Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Friday 07 March 2003 00:52, gann wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed snip I'm in favor of it snip Neither you nor anyone else has the right to force me or any other individual to subsidize your welfare. This device, if forced on individuals by a government entity, would violate fourth amendment protections against self-incrimination. DUI laws requiring breath or blood tests do the same thing. DUI laws define a political crime (as opposed to a crime with an actual victim) based on an arbitrary biological baseline (blood alcohol content). Reckless endangerment of another person is a real crime with a real victim regardless of the amount of alcohol or other drugs in the person's system. Laws against reckless endangerment can be enforced without violating constitutionally protected rights. DUI laws need to be abolished. This would all be academic if this were not a socialist country where the roads are built on stolen property with stolen money. If the roads were private property owned by private individuals then you would be free to travel on roads that required onboard breath testers, submission to random searches of your vehicle and body cavities, along with background checks of your criminal history, credit, and bank records if that made you feel safe and secure. If the terms of use of that road company were not to your liking you would be free to travel on a competing company's roads. Live free or die, David Neilson
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Sunday 09 March 2003 10:31 am, david wrote: Neither you nor anyone else has the right to force me or any other individual to subsidize your welfare. This device, if forced on individuals by a government entity, would violate fourth amendment protections against self-incrimination. DUI laws requiring breath or blood tests do the same thing. But you wouldn't mind if insurance companies required the device in order for you to get a policy (whether or not it called the police or just the insurance company) ? Right ?
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 09:31:40 -0500 (est), Sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Screw that - just buy a few thousand of these little devices, disable them so that they're always transmitting drunk driver and install them in politicians' cars all over DC (make sure you install'em in cop cars too.) You can also leave them in cabs. They'll be banned immediately. What the fuck makes you think you'd need to disable them for politicians? Ted Kennedy, anyone?
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
david wrote: But you wouldn't mind if insurance companies required the device in order for you to get a policy (whether or not it called the police or just the insurance company) ? Right ? If I did mind, I'd just find a different insurance company. It's a little bit harder for me to say, I don't like government X; I choose to be governed by Y instead while continuing to live in the same spot.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
At 08:52 AM 03/10/2003 -0500, david [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 09 March 2003 18:16, you [whoever that was?] wrote: On Sunday 09 March 2003 10:31 am, david wrote: Neither you nor anyone else has the right to force me or any other individual to subsidize your welfare. This device, if forced on individuals by a government entity, would violate fourth amendment protections against self-incrimination. DUI laws requiring breath or blood tests do the same thing. But you wouldn't mind if insurance companies required the device in order for you to get a policy (whether or not it called the police or just the insurance company) ? Right ? I wouldn't mind if some insurance companies required that, as long as any laws against annoying the police with bogus complaints didn't affect me. In particular, if the Bad Drivers' Insurance Company wanted to offer them with a special rate to people who might otherwise not be able to get insurance because of previous drunkenness, great. That level of market differentiation is unlikely to become available in most of the US, because states tend to protect consumers by regulating what kind of insurance is available and at what prices, though. I'd mind substantially if _my_ insurance company required it, because I've been fairly satisfied with the service and prices I get from them, and I'd have to go find a new company that wasn't blazingly stupid. I'd mind a lot if the government required insurance companies to use them, and required every driver or car owner to use one of those insurance companies, especially if drivers were still responsible if their machines made incorrect calls to the police.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
I wonder what the effect would be in states like WI which don't require auto insurance. Insurance is noticably cheaper here than in MN which does require it. On Mon, Mar 10, 2003 at 01:25:05PM -0800, Bill Stewart wrote: At 08:52 AM 03/10/2003 -0500, david [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 09 March 2003 18:16, you [whoever that was?] wrote: On Sunday 09 March 2003 10:31 am, david wrote: Neither you nor anyone else has the right to force me or any other individual to subsidize your welfare. This device, if forced on individuals by a government entity, would violate fourth amendment protections against self-incrimination. DUI laws requiring breath or blood tests do the same thing. But you wouldn't mind if insurance companies required the device in order for you to get a policy (whether or not it called the police or just the insurance company) ? Right ? I wouldn't