It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Driverless Cars & the police?

page: 2
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 10:45 PM
link   
a reply to: Bhadhidar

I`m sure they would, the judge would laugh the DA out of court if he tried to prosecute something like that but I`m sure the police would have NO problem charging someone with it.




posted on Dec, 24 2017 @ 07:51 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm

This is the same dilemma as "if everyone stopped breaking laws, what would happen to law enforcement?". The answer to that and your OP depends on the purpose of law enforcement in the first place.

If its purpose is to eliminate "crime" (laws being broken), then law enforcement should expand when lawbreaking increases and downsize when there are no laws being broken. There's no point in a "drug enforcement agency" when no drugs are being used, sold, distributed, or created. There's no point in a homicide unit if no homicides are being committed. etc.

But if its purpose is to prevent laws being broken (crimes) and serve as the legal domestic paramilitary unit that guards a jurisdiction, then it will continue to exist regardless of the amount of laws being broken or not broken.

Not only does the second option describe our current situation with law enforcement, but it should also be expanded to include 3 more things: jobs, contracts, and the public's false sense of security. Our current law enforcement system and judicial system employ a lot of people, both through direct hires and through subcontractors. Downsizing law enforcement would affect those voting blocks, as well as give fearmongers ammunition to use against any candidates that are in favor of downsizing (you know, the "tough on crime", "be afraid of terrorists at every corner", types). This is why I think they'd simply change what crimes they focus on.

However, reducing the size of law enforcement as criminal activity decreased would save taxpayers money and create a real situation of "less government". So in theory, you'd think many "small government" types and fiscal conservatives would like this option. But many of them also seem to be the "cop worshiping, tough on crime" types, which makes it unlikely that they'd want to reduce law enforcement or the judicial system's size or scope. So once again, I think they'd just change which crimes they focused on, since that would maintain their "tough on crime" obsession, keep law enforcement jobs, and keep those subcontractors happy.



posted on Dec, 24 2017 @ 10:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: JAGStorm

Law Enforcement does not set punishment nor fines for speeding infractions. The Prosecuting Attorney, in general, has the final say in whether or not a traffic summons is prosecuted. A judge then determines if the person is guilty and if so how much their fine is.

Most states have laws that restrict the amount of funding for police departments that come from traffic citations.

The fines that are collected dont go to law enforcement but instead goes to the government entities general fund.



You have to be joking. Most tickets issued by, say, the State Patrol, never see the light of day of a Prosecuting Attorney or a Judge. All are rubber stamped and mailed out. If one takes California as an example, let's say interstate truckers, there are two fine levels- at at the discretion of the office staff- they mail the higher fine rate to the out of state trucker knowing full well it's cheaper to pay the fine than appear. Show up, even to plead guilty and that judge comes out with a fine about 1/3 of the mailed penalty. Funds from the fines go directly to the county.

You cite the way it was, not the way it is.
edit on 24-12-2017 by nwtrucker because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 24 2017 @ 04:48 PM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Actually no, they get submitted to the county prosecutor (As I stated it will vary state to state).

Using interstate trucking as an example doesn't work since they are governed by federal law in regards to what they do. They have restricted driving hours per day and a reduced DWI threshold of .02%. Drivers are required to carry a medical card from the medical examiner / coroner from the county they reside in to certify they meet all medical requirements and are required to carry that card on their persons while operating a semi. They can be stopped without reasonable suspicion or probable cause and their required documentation can be checked in addition to their manifest and visual inspection of the cargo.

Because of the intricacies involved with interstate trucking and the additional crap that goes along with it its not really a good comparison.



posted on Dec, 24 2017 @ 07:38 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: nwtrucker

Actually no, they get submitted to the county prosecutor (As I stated it will vary state to state).

