Seen on the marquee outside a church in the Sonoma, CA, area this afternoon: "Our Savior is Comming Soon."
Which sparks the obvious question to a member of this august body: is the extra "m" a typo, or "o" instead of "u"?
bb
Seen on the marquee outside a church in the Sonoma, CA, area this afternoon: "Our Savior is Comming Soon."
Which sparks the obvious question to a member of this august body: is the extra "m" a typo, or "o" instead of "u"?
bb
"Oh, oh God, you're cumming soon!"
or the one I hear most "Oh, oh God, you're cumming too soon!"
:(
or the one I hear most "Oh, oh God, you're cumming too soon!"
That's where you tell them the second cumming will be worth the wait.
On the main road between Shilma and Manali in India there is a shop with a large sign advertising "Child Beer".
On the main road between Shilma and Manali in India there is a shop with a large sign advertising "Child Beer".
This does not bear thinking about.
bb
Odd signs are not that unusual here in CA. One of the oddest that I personally saw was a speed limit sign in a local hotel parking lot that set the speed limit to 7 1/2 MPH.
One of the oddest that I personally saw was a speed limit sign in a local hotel parking lot that set the speed limit to 7 1/2 MPH
I think this goes back to the early days of flight when aircraft were limited to taxiing 'no faster than a man can walk'. A place I worked at had the same signs and any employee that was caught 'speeding' was written up. Of course, 'speeding' was defined by supervisors as 'you were going too fast in the compound'.
The thing about the sign is I sent the photo I took of it to some friends and got back a link to a site that had 20-30 of those oddball signs. I seem to recall one said 2 5/8 MPH.
20-30 of those oddball signs
Depending on where they were located, you may want to see if they make more sense if converted into kilometres per hour. They may have been signs with miles per hour equivalents of local kilometre per hour limits.
San Diego, they don't, and we never used the metric system for speed limits.
The oddity to me is the difficulty of reading a speedometer to that degree of accuracy. I don't know about your speedometer, but mine hardly moves until I'm doing at least 5 mph and it is definitely not suitable for determining speed in 1/2 mph increments.
San Diego, they don't, and we never used the metric system for speed limits.
The oddity to me is the difficulty of reading a speedometer to that degree of accuracy. I don't know about your speedometer, but mine hardly moves until I'm doing at least 5 mph and it is definitely not suitable for determining speed in 1/2 mph increments.
I did a Freedom of Information Act enquiry to my locval UK police force. They put me onto a site on the accuracy of ordinary car speedometers which admitted that some speedometers are known to be 8mph wrong when the new car is sold and this is legal. I think most people know the theoretical error allowed by police when measuring speed on the road - and it is generally far less then 8mph.
When I bought an (American brand) car in June I asked for a rolling road comparison between indicated and actual speed - the company refused on the grounds they don't have the equipment
I seem to recall one said 2 5/8 MPH
My guess is that was intended to mean vehicles could not overtake (or run over) someone walking at about the average speed.
Odd signs are not that unusual here in CA. One of the oddest that I personally saw was a speed limit sign in a local hotel parking lot that set the speed limit to 7 1/2 MPH.
There is a Wal-Mart Distribution Center with that as the posted "yard" speed limit in Indiana. When I asked about it, evidently the safety officer at that location went with it "because it's memorable," once you see it, you're not likely to forget it any time soon.
you're not likely to forget it any time soon
Yes, very true. I saw my 7 1/2 mph sign 3 years ago.
One of the things I've noticed about driving in a parking lot is that the driver drives at a speed they feel is safe, and the pedestrian views the driver's speed as unsafe.
And then there are the drivers and pedestrians who can't wait for you to finish backing out of a parking slot. I've lost count of the drivers that sped up so they could squeeze through the decreasing gap between my moving vehicle and the cars parked behind me. Same goes for pedestrians.
Going off topic for a moment.
In another thread, the discussion touched on Amazon opening a bookstore in San Diego, and other places. I said I would let people know what the store was like. My wife and I finally got around to paying the store a visit. We were underwhelmed.
The store was very small, about a fifth of the floor space of most bookstores. The books offered for sale seemed to be books that Amazon is trying to promote. Very few authors in my favorite genre of Science Fiction; there was about 30 feet of shelf space for that genre and the arrangement of the books resulted in each book taking up a lot of space. My wife checked out another area of the store, and she said the store was showcasing their 'Fire' series of hardware. The other customers were like us, roaming around checking out the store and apparently little interest in the books.
the odd speed limits on the signs are most likely just to get your attention and make you think about how fast you are going.
