General > General Technical Chat
Insane overengineering of a car headlight
MadScientist:
Interesting , but has little to do with head light design.
Someone:
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 02, 2022, 01:54:59 pm ---
--- Quote from: Someone on April 02, 2022, 01:44:16 pm ---
--- Quote from: SilverSolder on April 02, 2022, 11:20:51 am ---
--- Quote from: Someone on March 31, 2022, 03:24:11 am ---[...]
Caught for drink driving (or speeding) thats an automatic fine/suspension in many jurisdictions despite being a victimless crime
[...]
--- End quote ---
Is it really victimless, though? Speeders/drinkers are subjecting others to increased risk.... so it is only victimless until it isn't?
--- End quote ---
Yes, victimless until it isnt, but even with the victim obvious, fault found, why do car vs pedestrian collisions have so few penalties applied?
--- End quote ---
It's not often a car mows down a pedestrian (at least, when they do the penalty tends to significant and the court case very public). More often, I suspect, the pedestrian gets in the way of the car. While peds have right of way over cars, physics says peds can get out of the way easier, so there's a limit to how much stupidity they can get away with.
--- End quote ---
I shall simply refer you right back to the reference you separated that quote from:
--- Quote from: Someone on March 31, 2022, 03:24:11 am ---Real world:
--- Quote from: https://revealnews.org/article/bay-area-drivers-who-kill-pedestrians-rarely-face-punishment-analysis-finds/ ---Sixty percent of the 238 motorists found to be at fault or suspected of a crime faced no criminal charges during the five-year period, CIR found in its analysis of thousands of pages of police and court records from Alameda, Contra Costa, Santa Clara, San Mateo and San Francisco counties.
When drivers did face criminal charges, punishment often was light. Licenses rarely were taken away. Of those charged, less than 60 percent had their driving privileges suspended or revoked for even one day, an automatic penalty in drunk driving arrests.
--- End quote ---
Caught for drink driving (or speeding) thats an automatic fine/suspension in many jurisdictions despite being a victimless crime, but kill someone, meh they'll get over it.
--- End quote ---
Those are the cases of people killing pedestrians because of their driving, being at fault, and charged for some offence.
Deaths, not injuries, not near misses, cases of people being killed.
The approximately 50% of pedestrian deaths that could not attribute fault to the driver(s), removed from the above.
Where fault could be attributed to the driver 60% had no action taken against them. I see you've killed a pedestrian and were at fault, please dont do it again.
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 02, 2022, 01:54:59 pm ---A better question may be why cyclists get away with so much law breaking. Mostly that's 'victim-less' but only because peds can jump out of the way easier. Quite often on my walks around here I find myself stepping into the road so a bloody cyclist can zoom by on the footpath.
--- End quote ---
Probably because the road safety figures show that cyclists running into things cause so little damage/injury/deaths compared to other vehicles? Orders of magnitude less.
PlainName:
--- Quote ---I shall simply refer you right back to the reference you separated that quote from:
--- End quote ---
I didn't separate the quote from the bit you highlight - you did, as you show in that quote!
Nevertheless, unless we want every post to quote everything that went before, some trimming is necessary. One has to assume that readers of the thread have, well, read the thread so know what it's about and what went before. The particular thing that I am commenting on is what I quote. That will necessarily skip a lot of history, but it is all there in the thread, all pre-read, all known. Nothing is being deliberately left out to obscure anything - if I meant to do that I wouldn't have quote anything at all.
--- Quote ---Where fault could be attributed to the driver 60% had no action taken against them.
--- End quote ---
OK.
--- Quote ---Probably because the road safety figures show that cyclists running into things cause so little damage/injury/deaths compared to other vehicles?
--- End quote ---
Well, cyclists do kill pedestrians, and I suspect that mostly cyclists are hit'n'run and untraceable. However, the point is that they break the law, and that's the actual arbiter of these things.
Someone:
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 03, 2022, 12:39:12 am ---
--- Quote ---Where fault could be attributed to the driver 60% had no action taken against them.
--- End quote ---
OK.
--- Quote ---Probably because the road safety figures show that cyclists running into things cause so little damage/injury/deaths compared to other vehicles?
--- End quote ---
Well, cyclists do kill pedestrians, and I suspect that mostly cyclists are hit'n'run and untraceable. However, the point is that they break the law, and that's the actual arbiter of these things.
--- End quote ---
You're tying to join things that are not equivalent: yes cyclists have and will kill pedestrians (at a tiny rate compared to cars, even when accounting for differing rates of exposure/interaction). But what rate are they prosecuted at for those occurrences? higher or lower than car drivers?
You said:
--- Quote from: dunkemhigh on April 02, 2022, 01:54:59 pm ---It's not often a car mows down a pedestrian (at least, when they do the penalty tends to significant and the court case very public).
--- End quote ---
Which was already shown to be incorrect by the quote you left out of your reply. It happens often, and most drivers dont receive significant penalties. Just look at the numbers:
https://www.bts.gov/content/transportation-fatalities-mode
2020: US 38,680 road deaths, 16% of which were pedestrians!
https://revealnews.org/article/bay-area-drivers-who-kill-pedestrians-rarely-face-punishment-analysis-finds/
Most drivers are not charged even if at fault (already quoted in this thread for those who cant be bothered to read links).
Or, are you trying to argue rates of prosecution for victimless crimes by car drivers and cyclists should be equally high? (and/or equally severe?) Which does not make sense when the outcomes/results of those different modes of transport are so different. Most jurisdictions have lower fines/penalties for victimless crimes committed by cyclists compared to cars, which in turn have lower fines/penalties compared to heavy vehicles. Acknowledging the differing risks.
Halcyon:
--- Quote from: trevers on February 14, 2022, 07:40:08 pm ---Bah! We don't need all of these things... The old way was cheaper and simpler.
Safety Glass - Non laminated was cheaper
Fuel injection - Carbs were great just a simple mechanical device, none of these new fangled computers telling MY engine how to run!
Seat belts - Just adds cost and besides isn't it safer for the passengers to be thrown clear of the wreck?
Airbags - It's a plot to sell more airbags after a crash by the automotive cabal!
Crumple Zones - Who needs all of that complicated engineering and fancy materials. I want my engine to pushed into the passenger compartment after the crash, it's faster to check for damage that way.
Radial Tires - Man give me back my bias-ply retreads, another conspiracy!
Anti-lock brakes - Again with the computers? My old non-power assisted drums worked fine.
Power steering - Just more over-engineered extras I get a free workout when parking!
etc. etc. etc...
Seriously the only person who would complain about modern headlights is someone who has never driven a car with them.
--- End quote ---
You can add automatic versus manual transmission to that list these days. I know there are purists out there who will argue that manual transmissions give them "greater control" over the vehicle, which is just bollocks in my eyes, but the fact remains, a well designed modern automatic transmission is better than old manual boxes in every way, including fuel economy.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version