High Tech Cars - Dangerous

[skye]

Do not like high tech things...

That's why I'm all for a classic car...like this 1930s Duesenberg Murphy coupe.

there you have it.

OH View attachment 155605

Gorgeous isn't it ?

You wanna just jump into the driver's seat. OOO-Weeee!

love to!!!!

 

[WinterBorn]

Distractions are a danger anytime someone is driving. That includes messing with the radio or trying to find a piece of paper with the address on it.

Most touch screens are no more distracting than your car stereo. It is the person who decides to use the app and takes their eyes off the road without pulling over. It is the person's fault if they wreck. Because there are things that CAN distract you, does not mean you use them.

The responsibility is solely the driver's.

. If only people were as rational as you wished they were, but anymore the percentages are falling to the bottom as far as the rational goes. It is getting worse, and the tech world is going way to fast for the generations to absorb it, and to become responsible with it. If your family member is killed or injured by one of these green horns, you will be singing a sad tune.

Yes, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a high tech car. But then, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a 1959 VW too. The technology is not why I would be sad.

But, while I would be sad, I would not rant against the technology. I believe we are responsible for our actions and shouldn't blame technology.

. If technology was proven to be why your loved one was killed, then yes your attitude would change immediately, and especially if you looked and saw that the stats we're stacking against the technology because more and more wrecks were being caused by it. Sometimes sadly it takes something to hit home before a person feels or can relate to what happened to other people in the same situation.

How does any car technology cause a wreck?

 

[beagle9]

Distractions are a danger anytime someone is driving. That includes messing with the radio or trying to find a piece of paper with the address on it.

Most touch screens are no more distracting than your car stereo. It is the person who decides to use the app and takes their eyes off the road without pulling over. It is the person's fault if they wreck. Because there are things that CAN distract you, does not mean you use them.

The responsibility is solely the driver's.

Of course. This is why drivers should always pull over first is/whenever they are going to use the touchscreen (or their cell phone screen)..

As for the degree of distraction as compared with your car stereo, if you program it to your stations, and you have only 3 or 4 at most, you can tune in with just a touch of a button. The AAA study (and the ABC TV report) showed the dash touchscreen to be far more involved than that, and thus, dangerous). Let's not get denialist about a danger.

And how many of the functions or apps are required to operate the car? Or are they navigation and other luxury items?

I drove a Tesla a year or so ago. You don't get more high tech than that. And everything is controlled from the touch screen. After a couple of minutes, I could do everything I needed with minimal distractions.

Plus, one of the new high tech items going in more and more cars is a warning for the driving if they drift in their lane, leave their lane, or don't see a car.

Changing the subject doesn't change the conclusions of the study.

"Look at how long my eyes are off the road."

I did not change the subject.

And yes, if someone plays with the technology instead of driving, they are a danger. But because the technology is there does not mean you have to use it while driving. THAT is a choice made by the driver.

. When that choice gets multiplied by say 240 million let's say, and it causes other citizens to die by the thousands, then removal of the technology might be warranted until a safer technology can be installed or is at hand.

 

[beagle9]

Distractions are a danger anytime someone is driving. That includes messing with the radio or trying to find a piece of paper with the address on it.

Most touch screens are no more distracting than your car stereo. It is the person who decides to use the app and takes their eyes off the road without pulling over. It is the person's fault if they wreck. Because there are things that CAN distract you, does not mean you use them.

The responsibility is solely the driver's.

. If only people were as rational as you wished they were, but anymore the percentages are falling to the bottom as far as the rational goes. It is getting worse, and the tech world is going way to fast for the generations to absorb it, and to become responsible with it. If your family member is killed or injured by one of these green horns, you will be singing a sad tune.

Yes, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a high tech car. But then, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a 1959 VW too. The technology is not why I would be sad.

But, while I would be sad, I would not rant against the technology. I believe we are responsible for our actions and shouldn't blame technology.

. If technology was proven to be why your loved one was killed, then yes your attitude would change immediately, and especially if you looked and saw that the stats we're stacking against the technology because more and more wrecks were being caused by it. Sometimes sadly it takes something to hit home before a person feels or can relate to what happened to other people in the same situation.

How does any car technology cause a wreck?

. Texting !!! Not a car technology, but it is taken into the car, and is used while driving. This makes the car dangerous to others because the driver is distracted by said technology.