I'm not familiar with a rolling road comparison.
You are right about the inaccuracy of the speedometer. In general, there are two factors that affect the indicated speed. 1) the accuracy of the meter its self. 2) the actual circumference of the tires.
The speedometer cable is driven by the driveshaft. A given number of driveshaft rotations equates to a given speed, and the faster the cable turns the greater your speed. However, tires of different sizes will make the same number of revolutions for a given number of driveshaft rotations. Thus the greater the circumference of the tire, the higher the speed. The speedometer will indicate the same speed for two different sizes of tires, since it is linked to the driveshaft.
If you want to check your actual speed against indicated speed. Find a road that has distance markers. Time yourself as you drive at a set speed for a given distance. Compute your actual speed and compare it to your set speed.
In the UK, the authorities sometimes use displays which show your speed with a warning to slow down if you're breaking the limit - supposedly these are more effective but less remunerative than speed cameras, and they're easy to move around since they don't rely on lines painted on the road.
According to the displays, the speedometer on my car is consistently optimistic by about 10% across the range.
AJ
In the UK, the authorities sometimes use displays which show your speed with a warning to slow down if you're breaking the limit - supposedly these are more effective but less remunerative than speed cameras, and they're easy to move around since they don't rely on lines painted on the road.
In the U.S. and Canada mobile (display) units have been seeing use since the late 90's. It also isn't unusual to see them used going into construction zones.
Also, they're becoming more common as permanent installs where there is a pronounced speed limit decrease, and/or where a turn advisory speed is well below posted speeds.
The speedometer cable is driven by the driveshaft.
The majority of modern vehicles do not have a speedometer cable but instead get the readings from various sensors in the drive-line. I have seen speedometers give readings when the vehicle is idling in park.
I guess I'm showing my age.
Regardless of cable or sensor, the speedometer indication is a function of how fast the driveshaft rotates.
the speedometer indication is a function of how fast the driveshaft rotates.
I understand what you are saying and in most cases that is true. (Personally, I prefer the old cable system. All the computerized garbage is too vulnerable.)
All the computerized garbage is too vulnerable
Too right, often the computers are programmed to shut the car down if any sensor stops working. I had a drive sensor develop an intermittent fault and the car just turned off, regardless of where I was or what it was doing. It took months of messing around and inconvenience for them to isolate it to a blood $50 sensor that cost $350 to replace.
It took months of messing around and inconvenience for them to isolate it to a blood $50 sensor
Been there, done that, saved the labor costs by replacing it myself.
Do you realize that the ONLY things the operator has 100% control of on a modern vehicle are Fuel cap, Fluid reservoir caps, Dipsticks, door handle and lock, and Hood and Trunk releases. Practically every system of the vehicle runs through the computer.
I hear the questions about brakes and steering coming so I'll answer. All vehicles have power assist brakes and most, if not all, have Anti-lock Braking Systems (ABS). If the computer or ABS unit fails the brakes are not as effective. The same goes for the steering. If you have ever had the power assist steering go out on your vehicle, you understand what I mean.
Been there, done that, saved the labor costs by replacing it myself.
Wasn't able to do that with this one, you needed to lift the damn motor part out to get at the sucker, and I didn't have the gear to do that safely.
... do that safely.
Sometimes I take shortcuts I know I shouldn't. Fortunately I've never gotten seriously injured.
oo right, often the computers are programmed to shut the car down if any sensor stops working. I had a drive sensor develop an intermittent fault and the car just turned off, regardless of where I was or what it was doing. It took months of messing around and inconvenience for them to isolate it to a blood $50 sensor that cost $350 to replace.
Interesting. I used to have a 2007 Dodge Nitro. I had a couple of incidents where the computer that controlled the dash instruments re-booted while I was driving on the interstate. The engine never shut down.
Interesting. I used to have a 2007 Dodge Nitro. I had a couple of incidents where the computer that controlled the dash instruments re-booted while I was driving on the interstate. The engine never shut down.
We have a three lane roundabout (traffic circle) nearby. A friend was going around in the company of heavy lorries when his main chip failed. The engine stopped and he lost power steering so he couldn't cruise out of danger! He did live to drive another day.