Using interstate trucking as an example doesn't work since they are governed by federal law in regards to what they do. They have restricted driving hours per day and a reduced DWI threshold of .02%. Drivers are required to carry a medical card from the medical examiner / coroner from the county they reside in to certify they meet all medical requirements and are required to carry that card on their persons while operating a semi. They can be stopped without reasonable suspicion or probable cause and their required documentation can be checked in addition to their manifest and visual inspection of the cargo.

Because of the intricacies involved with interstate trucking and the additional crap that goes along with it its not really a good comparison.


Yes I'm aware of the differences....
Yes ' Federal law.'...unless the State law is stricter, then the State law trumps the Federal regulation.



posted on Dec, 24 2017 @ 10:28 PM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: nwtrucker

Actually no, they get submitted to the county prosecutor (As I stated it will vary state to state).

Using interstate trucking as an example doesn't work since they are governed by federal law in regards to what they do. They have restricted driving hours per day and a reduced DWI threshold of .02%. Drivers are required to carry a medical card from the medical examiner / coroner from the county they reside in to certify they meet all medical requirements and are required to carry that card on their persons while operating a semi. They can be stopped without reasonable suspicion or probable cause and their required documentation can be checked in addition to their manifest and visual inspection of the cargo.

Because of the intricacies involved with interstate trucking and the additional crap that goes along with it its not really a good comparison.


Yes I'm aware of the differences....
Yes ' Federal law.'...unless the State law is stricter, then the State law trumps the Federal regulation.


Uhm yeah... Look up federal preemption (Supremacy clause). Bear in mind Semi's are subject to federal law because they are engaged in interstate commerce.

My point being using Semi's is not the best comparison for your argument.



posted on Dec, 25 2017 @ 08:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: nwtrucker

Actually no, they get submitted to the county prosecutor (As I stated it will vary state to state).

Using interstate trucking as an example doesn't work since they are governed by federal law in regards to what they do. They have restricted driving hours per day and a reduced DWI threshold of .02%. Drivers are required to carry a medical card from the medical examiner / coroner from the county they reside in to certify they meet all medical requirements and are required to carry that card on their persons while operating a semi. They can be stopped without reasonable suspicion or probable cause and their required documentation can be checked in addition to their manifest and visual inspection of the cargo.

Because of the intricacies involved with interstate trucking and the additional crap that goes along with it its not really a good comparison.


Yes I'm aware of the differences....
Yes ' Federal law.'...unless the State law is stricter, then the State law trumps the Federal regulation.


Uhm yeah... Look up federal preemption (Supremacy clause). Bear in mind Semi's are subject to federal law because they are engaged in interstate commerce.

My point being using Semi's is not the best comparison for your argument.


I used the ticket example due to exceptions I've experienced over the decades having driven all 49 states, professionally. For example, it is Federally mandated that there will not be dual speed limits, between cars and trucks.This law is decades old. Apparently, forfeiture of federal highway funds is the 'penalty'......



posted on Dec, 25 2017 @ 08:59 AM
link   

originally posted by: JAGStorm
So this is part 2 to my post driverless cars and driving in the snow.

I was traveling today and noticed tons of police pulling over tons of cars which = tons of ticket income.

So imagine driverless cars. I assume they will follow all traffic laws to a T, so where is all the ticket income going to come from?
Will the police simply downsize (I doubt it). I looked it up and traffic tickets are a BILLION dollar industry!
Will the police simply move their policing to a different area, online crimes, Jaywalking, the war on drugs (lol)...


They'll just ramp up their Civil Asset Forfeiture programs and problem solved. They'll make up the difference terrorizing the public somewhere, to be sure.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 11:03 AM
link   

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: nwtrucker

Actually no, they get submitted to the county prosecutor (As I stated it will vary state to state).

Using interstate trucking as an example doesn't work since they are governed by federal law in regards to what they do. They have restricted driving hours per day and a reduced DWI threshold of .02%. Drivers are required to carry a medical card from the medical examiner / coroner from the county they reside in to certify they meet all medical requirements and are required to carry that card on their persons while operating a semi. They can be stopped without reasonable suspicion or probable cause and their required documentation can be checked in addition to their manifest and visual inspection of the cargo.