mind if some insurance companies required that, as long as any laws against annoying the police with bogus complaints didn't affect me. In particular, if the Bad Drivers' Insurance Company wanted to offer them with a special rate to people who might otherwise not be able to get insurance because of previous drunkenness, great. That level of market differentiation is unlikely to become available in most of the US, because states tend to protect consumers by regulating what kind of insurance is available and at what prices, though. I'd mind substantially if _my_ insurance company required it, because I've been fairly satisfied with the service and prices I get from them, and I'd have to go find a new company that wasn't blazingly stupid. I'd mind a lot if the government required insurance companies to use them, and required every driver or car owner to use one of those insurance companies, especially if drivers were still responsible if their machines made incorrect calls to the police. -- Harmon Seaver CyberShamanix http://www.cybershamanix.com
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 00:52:29 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers at Texas Christian University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police. Great, a perfect reason for using Tequila Air Freshener. Or perhaps vodka, since it's less likely to stain the upholstery. And then sue the living fuck out of the pigs. And since it's succeptible to tobacco smoke, Joe Camel just became my new best friend. Pack a day? Only when I'm driving.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Fri, Mar 07, 2003 at 02:56:36PM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not crazy about everything that the government does, but there are trade- offs in a non-perfect society. One of them is monitoring the innocent to, in turn, attempt to prevent the guilty from trampling over everything, God willing. Yes. Perhaps you'll be the first to volunteer for 24/7 invasive, implant-based, GPS-trackable, body-cavity-explorable monitoring to keep the rest of us safe? After all, you're innocent, and you have nothing to hide, right? -Declan
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Sunday 09 March 2003 18:16, you wrote: On Sunday 09 March 2003 10:31 am, david wrote: Neither you nor anyone else has the right to force me or any other individual to subsidize your welfare. This device, if forced on individuals by a government entity, would violate fourth amendment protections against self-incrimination. DUI laws requiring breath or blood tests do the same thing. But you wouldn't mind if insurance companies required the device in order for you to get a policy (whether or not it called the police or just the insurance company) ? Right ?
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Sunday 09 March 2003 18:16, A.Melon wrote: On Sunday 09 March 2003 10:31 am, david wrote: Neither you nor anyone else has the right to force me or any other individual to subsidize your welfare. This device, if forced on individuals by a government entity, would violate fourth amendment protections against self-incrimination. DUI laws requiring breath or blood tests do the same thing. But you wouldn't mind if insurance companies required the device in order for you to get a policy (whether or not it called the police or just the insurance company) ? Right ? Not as long as it was truly a free market transaction involving no government regulation of the insurance company or laws requiring you to buy the insurance. Any transaction freely entered into by both parties is acceptable. David Neilson
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
Fuck you and fuck the man. I don't need any electronic snitch in my car. Do you? If you do, maybe you're in need of professional help! Hey! Keep him alive! :) If he's genuine, he can serve as a study material for observing the Adversary-sympathetic mindset. Think zoo, or a lab animal. The other possibility is he's a troll that managed to escape from Slashdot, and then the shouting and anger is what he gets attracted to. Regarding such snitch devices, one thing plays for us: Tamperproof (quite like bulletproof) isn't.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
At 02:56 PM 3/7/03 -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not crazy about everything that the government does, but there are trade- offs in a non-perfect society. One of them is monitoring the innocent to, in turn, attempt to prevent the guilty from trampling over everything, Allah willing. Wrong compromise. See Franklin, B. I'm pretty sure that your Jack-dipped cotton swab will fall under tampering and intentional abuse of law enforcement resources, so you will pay your fine, then come back here to complain about the man that is trying to take away your world of lawlessness and accountability. You might have picked the wrong list. We analyze systems. And societies are systems too. We look at weaknesses from an adversary's viewpoint. We switch viewpoints faster than Kasparov. We are the rabbit, and the fox, and the dynamics. We argue about which cuts of the sacred cow are the tastiest. We believe such studies are interesting by themselves, and sometimes practical, for instance letting us strengthen these systems based on our reasoning and experimentation. We use the plural singular as agitprop and to piss Tim off. Security science, bub. You propose a (hysterical big brotheresque--is some friend red asphalt?) system, and we study it. You don't even have to ask us, just make us aware of it :-) There are countries that are very differing in their laws and liberties. Yes, doncha just miss the Stasi? And what sharp uniforms!