As for the things in the control of the driver, my doors are controlled by computer - get within a metre and the door unlocks, touch a particular point from outside and the doors and boot /trunk lock. Unless I am physically within the car the engine will not start and steering is locked. Windscreen wipers and lights are computer controlled, ....
A computer controlled car can be a wonderful thing, however:
1) A hardware failure can leave you trapped in a missile that is hurtling down a road at 65+ mph and accelerating with you having little to no control over its speed and path.
2) Software programmers are notorious for bugs in their final software. Given a specific combination of circumstances not considered by the program, the software may direct the car to do something the driver is not prepared to handle. An inadequately tested software module may also contain faulty logic that results in a poor choice of how to respond to a specific situation.
3) The programmer's decisions define how we drivers must interface with our cars. Not all of us agree with the programmer's decisions.
A computer controlled car can be a wonderful thing, however:
Not sure if it's a subset of these or a number 4 - but the computer could override the driver's decision and cause an accident. Don't forget about the Airbus that crashed because the computer control wouldn't let the pilot take more drastic avoidance actions.
Not sure if it's a subset of these or a number 4
I suppose it could be a subset of 2, but it is definitely worthy of being a standalone item. :)
I find it bizarre that they're pressing ahead with self-driving cars before they've got self-driving trains cracked. There have been a number of crashes recently that computer control, with appropriate sensors to detect other traffic on the line, might have averted.
AJ
I agree. They are road testing computer controlled cars in California. There have been a couple of mishaps. If I recall correctly, the developers didn't use the term 'design error'.
A computer controlled car can be a wonderful thing, however:
Some months back I saw a documentary style video on the use of the self-driving cars. They had four or five of the same car driving in single and multiple lane conditions, and all went well, until they introduced on human driver car behaving in a typical highway manner. A couple of quick cases of cutting the computer car off and they had them hitting each other. And an almost contact swerve had the computer cars braking to avoid a hit that didn't happen.
The voice over said the issue the exercise showed was where people could tell the difference between a slight drift in a lane and a clear cut off slide, the computers couldn't - they simply saw a closing car or didn't spot it at all because the cars didn't have side radar, just front and rear.
I did not mean to infer the computer was driving the car.
The computer reads its sensors and makes decisions on how it should direct the car's subsystems to function. If a sensor fails, the computer does not know it failed and responds to the indication it receives. That response may be something that the driver is not expecting, such as cruise control suddenly accelerating the car, or even worse, shutting down the engine in the middle of dense, high-speed highway traffic with half or more of your fellow drivers having an inconsiderate 'get out of my way' attitude.
I did not mean to infer the computer was driving the car.
Two subjects going in this thread right now:
1. Computer controls on human driven cars causing problems, such as the one I had with the intermittent sensor. The computer shut the engine down if it didn't get a sensor reading every 'x' seconds. Let it sit and often the sensor would come back on line, but it was annoying when traveling between towns 40 km apart, or more.
2. Computer controlled self-driving cars, and the issues they have.
BTW, the first documentary I saw on a self-driving car under computer control was back in 1980. They had working models then, and still haven't perfected the system. The same documentary had an article on using alloy frames and composite bodies for street cars, and showed they would be cheaper to run, no dearer to make, and safer - but you still can't get such cars legally road registered in most countries.
but you still can't get such cars legally road registered in most countries.
Unfortunately they can be registered in California, and they are undergoing testing on public roads in the San Francisco area. I've read articles on the tests, but the articles did not address the road and weather conditions.
One of my concerns is that a rain, snow, or dust storm will confuse the computer and cause an accident.
One of my concerns is that a rain, snow, or dust storm will confuse the computer and cause an accident.
...and highway construction, in particular traffic diversions, as well as traffic control devices not where the vehicle computer expects them to be. (New Stop signs, stop lights, (construction/safety) flaggers, etc)
highway construction
On that, ever notice how they put up the signs that say Road Works when it quite clearly isn't working properly.
hehehe
Road Works
In the US it's generally Road Work, not Road Works. Doesn't have the same implication.
In the US it's generally Road Work, not Road Works.
And so often instead of signs with words, they just have that poor guy trying to open his umbrella.
My favorite was when I was posted in the UK and saw the PSA trucks. Always guaranteed to see People Standing Around.
Some months back I saw a documentary style video on the use of the self-driving cars.
I didn't see the documentary, but what you're describing is predictable, especially in the early stages of developing that type of software. The software will eventually improve.
