🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <35A309AE.32111AAA@prodigy.net.nospam>,
Tony Wang  <tonyw44@prodigy.net.nospam> wrote:
>
>
>Scott M. Kozel wrote:
>
>> If he had been travelling at or below the design speed of the highway,
>> he likely would have seen the obstacle in time to stop or avoid it.  Of
>> course the dope didn't help things.
>
>Are you sure?  I mean, come on.  The guy was, after all, stoned.
>
>What if he had been drunk?  Would you have made the same argument?
>
>They say that at a 0.10 BAC content, your reactions are slowed by more that 50
>percent.  What's the figured for marijuana?  Same?  Lower?  Higher?  If so, don't
>you think he'd be toast either way, speed limit or not?

Of course, there is also the fact that some people at .10 BAC
drive better than some stone cold sober people.  

The driving test supposedly qualifies one to drive.  Therefore, don't
you think that if you could pass the test in an intoxicated state,
you'd be certified to drive at that level of intoxication or below?

You could have a drunken driving endorsement, a stoned endorsement,
an LSD endorsement, etc.  It'd be great.  "But officer, I have a
glue-sniffing endorsement!"

Just as a random data point, I performed better on reaction time
tests than all of my friends I tried it against, quite well
intoxicated on marijuana.  A simple "see the light, press the
button" type test.  I can also walk on my hands at any level of
intoxication I've reached in the last few years save one time.  (I
certainly wasn't driving then.)  

I've never had to take a field sobriety test, but I wonder if I'd
get taken in as a smartass if I walked the line on my hands...

Why does sober joe blow get to drive at 50% of the ability level of
a drunk racecar driver?  Why do people too incompetent to successfully
kill someone get off easier with "attempted murder?"

Wouldn't it be great if we had to pass driving tests that included
emergency avoidance procedures and a reaction time test such that
the bottom n percent of sober drivers now wouldn't be able to drive
an auto, period?  Correcting for a skid, breaking without locking
the tires within a certain distance, skills like that.

Oh, and we could refuse to license autos that couldn't stop 
within x feet and couldn't accelerate at .n gee under some
standard conditions.

Reckless driving and speeding fines could be weighted by the
vehicle's mass -- how are you going to hurt someone in an
automobile on a motorcycle?  Not easily.  Too bad for those
idiots in SUVs who drive too fast for their pathetic, wallowing
vehicles and tailgate other drivers...

And where are the tickets for vehicles travelling too slow 
relative to the traffic flow?  And tickets for accelerating
too slowly?

Taillights that had two colors (one for acceleration in the
direction of travel and one for acceleration opposite the
direction of travel -- there's no such thing as 'deceleration.')
and varied their intensity depending on the rate of acceleration
would provide aware drivers with more information on which to base
decisions.  

Hey, how many differentials of distance/time do you think people
notice?  Obviously we notice distance/time.  (speed)  It's
also pretty obvious we notice delta speed/time (acceleration.)
What about delta accel / time?  Do you feel that you are aware
of the rate of change of acceleration in other vehicles?  I'd
say I am, but that next differential is just not in the picture.

Rate of change of change of acceleration?  Ow. 

What happened to the common belief that saving a few lives is worth
any amount of inconvenience when it comes to driving?  "You can't
put a price on human life."  Funny, we do it with the auto every
day.  

I'm more concerned about people under the influence of incompetence
than alcohol or drugs.  (And the ones under the influence of both.)

Flame away.  :)