 

[WinterBorn]

Distractions are a danger anytime someone is driving. That includes messing with the radio or trying to find a piece of paper with the address on it.

Most touch screens are no more distracting than your car stereo. It is the person who decides to use the app and takes their eyes off the road without pulling over. It is the person's fault if they wreck. Because there are things that CAN distract you, does not mean you use them.

The responsibility is solely the driver's.

. If only people were as rational as you wished they were, but anymore the percentages are falling to the bottom as far as the rational goes. It is getting worse, and the tech world is going way to fast for the generations to absorb it, and to become responsible with it. If your family member is killed or injured by one of these green horns, you will be singing a sad tune.

Yes, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a high tech car. But then, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a 1959 VW too. The technology is not why I would be sad.

But, while I would be sad, I would not rant against the technology. I believe we are responsible for our actions and shouldn't blame technology.

. If technology was proven to be why your loved one was killed, then yes your attitude would change immediately, and especially if you looked and saw that the stats we're stacking against the technology because more and more wrecks were being caused by it. Sometimes sadly it takes something to hit home before a person feels or can relate to what happened to other people in the same situation.

How does any car technology cause a wreck?

. Texting !!! Not a car technology, but it is taken into the car, and is used while driving. This makes the car dangerous to others because the driver is distracted by said technology.

So this technology will kill people without the driver doing anything?

Obviously not. It is the driver choosing to use apps they do not need. If they have an accident, send them to prison. But blame the driver, not the technology.

 

[beagle9]

. If only people were as rational as you wished they were, but anymore the percentages are falling to the bottom as far as the rational goes. It is getting worse, and the tech world is going way to fast for the generations to absorb it, and to become responsible with it. If your family member is killed or injured by one of these green horns, you will be singing a sad tune.

Yes, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a high tech car. But then, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a 1959 VW too. The technology is not why I would be sad.

But, while I would be sad, I would not rant against the technology. I believe we are responsible for our actions and shouldn't blame technology.

. If technology was proven to be why your loved one was killed, then yes your attitude would change immediately, and especially if you looked and saw that the stats we're stacking against the technology because more and more wrecks were being caused by it. Sometimes sadly it takes something to hit home before a person feels or can relate to what happened to other people in the same situation.

How does any car technology cause a wreck?

. Texting !!! Not a car technology, but it is taken into the car, and is used while driving. This makes the car dangerous to others because the driver is distracted by said technology.

So this technology will kill people without the driver doing anything?

Obviously not. It is the driver choosing to use apps they do not need. If they have an accident, send them to prison. But blame the driver, not the technology.

. Good grief... If the technology causes the driver to be distracted, and it is a design that inadvertently creates a distraction, then a review of the technology is at hand. Over the years, and yes (sadly not without tragedy's occurring) the technology has been changed to correct the problems it may have caused.

 

[WinterBorn]

Yes, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a high tech car. But then, I will be singing a sad tune if someone I care about is hurt by someone driving a 1959 VW too. The technology is not why I would be sad.

But, while I would be sad, I would not rant against the technology. I believe we are responsible for our actions and shouldn't blame technology.

. If technology was proven to be why your loved one was killed, then yes your attitude would change immediately, and especially if you looked and saw that the stats we're stacking against the technology because more and more wrecks were being caused by it. Sometimes sadly it takes something to hit home before a person feels or can relate to what happened to other people in the same situation.

How does any car technology cause a wreck?

. Texting !!! Not a car technology, but it is taken into the car, and is used while driving. This makes the car dangerous to others because the driver is distracted by said technology.

So this technology will kill people without the driver doing anything?

Obviously not. It is the driver choosing to use apps they do not need. If they have an accident, send them to prison. But blame the driver, not the technology.

. Good grief... If the technology causes the driver to be distracted, and it is a design that inadvertently creates a distraction, then a review of the technology is at hand. Over the years, and yes (sadly not without tragedy's occurring) the technology has been changed to correct the problems it may have caused.

Indeed it has. But it comes back to the same thing I have said, none of the apps are required to operate the car. And I am quite sure the drivers are warned (in writing) not to use the technology while driving.

The technology is not the danger. It is the driver.

 

[beagle9]

. If technology was proven to be why your loved one was killed, then yes your attitude would change immediately, and especially if you looked and saw that the stats we're stacking against the technology because more and more wrecks were being caused by it. Sometimes sadly it takes something to hit home before a person feels or can relate to what happened to other people in the same situation.