Because of the intricacies involved with interstate trucking and the additional crap that goes along with it its not really a good comparison.


Yes I'm aware of the differences....
Yes ' Federal law.'...unless the State law is stricter, then the State law trumps the Federal regulation.


Uhm yeah... Look up federal preemption (Supremacy clause). Bear in mind Semi's are subject to federal law because they are engaged in interstate commerce.

My point being using Semi's is not the best comparison for your argument.


I used the ticket example due to exceptions I've experienced over the decades having driven all 49 states, professionally. For example, it is Federally mandated that there will not be dual speed limits, between cars and trucks.This law is decades old. Apparently, forfeiture of federal highway funds is the 'penalty'......


and that law was invalidated when the Federal DOT returned control of the speed limits back to the states (1987 / 1996). Dual speed limit exists in some states and rightfully so given commercial trucks and simple motor vehicles are governed by different laws / requirements.

Either way I would imagine a driver less semi is not going to be exceeding the posted speed limit given programming. With that said I would imagine the restrictions on the number of hours truck drivers can drive in 1 day wont apply to driverless trucks making up for the strict adherence to a speed limit.

Long story short fines have nothing to do with law enforcement.
edit on 27-12-2017 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 11:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: redhorse

originally posted by: JAGStorm
So this is part 2 to my post driverless cars and driving in the snow.

I was traveling today and noticed tons of police pulling over tons of cars which = tons of ticket income.

So imagine driverless cars. I assume they will follow all traffic laws to a T, so where is all the ticket income going to come from?
Will the police simply downsize (I doubt it). I looked it up and traffic tickets are a BILLION dollar industry!
Will the police simply move their policing to a different area, online crimes, Jaywalking, the war on drugs (lol)...


They'll just ramp up their Civil Asset Forfeiture programs and problem solved. They'll make up the difference terrorizing the public somewhere, to be sure.


For which state are you referring to? States have already started passing laws that prohibit civil asset seizure.



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 11:12 AM
link   
a reply to: JAGStorm


A modest proposal: an algorithm that occasionally breaks traffic laws in relatively minor ways might save some of that revenue?


Or we can just use machine learning to automate the police function as well, along with the entire legal and legislative system.


With a little job retraining for those impacted, obviously. I mean, we can't just let the unskilled starve, right?



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 01:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: 0zzymand0s
A modest proposal: an algorithm that occasionally breaks traffic laws in relatively minor ways might save some of that revenue?


Doubtful... Who would be issued the citation?



posted on Dec, 27 2017 @ 04:23 PM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Xcathdra

originally posted by: nwtrucker

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: nwtrucker

Actually no, they get submitted to the county prosecutor (As I stated it will vary state to state).

Using interstate trucking as an example doesn't work since they are governed by federal law in regards to what they do. They have restricted driving hours per day and a reduced DWI threshold of .02%. Drivers are required to carry a medical card from the medical examiner / coroner from the county they reside in to certify they meet all medical requirements and are required to carry that card on their persons while operating a semi. They can be stopped without reasonable suspicion or probable cause and their required documentation can be checked in addition to their manifest and visual inspection of the cargo.

Because of the intricacies involved with interstate trucking and the additional crap that goes along with it its not really a good comparison.


Yes I'm aware of the differences....
Yes ' Federal law.'...unless the State law is stricter, then the State law trumps the Federal regulation.


Uhm yeah... Look up federal preemption (Supremacy clause). Bear in mind Semi's are subject to federal law because they are engaged in interstate commerce.

My point being using Semi's is not the best comparison for your argument.