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Friday, March 7, 2003, at 12:46 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would fairly entertain said discussion. Erle http://ganns.com You're on the wrong list here for at least four reasons: 1. You're spamming us with some idea I have a hunch you are connected with in some way. 2. You're a statist. 3. You're a pedant, especially with your I would fairly entertain said discussion silliness. 4. This breath tester is not related to list topics. Off-topic discussion happens, especially when regulars know each other and have something they want to say to their colleagues. Your off-topic post doesn't fall into this category. --Tim May
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
You seem to be such a hopeless case that I don't even know where to start. Your vulgarity alone gives paints a pretty good picture of you. If you prefer to carry on like an immature grade-school kid, I'll be ignoring you. Let me know when you want to have an actual conversation with viable content instead of scraping the bottom of the vocabulary barrel. - Original Message - From: Sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Sycophantic Boot Licker [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 2:28 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 Sycophantic Boot Licker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not crazy about everything that the government does, but there are trade- offs in a non-perfect society. One of them is monitoring the innocent to, in turn, attempt to prevent the guilty from trampling over everything, God willing. Tradeoffs you say? Monitor the innocent to find the guilty? Hmm, why, isn't that like being guilty before proven innocent? Hmmm... I think you're a total dickwad and work for the man. Fuck you. And fuck your willing God. It's assholes like you and who think like you that bend over and take it every time that kill our freedoms. Fuck you and fuck the man. I don't need any electronic snitch in my car. Do you? If you do, maybe you're in need of professional help! There are countries that are very differing in their laws and liberties. Don't lose hope by thinking that this is the only one for you. You can try a few of them until one suits your flavor. Isn't freedom great? Amen! If you don't like freedom, I'm sure Communist China will be more to your liking. Or perhaps Iraq? --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
- Original Message - From: Major Variola (ret) [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 11:28 AM Subject: Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police False positives: What about folks with vinegar on their breath? I think that being pulled over once a year for a couple minutes is worth catching a bunch of other real drunk drivers. False negatives: I could remember to use an airpump in an ethanol state in which it would be illegal/immoral to drive in. Then you would successfully defeat the device and continue to drive under the influence. Fools: giving the police a link to your location and activities. And paying for the privledge. As if I care if cops know where I am. Maybe if they notice my radio beacon pulled over to the side of the road nowhere near an intersection, they might roll by to see if I need assistance. Erle http://ganns.com
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
- Original Message - From: Dan Veeneman [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 1:42 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police I had an acquaintance years ago that always kept a bottle of cologne in the car. If he was ever pulled over after drinking, he would take a swig of the cologne before the cop got to his window. All the cop would then smell was the cologne and not the beer/whiskey/whatever he was drinking. He is to be commended for beating the system and endangering his own and other lives. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police. Hackable and able to be spoofed. True, but not by dumb drunk drivers.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
ggc University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst ggc converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current ggc proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the ggc data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the ggc police. but what about other passengers who have been drinking, and what about open windows? unless we're going to be forced to drive with tubes stuck in our mouths... -- stuart We are the only nation on earth capable of exporting security in a sustained fashion, and we have a very good track record of doing it. Thomas P.M. Barnett http://www.nwc.navy.mil/newrulesets/ThePentagonsNewMap.htm
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
At 10:52 PM -0800 3/6/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers at Texas Christian University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police. So much for the sober designated driver with a load of drunk passengers. Cheers - Bill - Bill Frantz | Due process for all| Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | used to be the | 16345 Englewood Ave. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | American way. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
At 12:52 AM 3/7/03 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers at Texas Christian University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police. False positives: What about folks with vinegar on their breath? False negatives: I could remember to use an airpump in an ethanol state in which it would be illegal/immoral to drive in. Fools: giving the police a link to your location and activities. And paying for the privledge. And who gives a fuck if its a fuel cell, (Texas Christian media whores) its just a catalytic detector, big deal. http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/cars/article.jsp?id=2069 I'm in favor of it if they can overcome attempted bypass of the unit. Unless it cryptographically allows the car to operate only when functional, someone will figure out how to defeat it.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