How does any car technology cause a wreck?

. Texting !!! Not a car technology, but it is taken into the car, and is used while driving. This makes the car dangerous to others because the driver is distracted by said technology.

So this technology will kill people without the driver doing anything?

Obviously not. It is the driver choosing to use apps they do not need. If they have an accident, send them to prison. But blame the driver, not the technology.

. Good grief... If the technology causes the driver to be distracted, and it is a design that inadvertently creates a distraction, then a review of the technology is at hand. Over the years, and yes (sadly not without tragedy's occurring) the technology has been changed to correct the problems it may have caused.

Indeed it has. But it comes back to the same thing I have said, none of the apps are required to operate the car. And I am quite sure the drivers are warned (in writing) not to use the technology while driving.

The technology is not the danger. It is the driver.

It is both if compliance doesn't take place. The tech plays a role, so it doesn't get a free pass as if it is innocent. It takes two yes. Without the distraction, then the citizen begins to function properly again while driving.

 

[Montrovant]

I believe this is the study from the OP: AAA Center for Driving Safety and Technology | AAA Exchange

 

[WinterBorn]

How does any car technology cause a wreck?

. Texting !!! Not a car technology, but it is taken into the car, and is used while driving. This makes the car dangerous to others because the driver is distracted by said technology.

So this technology will kill people without the driver doing anything?

Obviously not. It is the driver choosing to use apps they do not need. If they have an accident, send them to prison. But blame the driver, not the technology.

. Good grief... If the technology causes the driver to be distracted, and it is a design that inadvertently creates a distraction, then a review of the technology is at hand. Over the years, and yes (sadly not without tragedy's occurring) the technology has been changed to correct the problems it may have caused.

Indeed it has. But it comes back to the same thing I have said, none of the apps are required to operate the car. And I am quite sure the drivers are warned (in writing) not to use the technology while driving.

The technology is not the danger. It is the driver.

It is both if compliance doesn't take place. The tech plays a role, so it doesn't get a free pass as if it is innocent. It takes two yes. Without the distraction, then the citizen begins to function properly again while driving.

Free pass? The tech is inanimate. It does what it is programmed to do when activated by the driver. It is not self-actuating and does not operate on its own. The driver chose to activate the app. They chose to take their eyes off the road. They chose to act carelessly.

 

[petro]

. Texting !!! Not a car technology, but it is taken into the car, and is used while driving. This makes the car dangerous to others because the driver is distracted by said technology.

So this technology will kill people without the driver doing anything?

Obviously not. It is the driver choosing to use apps they do not need. If they have an accident, send them to prison. But blame the driver, not the technology.

. Good grief... If the technology causes the driver to be distracted, and it is a design that inadvertently creates a distraction, then a review of the technology is at hand. Over the years, and yes (sadly not without tragedy's occurring) the technology has been changed to correct the problems it may have caused.

Indeed it has. But it comes back to the same thing I have said, none of the apps are required to operate the car. And I am quite sure the drivers are warned (in writing) not to use the technology while driving.

The technology is not the danger. It is the driver.

It is both if compliance doesn't take place. The tech plays a role, so it doesn't get a free pass as if it is innocent. It takes two yes. Without the distraction, then the citizen begins to function properly again while driving.

Free pass? The tech is inanimate. It does what it is programmed to do when activated by the driver. It is not self-actuating and does not operate on its own. The driver chose to activate the app. They chose to take their eyes off the road. They chose to act carelessly.

Not according to liberalism. Personal responsibility died years ago. They apply the same lack of logic to guns, criminal activity, even alcoholism. Victim mentality requires that an outside source is responsible, never the individual.
Far as I am concerned it is the fault of a careless individual over technology every time and the law in my area supports that. You cause a crash and are found to be distracted there are extra charges much as if you drove drunk.

 

[WinterBorn]

So this technology will kill people without the driver doing anything?

Obviously not. It is the driver choosing to use apps they do not need. If they have an accident, send them to prison. But blame the driver, not the technology.

. Good grief... If the technology causes the driver to be distracted, and it is a design that inadvertently creates a distraction, then a review of the technology is at hand. Over the years, and yes (sadly not without tragedy's occurring) the technology has been changed to correct the problems it may have caused.

