

      Allow me to reiterate that I am not in agreement with all the laws regarding alcohol. Some of them are just stupid knee-jerk bullshit. Laws today are written by the various states, not for the purpose of increasing safety, but for the purpose of securing federal funds.

      I encourage you to read about Candy Lightner. She's the woman who founded MADD - then later left MADD because the focus drifted away from drunk drivers, to fund raising. Today, MADD's position is that alcohol is evil, and they want to outlaw alcohol. I'm 100% with Lightner - MADD should be brought under control, and forced to focus on it's primary mission: drunk driving.

      https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/madd-founders-daughter-killed-by-drunk-driver [history.com]

      When police arrested Clarence Busch, the driver who hit Cari, they found that he had a record of arrests for intoxication, and had in fact been arrested on another hit-and-run drunk-driving charge less than a week earlier. Candy Lightner learned from a policeman that drunk driving was rarely prosecuted harshly, and that Busch was unlikely to spend significant time behind bars. Furious, Lightner decided to take action against what she later called “the only socially accepted form of homicide.” MADD was the result. (Charged with vehicular homicide, Busch did eventually serve 21 months in jail.)

      Now, you can make all the claims you like, you can grouse and complain about the laws. But, the facts support laws against drunk driving. Even more, the facts support being RESPONSIBLE. As outlined in the article, the same individual could be responsible for many accidents, including property damage, injuries, and even death, and they WERE NOT HELD RESPONSIBLE! The "good old boys" might be forced to spend a night in jail, after killing someone. That crap had to change.

      One more time, let me be clear. I don't agree with all the laws on the books today. Nor do I agree with MADD's agenda. But, I am 100% in agreement with Candy Lightner's goals.

      • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 22 2018, @06:36AM

        by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 22 2018, @06:36AM (#751888)

        The problem is a lack of a enforcement of property rights due to the "old boys club" that naturally arises in a monopoly, especially a monopoly that is violently imposed.

        Whose more likely to know the boys in blue and the boys in the DA office and the boys on the bench? Well, the extrovert drinkers.

        The problem isn't alcohol or even driving under the influence; the problem is crashing (which results from falling asleep), and the problem is a lack of property rights (due to a lack of enforcement).