At 09:28 AM 03/07/2003 -0800, Major Variola (ret) wrote: At 12:52 AM 3/7/03 -0600, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers Would you buy one if you're drunk? Would you put one in your trunk? Who's the target market for this sort of thing? Engineers can build things for the existential pleasure of it, but usually they're trying to solve problems for people, and it's not clear what the business requirement is here. Did someone fund them? Who? Why? Doing the technical part of detecting alcohol vapor is cool, but doing the systems integration to make it call the police makes a large number of assumptions about the occupants of the car and the legality of the actions they're about to perform and the probability of false positives and false negatives and the willingness of the police to be called about it. (Police, for instance, don't like false alarms from burglar alarms.) Validating those assumptions is part of the engineering job, just like validating the effect of opening all the car windows before you get in is. Newspaper clippings usually don't do a good enough job on details to let you estimate whether the engineering was done well (except of course when things fail spectacularly.) Building a device that can call any pre-programmed number is a much different problem - it's almost identical technically, but applications include selling to parents for their kids' cars (and be sure to include a speakerphone in the communications part.) (Bobby! The machine says you're drunk! Are you ok? I'm fine, ma, I'm just driving Alice and Carol home.) or if you're trying to sell it to people who are habitual drunks, having it programmed to call a taxi makes more sense. There may be some captive market for selling to people on probation, who might accept it as an alternative to not being allowed to drive at all, but that's clearly a niche market, not an install-on-all-new-cars market.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
At 2:56 PM -0500 on 3/7/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Wow, easy there, chief. You're new here, aren'tcha? :-) Cheers, RAH -- - R. A. Hettinga mailto: [EMAIL PROTECTED] The Internet Bearer Underwriting Corporation http://www.ibuc.com/ 44 Farquhar Street, Boston, MA 02131 USA ... however it may deserve respect for its usefulness and antiquity, [predicting the end of the world] has not been found agreeable to experience. -- Edward Gibbon, 'Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire'
Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers at Texas Christian University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police. http://www.newscientist.com/hottopics/cars/article.jsp?id=2069 I'm in favor of it if they can overcome attempted bypass of the unit. Unless it cryptographically allows the car to operate only when functional, someone will figure out how to defeat it. Subscribe to The Gann Letter if you are interested in:varying levels of humor/jokes/quotes, parody/satire,science/space/technology items, cool news, games,programs, pics, and other interesting stuff. subscribe #1: [EMAIL PROTECTED]subscribe #2: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheGannLetter/joinsubscribe #3: gann (at) ganns.comread online : http://ganns.com
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
Screw that - just buy a few thousand of these little devices, disable them so that they're always transmitting drunk driver and install them in politicians' cars all over DC (make sure you install'em in cop cars too.) You can also leave them in cabs. They'll be banned immediately. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers at Texas Christian University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
So you hook it up to a wad of cotton dipped in Jack... Whatever. Fuck Big Brother. Fuck it in the ass until it squeals, then fuck it some more. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good job. You just caused law enforcement to ignore emitters from all cabs, government, and police vehicles. My guess is that the unit will perform a self-check and emit a broken signal instead of drunk. Maybe the police will only pull over broken vehicles not listed above, knowing that broken ones from average citizens are far likelier to have been sabotaged.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
Good job. You just caused law enforcement to ignore emitters from all cabs, government, and police vehicles. My guess is that the unit will perform a self-check and emit a broken signal instead of drunk. Maybe the police will only pull over broken vehicles not listed above, knowing that broken ones from average citizens are far likelier to have been sabotaged. Quoting Sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Screw that - just buy a few thousand of these little devices, disable them so that they're always transmitting drunk driver and install them in politicians' cars all over DC (make sure you install'em in cop cars too.) You can also leave them in cabs. They'll be banned immediately. On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers at Texas Christian University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
Actually, read the article. It covers sober driver and drunk passengers. Quoting Bill Frantz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: At 10:52 PM -0800 3/6/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: A tiny fuel cell that detects the alcoholic breath of a drink-driver and calls the police has been developed by a team of engineers at Texas Christian University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police. So much for the sober designated driver with a load of drunk passengers. Cheers - Bill - Bill Frantz | Due process for all| Periwinkle -- Consulting (408)356-8506 | used to be the | 16345 Englewood Ave. [EMAIL PROTECTED] | American way. | Los Gatos, CA 95032, USA
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