I used the ticket example due to exceptions I've experienced over the decades having driven all 49 states, professionally. For example, it is Federally mandated that there will not be dual speed limits, between cars and trucks.This law is decades old. Apparently, forfeiture of federal highway funds is the 'penalty'......


and that law was invalidated when the Federal DOT returned control of the speed limits back to the states (1987 / 1996). Dual speed limit exists in some states and rightfully so given commercial trucks and simple motor vehicles are governed by different laws / requirements.

Either way I would imagine a driver less semi is not going to be exceeding the posted speed limit given programming. With that said I would imagine the restrictions on the number of hours truck drivers can drive in 1 day wont apply to driverless trucks making up for the strict adherence to a speed limit.

Long story short fines have nothing to do with law enforcement.


Law enforcement doesn't have much to do with driverless vehicles either, I'd add.

Ah, your an expert on the differences between car and trucks, now? I suggest otherwise. In very state where the speed limits were changed from split to the same, the number of accidents reduced in before-after comparisons.

The problem with driverless vehicles, especially in high traffic regions will be the combination of both driverless and driver controlled environments.



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 03:06 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

On highways and in case you missed it all states have laws that require vehicles to drive in the right lane unless passing. Some states also have laws that require vehicles of a certain tonnage that restrict the lanes they can use.

It does not change the fact states have dual speed limits today since the federal government relinquished control.

Law Enforcement would still be involved for safety inspections / cargo inspections and weight control just as they are now.


Given my background yeah I am pretty certain I know what I am talking about - respectfully.



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 07:10 AM
link   
a reply to: TheScale

Just my opinion: All the Driverless cars will be linked to a central network and their GPS coordinates will all be known to the hive mind of the central command and control. If an ambulance or a firetruck is enroute to someplace it will automatically relay its position to the central hive mind. All the driverless cars and trucks will know exactly how far these emergency vehicle are from their exact location and will pull over if necessary.. Cops.. will probably have the means to contact the hive command and control and disable any vehicle in its tracks. A driverless car high speed chance or a bank robbery getaway is totally out of the question unless done on a motorcycle which they will probably outlaw too..

Good news is all of the small town speed traps will be done away with.. I hope the bastards starve

edit on 727thk17 by 727Sky because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 07:30 AM
link   
Forget about the cops. What about the Organ Transplant Waiting List?



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 08:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: Xcathdra
a reply to: nwtrucker

On highways and in case you missed it all states have laws that require vehicles to drive in the right lane unless passing. Some states also have laws that require vehicles of a certain tonnage that restrict the lanes they can use.

It does not change the fact states have dual speed limits today since the federal government relinquished control.

Law Enforcement would still be involved for safety inspections / cargo inspections and weight control just as they are now.

Given my background yeah I am pretty certain I know what I am talking about - respectfully.


Well, in the day, professional drivers were accorded the same status as you 'legal types. Professionals. Seeing my first experiences in driving professionally go back to the mid seventies, I'd say, empirically, I fall into that category.

There is a distinct difference from 'law', from regulation, and the friction caused by enforcing those laws and regulations in the real world. You cite lane restrictions which in fact in most cases also apply to cars, as well. 'Tonnage' isn't a factor on Interstates, by the way, vehicle category is. Tonnage is usually applied on a state level usually on non-federally subsidized roads. Reality is it is used to restrict routes from use by trucks. Political motivation. There are exceptions, but they tend to prove the rule. This goes back to the pre-interstate days where one bridge with a weight restriction in one state would kill viability for trucks to compete with railways cross country. The railways would 'donate' portable scales to the states to control/restrict truck traffic.

This is the only area where I part ways with your views.

I have zero problem with hours of service restrictions, inspections of commercial vehicles, etc.. I do have a problem with the fact that the same 'safety' regulations should be applied to all vehicles and all drivers, but isn't. If the real motive was safety, it would. I would cite an example are commercial vehicles are banned from staying on the interstate going through Atlanta unless delivering/loading. One driver was cited and decided to contest the citation. When asked by the Judge on what grounds he was contesting the ticket, he responded with civil rights violations.The Judge immediately dismissed the case.