Unfortunately, when you add in a human, the human will do things the computer software is not expecting. Since no code exists for that human action, there is no telling what the computer will have the car do. Hopefully, the default condition is to brake to avoid the danger without swerving.
Some months back I saw a documentary style video on the use of the self-driving cars. They had four or five of the same car driving in single and multiple lane conditions, and all went well, until they introduced on human driver car behaving in a typical highway manner.
According to the manual my car "watches" the white lines on each side of the traffic lane and squalks if you get too close. Thankk goodness it hasn't been activated (I don't know if it is even fitted like some of the other "features" such as switching the engine off if you stop in traffic for three minutes and restarting if the car in front moves. I can do without all this - it is supposed to e a run of the mill standard production model from one of the biggest US companies (therefore not Tesla!)
According to the manual my car "watches" the white lines on each side of the traffic lane and squalks if you get too close.
My uncle used to have a horse that would take him home when he was dead drunk. The barman would load him on the horse, the horse would walk home, walk up on the front verandah, stand beside the old lounge out the front, lean over, and dump dear old unk on the lounge, then walk off to his stall. With the slow traffic of most city traffic now, I wonder if i wouldn't be better off selling the car and buying a horse.
With the slow traffic of most city traffic now, I wonder if i wouldn't be better off selling the car and buying a horse.
Not in the US. There are a number of examples of people getting DUI convictions for riding a horse drunk.
Not in the US. There are a number of examples of people getting DUI convictions for riding a horse drunk.
Worst overreach I'm aware of is a DUI for operating a riding lawnmower in his front yard adjacent to a county highway(making it part of the highway right-of-way) with an open container(beer).
Surprised they didn't nail him for not having a license plate on the lawn mower, proof of insurance(for a licensed motor vehicle), and potentially no drivers license on his person as well. Completely disregarding that he never went outside his own property line, and never entered a lane of traffic.
Worst overreach I'm aware of is a DUI for operating a riding lawnmower in his front yard adjacent to a county highway(making it part of the highway right-of-way) with an open container(beer).
Having reached "that age" I had to have my driving licence renewed after many many decades. They let my lawnmower licence and motorbike licences continue but the bar stewards took away my tracked vehicle licence (so I can no longer drive a tank on the public road) and took away my licence to drive an electric vehicle (so no Tesla or hybrid vehicle for me). I can still drive a Viper or a Cinquecento on the German autobahns where there is no speed limit (I'm told).
Referring to another post, over here we can crawl, dance, hop, walk, ride a bike, use a motorised or non-motorised scooter on any road except motorways. If there is a special cycle lane we can (and it appears every cyclist does) forgo the cycle lane and ride on the highway.
My uncle used to have a horse that would take him home when he was dead drunk. The barman would load him on the horse, the horse would walk home, walk up on the front verandah, stand beside the old lounge out the front, lean over, and dump dear old unk on the lounge, then walk off to his stall. With the slow traffic of most city traffic now, I wonder if i wouldn't be better off selling the car and buying a horse.
You can get a DUI while riding a horse on public roadway right-of-ways in the U.S. Drunken bicycling can likewise get a DUI if the officer wants to pursue it.
Australia had a case a few years back where a guy got a DUI for riding a small motorized cooler home, top speed, about 5MPH, IIRC.
I can somewhat understand the horse(but not completely), but I think the others have completely lost the plot on intent of the law vs letter of the law. The biggest factor on the harsh DUI laws was in response to the danger a drunk driver presents to others, not themselves. A horse could get several other people seriously injured or killed in the right (wrong) circumstances. But the guy on a bicycle or motorized (very low speed) cooler? If he has a motor vehicle accident, he's probably going to be the one dead so long as the other motorist isn't seriously impaired themselves.
computerized garbage
Yeah, I agree. One of the worst designed things ever installed on a car are airbags.
My truck has been showing an airbag error light for years. The dealer doesn't know why, and extended warrantee expired. There are four units and the wiring harness that may be at fault. They have to replace a unit to see if it fixes the problem, and once installed, I bought the part. If its the wiring harnass, last item to be exchanged, the repair will cost over $5,000. Might as well replace the truck.
The impact sensor, which triggers deployment of the airbag, will only do its thing in a head-on crash if the force of impact is within about 5 degrees of the direction of travel. That means if you strike something or hit by something other than head-on (or rear-ended), no airbag.