Indeed it has. But it comes back to the same thing I have said, none of the apps are required to operate the car. And I am quite sure the drivers are warned (in writing) not to use the technology while driving.

The technology is not the danger. It is the driver.

It is both if compliance doesn't take place. The tech plays a role, so it doesn't get a free pass as if it is innocent. It takes two yes. Without the distraction, then the citizen begins to function properly again while driving.

Free pass? The tech is inanimate. It does what it is programmed to do when activated by the driver. It is not self-actuating and does not operate on its own. The driver chose to activate the app. They chose to take their eyes off the road. They chose to act carelessly.

Not according to liberalism. Personal responsibility died years ago. They apply the same lack of logic to guns, criminal activity, even alcoholism. Victim mentality requires that an outside source is responsible, never the individual.
Far as I am concerned it is the fault of a careless individual over technology every time and the law in my area supports that. You cause a crash and are found to be distracted there are extra charges much as if you drove drunk.

If you want to rely of far-left loonies for your definitions, go right ahead. I do not.

Oddly, the OP claims to be a conservative while he whines about things like a liberal.

 

[protectionist]

Not according to liberalism. Personal responsibility died years ago. They apply the same lack of logic to guns, criminal activity, even alcoholism. Victim mentality requires that an outside source is responsible, never the individual.
Far as I am concerned it is the fault of a careless individual over technology every time and the law in my area supports that. You cause a crash and are found to be distracted there are extra charges much as if you drove drunk.

Of course the driver when takes his eyes off the road too long, has blame for doing that. But the dashboard touchscreen (and its many menus) give him an added capability to do that, thereby increasing the danger, and resulting crashes. No-brainer.

 

[protectionist]

Only a liberal would try and excuse bad choices by saying the technology created the problem. lol

The technology being there does nothing. It is the driver who decides to take their eyes off the road. It is the same with cell phones. The driver decided to send a text and is distracted. It is the driver's fault. The only difference is whether it is the cell phone lying on the seat or the screen mounted in the dashboard.

But maybe you should rethink your fear of driverless cars. No distractions there.

It is both the driver AND the technology (cellphones or touchscreens). But with the technology present, the danger is much greater. Without it, the driver can't be distracted by that particular technology. The technology INCREASES the possibility/opportunity be distracted dangerously.

It may be fun, and useful, but it's also an added hazard, when used while the car is moving in traffic. Not much at all if/when the driver pulls over, stops in a safe location, and then uses the cell phone or touch screen. .

 

[Muhammed]

Distractions are a danger anytime someone is driving. That includes messing with the radio or trying to find a piece of paper with the address on it.

Most touch screens are no more distracting than your car stereo. It is the person who decides to use the app and takes their eyes off the road without pulling over. It is the person's fault if they wreck. Because there are things that CAN distract you, does not mean you use them.

The responsibility is solely the driver's.

Exactly, and the biggest driver distraction of all is not any high tech gadget. It is passengers.

 

[WinterBorn]

Distractions are a danger anytime someone is driving. That includes messing with the radio or trying to find a piece of paper with the address on it.

Most touch screens are no more distracting than your car stereo. It is the person who decides to use the app and takes their eyes off the road without pulling over. It is the person's fault if they wreck. Because there are things that CAN distract you, does not mean you use them.

The responsibility is solely the driver's.

Exactly, and the biggest driver distraction of all is not any high tech gadget. It is passengers.

Yes! There have been distractions since cars were cranked by a handle on the front. If a driver is responsible, none of the technology will be a problem. If the driver is irresponsible, removing all technology will not matter.

 

[petro]

Not according to liberalism. Personal responsibility died years ago. They apply the same lack of logic to guns, criminal activity, even alcoholism. Victim mentality requires that an outside source is responsible, never the individual.
Far as I am concerned it is the fault of a careless individual over technology every time and the law in my area supports that. You cause a crash and are found to be distracted there are extra charges much as if you drove drunk.

Of course the driver when takes his eyes off the road too long, has blame for doing that. But the dashboard touchscreen (and its many menus) give him an added capability to do that, thereby increasing the danger, and resulting crashes. No-brainer.

Half of the features shut off when in gear. The rest of mine is voice activation.
Crashes are caused mostly by human error. Distraction is human behavior. If too stupid to pay attention, shouldn't be driving.