Posted by Bill McGonigle
Fri, 30 Jan 2009 03:38:00 GMT
A bill has been introduced before the New Hampshire House of Representatives, called HB 575-FN - AN ACT prohibiting driving with any amount of certain controlled drugs or metabolites in the blood or urine which slips this little gem into our laws:
II. Any person who drives, operates, or attempts to operate an OHRV, drives or attempts to drive a vehicle upon the ways of this state, or operates or attempts to operate a boat on the public waters of this state shall be deemed to have given consent to chemical, infrared molecular absorption, or gas chromatograph test or tests of his or her blood or urine for the presence of any schedule I controlled substance, as defined in RSA 318-B:1-b, or its metabolites.
Read that again if it didn't sink in. If you're going for a gallon of milk, you've implicitly given your consent to have to pee in a cup or be stuck for a blood draw just by pulling out of your driveway. No commission of a crime is required, no reasonable suspicion need be raised. You've implicitly consented, just by driving, or riding your ATV or snowmobile, or piloting your boat. If you're out fishing on the lake, you cannot refuse a random blood draw. Well, you can, but you'll be found guilty of a misdemeanor and subject to arrest. I'm sure you'll be eventually vindicated on fourth amendment grounds, if you can afford to fight it, but any way you cut it this is outrageous and demeaning.
This bill is sponsored by Reps. J. Flanders and Welch, of Rockingham District 8. The committee members contact info can be found here and you can find contact information for your legislators here.
A hearing is scheduled at the Legislative Office Building in Concord on 02/05/2009 at 11:00 AM, Room 204. Everybody needs to be there.
Posted in Government, Driving, Local | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Bill McGonigle
Fri, 04 Jul 2008 06:09:00 GMT
I've frequently heard about how great the trains are on the other side of the pond, so when I had lunch with a fellow from outside Manchester, UK recently, I asked him how many people take the train to London as a commute.
"Oh, plenty, but not me," was his answer. Probing further, I found the reason was he couldn't afford it.
The trains are apparently so popular and the roads so congested, that simple supply and demand have driven the fares sky-high. He told me that commuting to London, a bit less than a 2 hour trip, would run about a thousand dollars a week. Some big firms cover these costs for their day-trippers.
Half-disbelieving, I figured I'd run the numbers myself. I searched for that trip, on a weekday, commuting hours, and asked for the cheapest fare, steerage class. Turns out the cheapest round-trip fare is £230. Google says that's about $455.
While granting that there is probably a frequent-traveler discount, I can take a 2-hour commuter bus round-trip from here to Boston for $40 as the posted rate. $32 is the 'monthly' rate.
So, I'll assume my lunch partner's numbers were a bit old, or at least his exchange rate. Taking the train in the UK like this is in all likelihood $1600 per week affair, or about 10 times the cost of commuting in the US.
Consider this the next time you hear we ought to have commuter trains like they do in Europe.
Posted in Government, Traffic, Economics, Driving, Local | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Bill McGonigle
Sun, 13 Apr 2008 20:26:00 GMT
Starting with Model Year 2008, all vehicles are mandated by the Federal Government to have a Tire Pressure Monitoring System. These systems most commonly are implemented using an RFID chip in each tire valve stem, with a unique serial number on each. When cars are manufactured the ID's of the tires are associated with VIN's, and replacement tires could be re-associated during State inspections. Car onboard diagnostics could be programmed to not allow the car to operate in a situation with unaddressable tires.
Such systems are vulnerable to being read by just about anybody. A buried wire under the pavement, same as inductive traffic sensors used at red lights, could be utilized to read vehicle information anywhere on a road. A good use of this would be private parking lots, for automated billing purposes. It could also be used for State surveillance or terrorism.
Bruce Schneier has a writeup and a few years ago there was some creative brainstorming about what could be done. These are just a start- let your imagination run wild and there are all sorts of possibilities, both good and bad. The technology is neutral, but some uses may be sinister.
Posted in Government, Science, Driving | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Bill McGonigle
Sat, 05 Apr 2008 18:20:00 GMT
I wrote to Autozone to let them know they missed our van (2005 Pontiac Montana SV6) on their parts website and let them know of the other GM equivalents. They responded more than a week later:
We apologize if you experienced difficulties while using AutoZone.com. We appreciate you taking the time to send us your feedback. We have
forwarded your comments to the Webmaster for further consideration.
Wow, I'm so impressed. "Thanks for the catch, we'll make sure it gets added" would have been *so* bad for customer relations, right?
Posted in Economics, Driving | no comments | no trackbacks
Posted by Bill McGonigle
Thu, 17 Jan 2008 03:22:00 GMT
This is my first post in 'Driving'. I intend to offer tips, rules, and optimizations that many people seem to not understand while driving. Instead of yelling at the windshield, I'll blog instead and perhaps improve some drivers. I'll also shame any who are egregiously rude.
First up - headlights. Headlights serve two purposes, both important. First, they help you see. That was the easy one. Second, they help others see you. They can increase your visibility by 40%, according to something I read in a AAA magazine a while back. Canada and, if memory serves, Florida require headlights all the time. Canada, because it's half-dark there all the time (I kid because I love), and Florida because the increase is most marked among the elderly.
Some times to turn on headlights:
- Whenever your windshield wipers are on, unless you're just running the wash cycle. If you're seeing less than optimally, so is everybody else.
- When it's dawn or dusk - never drive with just your parking lights on. They're called 'parking' lights, not 'I should probably have my headlights on but I'm too cool for that' lights. Today a lady was passing a car in the other lane on 120, around a curve, at dusk, and it was pretty hard for me to process what was actually happening. She only had her parking lights on, and would have been much more safe with her headlights on. (Shut up, Bevis)
- All the time. Seriously, what do you have to lose? Since the advent of daytime running lights, nobody flashes you anymore. Your fairly modern car should turn off the lights for you.
One downside to these modern cars are the automatic lights. My wife''s minivan has an automatic headlight light sensor, and it comes on too late for safety. I'm going to experiment with putting a piece of tape over the sensor to decrease the amount of light it receives and see if that turns them on sooner.
So, turn on those lights and save a life.
Posted in Driving | no comments | no trackbacks