The airbag should fill the space between you and what you might hit, and absorb the impact so your body doesn't hit the steering wheel or dashboard. Instead, it is designed to slam into you and drive you back against your seat. Result, broken noses, friction burns, etc.
The airbag should fill the space between you and what you might hit, and absorb the impact so your body doesn't hit the steering wheel or dashboard. Instead, it is designed to slam into you and drive you back against your seat.
I have a similar problem with the darn seat belts. The one in my truck cuts across my neck when I use it. I think I would prefer risking a ticket or an accident without that belt across my neck. I can only guess what damages might be done by the belt in an accident.
The one in my truck cuts across my neck
I know many people who have such and issue, and they put their arm over the seat belt before the plug it in to the stalk. Not sure how legal it is, but it means they have it on.
I know many people who have such and issue, and they put their arm over the seat belt before the plug it in to the stalk. Not sure how legal it is, but it means they have it on.
I have another little problem. I have to balance a portable oxygen tank I use during all trips outside. I plan on getting one of those portable concentrator's as soon as the current contract expires for the one at home. Can't afford both right now although the research into the portables looks great.
I have a similar problem with the darn seat belts. The one in my truck cuts across my neck when I use it.
If it is a newer vehicle, check and see if the upper guide can be adjusted. Most newer ones can slide up and down to help eliminate neck rub.
Also, on many new vehicles, the seatbelt retractor is part of the airbag system. When the airbags deploy, a chare is set off in the seatbelt system to force it to recoil and lock.
Personally, I think people should learn to drive better and stop relying on the vehicle safety systems to protect them.
If it is a newer vehicle, check and see if the upper guide can be adjusted.
Its a 1993 model without that guide. Although the mileage is extremely low only around a 150k.
Also, on many new vehicles, the seatbelt retractor is part of the airbag system. When the airbags deploy, a chare is set off in the seatbelt system to force it to recoil and lock.
Airbags aren't intended for low-speed collisions, so setting one off when traveling at an indeterminate speed (20 to 30 mph) it's often more harmful than beneficial. However, I don't think many people 'injured' in serious car wrecks (accidents occurring when both cars are traveling faster than 50 mph) would argue they'd have suffered fewer injuries if they hadn't worn their seat belts.
Personally, I think people should learn to drive better and stop relying on the vehicle safety systems to protect them.
Let's replace the airbags with a big, sharp spike in the middle of the wheel. Studies have shown that people drive more recklessly/dangerously when protected by good safety features, such that the risk to themselves stays about the same BUT this drives up the risk to others. Having a big, sharp reminder of danger right in front of them should hopefully make them more careful so reducing risk to others, and if they aren't, chances are they will quickly take themselves out of the equation, thus also reducing risk to others.
Abolish speed limits - think of it as evolution in action. (tip of the hat to Niven)
Abolish speed limits - think of it as evolution in action. (tip of the hat to Niven)
Problem with that is, much like with DUI(Which often mixed with high speed, at least before major crackdowns on DUI), that the person speeding isn't the one who ends up dead. In fact, they're often the one who walks away. Unlike their passengers, or whomever they hit.
Problem with that is,............. that the person speeding isn't the one who ends up dead. In fact, they're often the one who walks away. Unlike their passengers, or whomever they hit.
Over here that is "causing death / injury by dangerous driving" which can mean being a guest of Her Majesty for a while
Over here that is "causing death / injury by dangerous driving" which can mean being a guest of Her Majesty for a while
Yes, that's all well and good, except for the terrible part involving someone needing to seriously injured or killed by a drunk driver before you can prosecute them.
Which is where the special carve-out for DUI and the push for strict enforcement came from. Rather than wait until someone gets hurt, remove the dangerous (drunk) driver from the equation before he can hurt anyone else.
But that circles back to DUI laws being initially intended to prevent drunk drivers from harming others. It was not intended as a means for law enforcement to harass non-dangerous persons doing low risk/low(to no) disruption activities while in possession of alcohol or under its influence.
But that circles back to DUI laws being initially intended to prevent drunk drivers from harming others.
which is why it's crazy to apply it to a person on a horse.
which is why it's crazy to apply it to a person on a horse.
No, it's not so crazy.
I've talked with my mom about this. She grew up on a farm and had a horse, which she rode to high school on occasion.
A well trained riding horse will follow directions from the rider even at risk of injury. You can crash a horse, you could run over a pedestrian with a horse.
A drunk on a horse is only marginally less dangerous than a drunk on a motorcycle.