I don't guess you read the article. It answers at least your first question. Another option to breathing through a tube might be to not drink alcohol before driving. Wow, you know... deterring people from drinking and driving might be a favorable side effect of this public-monitoring, information-gathering tool of big brother's. Erle http://ganns.com Quoting stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED]: ggc University. A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst ggc converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current ggc proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. A chip analyses the ggc data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the ggc police. but what about other passengers who have been drinking, and what about open windows? unless we're going to be forced to drive with tubes stuck in our mouths... -- stuart
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
At 12:52 AM 3/7/03 -0600, you wrote: A pump draws air in from the passenger cabin, a platinum catalyst converts any alcohol to acetic acid, which then produces a current proportional to the concentration of alcohol in the air. I had an acquaintance years ago that always kept a bottle of cologne in the car. If he was ever pulled over after drinking, he would take a swig of the cologne before the cop got to his window. All the cop would then smell was the cologne and not the beer/whiskey/whatever he was drinking. In any case, alcohol in the cabin does not equate to an impaired driver. A chip analyses the data, and if it is too high, turns on a wireless transmitter that calls the police. Hackable and able to be spoofed. Cheers, Dan
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
Yes. Won't someone please think about the *children*? We shouldn't have a problem with being monitored 24x7 if we aren't doing anything illegal, right? Especially since it's for such a good cause! Did you ever think that perhaps this bothers people for reasons *other* than getting caught drunk driving? -p - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 2:43 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police I don't guess you read the article. It answers at least your first question. Another option to breathing through a tube might be to not drink alcohol before driving. Wow, you know... deterring people from drinking and driving might be a favorable side effect of this public-monitoring, information-gathering tool of big brother's. Erle http://ganns.com
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
I would fairly entertain said discussion. Erle http://ganns.com Quoting Pete Capelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Yes. Won't someone please think about the *children*? We shouldn't have a problem with being monitored 24x7 if we aren't doing anything illegal, right? Especially since it's for such a good cause! Did you ever think that perhaps this bothers people for reasons *other* than getting caught drunk driving? -p - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: stuart [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Friday, March 07, 2003 2:43 PM Subject: Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police I don't guess you read the article. It answers at least your first question. Another option to breathing through a tube might be to not drink alcohol before driving. Wow, you know... deterring people from drinking and driving might be a favorable side effect of this public-monitoring, information-gathering tool of big brother's. Erle http://ganns.com
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
Wow, easy there, chief. I think you have some aggression you may want to let a professional address. Besides that... I'm not crazy about everything that the government does, but there are trade- offs in a non-perfect society. One of them is monitoring the innocent to, in turn, attempt to prevent the guilty from trampling over everything, God willing. I'm pretty sure that your Jack-dipped cotton swab will fall under tampering and intentional abuse of law enforcement resources, so you will pay your fine, then come back here to complain about the man that is trying to take away your world of lawlessness and accountability. There are countries that are very differing in their laws and liberties. Don't lose hope by thinking that this is the only one for you. You can try a few of them until one suits your flavor. Isn't freedom great? Amen! Quoting Sunder [EMAIL PROTECTED]: So you hook it up to a wad of cotton dipped in Jack... Whatever. Fuck Big Brother. Fuck it in the ass until it squeals, then fuck it some more. --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Good job. You just caused law enforcement to ignore emitters from all cabs, government, and police vehicles. My guess is that the unit will perform a self-check and emit a broken signal instead of drunk. Maybe the police will only pull over broken vehicles not listed above, knowing that broken ones from average citizens are far likelier to have been sabotaged.
Re: Fw: Drunk driver detector that radios police
On Fri, 7 Mar 2003 Sycophantic Boot Licker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not crazy about everything that the government does, but there are trade- offs in a non-perfect society. One of them is monitoring the innocent to, in turn, attempt to prevent the guilty from trampling over everything, God willing. Tradeoffs you say? Monitor the innocent to find the guilty? Hmm, why, isn't that like being guilty before proven innocent? Hmmm... I think you're a total dickwad and work for the man. Fuck you. And fuck your willing God. It's assholes like you and who think like you that bend over and take it every time that kill our freedoms. Fuck you and fuck the man. I don't need any electronic snitch in my car. Do you? If you do, maybe you're in need of professional help! There are countries that are very differing in their laws and liberties. Don't lose hope by thinking that this is the only one for you. You can try a few of them until one suits your flavor. Isn't freedom great? Amen! If you don't like freedom, I'm sure Communist China will be more to your liking. Or perhaps Iraq? --Kaos-Keraunos-Kybernetos--- + ^ + :NSA got $20Bil/year |Passwords are like underwear. You don't /|\ \|/ :and didn't stop 9-11|share them, you don't hang them on your/\|/\ --*--:Instead of rewarding|monitor, or under your keyboard, you \/|\/ /|\ :their failures, we |don't email them, or put them on a web \|/ + v + :should get refunds! |site, and you must change them very often. [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.sunder.net