The fact is you cite law and apparently that ends any issue. I cite law in relation to physical reality and it's effect.

The real reason for commercial regulations goes back to the influence of unions and their need to similarly restrict non-union carriers and drivers. Yes, safety was the rhetoric and it is valid, to an extent. However, the motive was not safety whatsoever. It was appeasing union leadership and the obvious political support those groups engendered.

You can take this to the bank, I am more capable of deciding my hours of service, my fatigue level, my vehicle safety, be it my own equipment or a campany's, than any non-commercial driver. Period.

I do follow the laws and rules of trucking and have no violations on my record, by the way.

I will bend them, on occasion, in the right circumstances when appropriate.

Back to driverless vehicles. Tolerable with a low percentage of driverless vehicles. A high percentage, however? A physical cacophony of biblical proportions just down the road......



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 11:48 AM
link   
a reply to: nwtrucker

Yes tonnage is a state issue however since they cross state lines you run into some problems with that train of thought. Michigan has an insane top tonnage that is 10's of thousands of pounds heavier than other states do the car industry (which the weight in questions absolutely destroys their roads).

As for lane restrictions driving in the right hand lane when 2 or more lanes in the same direction are provided is required of all vehicles. Hence the reason I said the left lane was for passing and that point went to your comment about the dangers of a dual speed limit system.

A semi restricted to 55mph on a highway whose upper limit is 70mph for cars is not going to be driving in the left lane.

As for safety regulations being different... They have to be different given a semi hauling an 80k pound load is going to be built differently than a car that ways 1,500lbs +/-. Secondly because semis are engaged in interstate commerce you cant reasonably expect all 50 states,all Canadian provinces and all Mexican states to establish their own safety requirements and expect all truckers know all those laws / requirements. It is why its federal and why Mexican semis were restricted to a certain distance from the US border before being required to drop their load for another semi that meets the safety requirements to continue where the Mexican drivers left off. The same problem occurred with Canada but since Mexican trucks were eventually blocked it did not affect them (and if im not mistaken that situation has been resolved due to NAFTA agreements).

There is a fundamental difference between a personal car and a semi.

Who is going to do more damage in an accident -
A 1,500 pound car or an 80k lbs truck?

I have worked enough accidents / fatality accidents to say the truck will cause more damage.

As for who is more capable of determining their own levels I agree. However I also know and understand why semis are treated completely different than personal cars and it is done for good reason. Those same laws allow law enforcement to ensure semi drivers are in fact complying with the law (all applicable laws). Semi drivers are not engaging in a cross state / cross country road trip for personal gratification. They are engaging in interstate commerce and therefore are subject to a different and more restrictive set of laws.

I am more interested in seeing how drug cartels and human traffickers are going to exploit driver less semis.



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 02:21 PM
link   
a reply to: Xcathdra

Interim systems will (and do have) drivers with them, at least for now.

As this isn't a court with a judge and jury, we both know better.


I would be remiss in not pointing out those very regulations provide you and your ilk a very lucrative income. Even when physical evidence is entirely in the fault of the other driver, the legal point of 'regulation' is used to supplant responsibility of the source of the accident to the tune of multi-millions.

Not a bad gig.



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
I have given the whole issue of who is responsible for the behaviour of a driverless car some thought in the past, and heres what I think will happen as the technology matures.

The cars will always have a full set of manual controls, in case you need to override the computers decisions, or in case the computer malfunctions.

That means, that the person sat behind the manual controls, has to be a fully qualified driver, not under the influence of any drink or drugs, and not have any disability that would render them unable to drive the vehicle.

Based on those assumptions, that person would be wholly responsible for any legal infraction the cars computer makes, because they could have overridden it, and they would be able to be issued a ticket for being drunk, even if they were not actively driving.
edit on 28/12/2017 by BMorris because: Additional clarification



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join