I think it comes down to how well trained the horse is, and how smart it is. Many moons ago we used to get milk delivered each morning in bottles. The local milkman had a horse drawn cart to deliver the milk. The horse walked down the road by itself while he ran to the houses with the full bottles and returned to swap the empties with full ones on the cart. If he needed more than he carried a whistle stopped the horse. It knew the route better than he did, it seemed.
Also, as I mentioned earlier, my uncle's horse took him home, despite him being out of it. It was trained in what to do, and did it at a walk. The horse was never a danger to anyone when doing that.
Sure an angry drunk in full control could cause an issue, but then the police response should be based on the person's actions not on them being drunk.
I think it comes down to how well trained the horse is, and how smart it is. Many moons ago we used to get milk delivered each morning in bottles. The local milkman had a horse drawn cart to deliver the milk. The horse walked down the road by itself while he ran to the houses with the full bottles and returned to swap the empties with full ones on the cart. If he needed more than he carried a whistle stopped the horse. It knew the route better than he did, it seemed.
That's not a difference in either how well the horse is trained or in how smart the horse is. That's a difference in what the horse is trained to do.
but then the police response should be based on the person's actions not on them being drunk.
No, the police response should be based on what the law is. If you don't like the law, complain to the appropriate legislative body, not the police.
No, the police response should be based on what the law is.
I don't know about in the US but in Australia the police are allowed to, and a re supposed to, use their discretion as to what the situation merits. Sadly, that is happening less and less.
Sadly, that is happening less and less.
Is it happening less or is their discretion resulting in the situation meriting a more aggressive stance than some may feel in appropriate.
Is it happening less or is their discretion resulting in the situation meriting a more aggressive stance than some may feel in appropriate.
I think it's more instructions from on high to go hard-line.
instructions from on high to go hard-line.
Regardless of it being a personal decision or instructions from on high, going hard-line creates its own problems.
When the police escalate their response to someone breaking the law, the criminals increase the manner and level of resistance they use to avoid being arrested. Which in turn results in the situation getting more and more out of control.
instructions from on high to go hard-line.
Regardless of it being a personal decision or instructions from on high, going hard-line creates its own problems.
When the police escalate their response to someone breaking the law, the criminals increase the manner and level of resistance they use to avoid being arrested. Which in turn results in the situation getting more and more out of control.
Regardless of it being a personal decision or instructions from on high, going hard-line creates its own problems.
When the police escalate their response to someone breaking the law, the criminals increase the manner and level of resistance they use to avoid being arrested. Which in turn results in the situation getting more and more out of control.
I think Ernest was not discussing the level of responses by police to "criminals", but to generally law-abiding citizens who have made a mistake or are causing some disturbance. I think the orders from "on high" are a result of community pressures for a "zero tolerance" attitude by police, while the preference of front-line police is to restore calm and order, but with the option of formal action when deemed necessary to adequately deter repeats of "offences".
I think the attitude of trying a low-key approach first was best for the long-term interests of the community.
I think the attitude of trying a low-key approach first was best for the long-term interests of the community.
I agree - and it's that approach that makes the difference between a Peace Officer and a Law Enforcement Officer. The first is caring for the community, and the second is only pushing up fines levied and money wasted on court cases that could be avoided.
Yes, Ernest.
I was a BAD DRUNK in my day, and I did not stop drinking until after the age of 30 - but I cannot recall an instance where I thought any of our 'Peace Officers' was NOT as tolerant as I allowed them to be ... mind you, I woke up with unexplained bruising after blackouts fairly often.
Yes, Ernest.
Many, many years ago, when I was a wee lad during the Jurasic Period where I helped to program dinosaurs I was out late one Friday night while in a small country town. About a half hour after closing time the I saw the local cops stop beside a man slumped on a bench in the park. They checked his pilse, breathing, looked at his face with a torch, and one said, "It's Bob xxxx. He got laid off today. We best take him home and pour him into his bed." I late found out they took him instead of to the station. Today, they'd toss him in a paddywagon and he'd be before the ebak in the morning for a fine for being drunk and disorderly, despite being totally out of it. Yes, times have changed, and I don't think it's for the better.
About a half hour after closing time the I saw the local cops stop beside a man slumped on a bench in the park. They checked his pilse, breathing, looked at his face with a torch, and one said, "It's Bob xxxx. He got laid off today. We best take him home and pour him into his bed." I late found out they took him instead of to the station. Today, they'd toss him in a paddywagon and he'd be before the ebak in the morning for a fine for being drunk and disorderly, despite being totally out of it. Yes, times have changed, and I don't think it's for the better.
The same is happening in the UK; I put it down to the old times when a copper had the same beat for decades, went round on a bike or Shanks' Pony and knew everybody. Now they seem not to know what legs and feet are for and don't know a soul; they even use the word "enforcement" everywhere as a threat.
On top of that some are plain stupid. A friend, returning from the pub was stopped for being (admittedly) well over the alcohol limit and formally charged. The copper was new and had upset everyone in the village and was furious when my friend pointed out that he was the passenger in a car registered in and driven by a man from Sweden. Eventually the copper was so badly insulted and treated that he had to be removed
A drunk on a horse
This is starting to remind me of the movie 'Cat Belew' where you had a drunk rider (Lee Marvin) on a drunk horse (Not Named?). :)
the movie 'Cat Belew' where you had a drunk rider
Cat Ballou (1965 Jane Fonda & Lee Marvin)
My favorite line: (After a drunken Kid Shelleen shoots at a target on the side of a barn) "He did it! He missed the barn!"
Cat Belew
Cat Ballou - one of the funniest films every
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cat_Ballou
Yes, that's all well and good, except for the terrible part involving someone needing to seriously injured or killed by a drunk driver before you can prosecute them.
Very strict DUI laws probably saved my life, or someone else.
The real nature of alcoholism is almost universally misunderstood.
My metabolism (almost certainly genetic) is very different to the majority when it processes alcohol. What I felt the FIRST TIME I got drunk was very different to most.
It took some time for me to become a real danger to the community.
For some time I was "protected" because I would throw up and go to sleep at about twice the common DUI limit of 0.08%.
I gradually developed a tolerance to the point where I could still walk and find my car at over three times that limit.
My experience suggests that the brain's instincts for self preservation become dis-functional at about three times the limit.
I reached a point where (in blackouts) I could get so drunk I was INCAPABLE of thinking I was too drunk to drive safely, but I could still my car.
***
After two DUIs in quick succession (0.16 and 0.26), I was facing jail if I was caught at those levels again.
It was ONLY THAT THREAT that allowed me to make the decision that I should NEVER have the first drink -- If I did it was inevitable I would on occasions get so drunk I would believe I was capable of driving!?
***
Thanks to those strict DUI laws, it is now over 28 years since my last drink, and I'm still here to annoy you all. :-)
The one in my truck cuts across my neck
I was back east with my boss in a rental car in the mid-80's. The seat belt system was one of those that you sat in the seat, shut the door, and a drive system pulled the seat belt from the glove box area, up the post, toward you, and over your shoulder.
My boss was driving, so when we pulled into a gas station, he asked if the fill tube was on my side of the car. I opened the door and leaned out to look for the fill tube. The seat belt retractor engaged starting to pull the seatbelt back toward the glove box. The seat belt was pulled across the back of my neck and pulled my head down toward the glove box. I was lucky it didn't break my neck.
I suspect the system hurt a number of people for it stopped being used.
I suspect the system hurt a number of people for it stopped being used.
That's not the only problem with the automated shoulder belts. There were also problems with people sliding out from under them if they didn't fasten the manual lap belt.
hat's not the only problem with the automated shoulder belts. There were also problems with people sliding out from under them if they didn't fasten the manual lap belt.
I wonder at times how many injuries have been caused because of the dang seat belts. I will admit they do prevent major injuries in crashes and other related accidents.
I have a similar problem with the darn seat belts. The one in my truck cuts across my neck when I use it. I think I would prefer risking a ticket or an accident without that belt across my neck. I can only guess what damages might be done by the belt in an accident.
There are seat belt extenders available for many cars that will alleviate these problems. They are free from dealers for some cars. I know I've had them for Dodges and Chevys.
There are seat belt extenders available for many cars that will alleviate these problems.
I've seen some that attach to the belt up the side and the belt down the shoulder to lower the angle, but yet to see one that's legal to use, due to how they interfere with the operation of the retraction system.
If the dealer has it as a legitimate part number for the car I have to assume they're legal in this country.
If the dealer has it as a legitimate part number for the car I have to assume they're legal in this country.
I haven't yet seen one that is supplied as a genuine spare part for the vehicle. All have been third party after-market items.
The only seat belt extensions I've seen as genuine parts are a section to expand the belt length for people with larger bellies by having, and those do not affect where the belt crosses over the shoulder.
The only seat belt extensions I've seen as genuine parts are a section to expand the belt length for people with larger bellies by having, and those do not affect where the belt crosses over the shoulder.
True, but an extension will affect where it crosses the neck.
If the dealer has it as a legitimate part number for the car I have to assume they're legal in this country.
Bad assumption in the US. There are many things that can be sold legally, but it is illegal to use them. Pepper spray is a good example. You can buy it, you can carry it with you, but if you use it, there is a possibility of being arrested even if you were justified in its use.
There are many things that can be sold legally, but it is illegal to use them.
Last I heard some states in the US having a radar detector is legal, while it's against the law in others. There are even some genuine high-performance car parts that aren't legal to put on some cars in some states, due to different laws on performance etc. Then you get into genuine parts that are listed for that vehicle, but can be put on and work, but not a listed spare while still a genuine part.
back in the 1970s I used to work for Kawasaki Australia, and one part of my job was to identify parts from different models that could be fitted as spares for the bikes the company raced. The rules required you fitted genuine manufacturer spares, but it didn't have to be a spare designed for that model if you could find one off another model that fit and was also a genuine spare.
Last I heard some states in the US having a radar detector is legal, while it's against the law in others. There are even some genuine high-performance car parts that aren't legal to put on some cars in some states, due to different laws on performance etc.
That's thanks to stock car racing. Just because you can't drive the car on public roads doesn't mean the car's owner doesn't have use of private land/private tracks/closed courses upon which it is legal to operate a vehicle with such parts installed. It just doesn't drive itself to where it will used.
I've seen some that attach to the belt up the side and the belt down the shoulder to lower the angle, but yet to see one that's legal to use, due to how they interfere with the operation of the retraction system.
That factor plus the fact that the only ones I have ever run across. I had to fight to get them hooked up properly each time I used the belt. More trouble to use the attachment than it was worth. And now with my increased health issues I sure don't need added stress. Lately my o2 rate has been averaging around 85 and PR has been around 120-130. I have been able to keep those numbers under control however without going to a hospital or telling the doctor.
More trouble to use the attachment than it was worth.
A decade ago when I bought my latest vehicle the major deciding factor for me was 'At what height off the ground was the driver's seat?' This was because most cars were low slung and when you sat down your rear was below your knees, thus getting up put too much strain on a bad back. If I ever buy another car a secondary factor will be ho low down the side pillar does the seat belt shoulder bracket slide? My current car has a small amount of slide so it goes down to be merely annoying instead of instantly throttling when put on. In either case, the belt doesn't go over the point of the shoulder of anyone under 6 feet, but will do so when slid all the way up for a person 6 feet 6 inches.
One of the worst designed things ever installed on a car are airbags.
As far as 'safety items' go, I agree 100%. Emissions wise, the worst thing is the catalytic converter. I once heard the way it operates is "like filtering the mess to cure diarrhea"
One of the vehicles I own was the first model year that it was equipped with the airbag. Since it was not a new body style year, all the parts from the previous year were interchangeable. I went to the junkyard and got an older steering column and 15 minutes later - no more airbag. I removed the warning bulb from the instrument panel and haven't had a single problem. My ex-father-in-law was more injured by the airbag than the accident he was in with the same model vehicle.
My ex-father-in-law was more injured by the airbag than the accident he was in with the same model vehicle.
Part of that is drivers have to be retrained as to how to hold the steering wheel. If your grip is at 10 O'clock and 2 O'clock(or higher, doing the "aim high in steering" thing), which was the older method, "for better alertness." In the event of an air bag deployment, it will likely burn you, and possibly break your arms.
Which is why the new instruction is to grip the lower half of the steering wheel, with 8 O'clock and 4 O'clock being about as high as you want to go. However, there still are defensive driving schools/courses/instructors out there teaching the old method. Which is all well and good if you're driving a heavy commercial truck(which don't have airbags), but anything smaller....
In the event of an air bag deployment, it will likely burn you, and possibly break your arms.
While I agree with your assessment, his injuries were all facial caused by the airbag system, not his hands/arms.
I don't care how soft a pillow is, if it hits you at about 200 mph, it's going to hurt.
In the event of an air bag deployment, it will likely burn you, and possibly break your arms.
Another injury issue with Air Bags is broken ribs, particularly with smaller adults and children in the front passenger seat.