Fascinating (and very short) article by Elliot Hannon for Slate.com regarding a move by the European Union to, and I quote, “introduce a new law requiring cars to come fitted with technology that would keep drivers from going over the speed limit.”

You can read the entire article here:

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2013/09/02/a_new_e_u_proposal_looks_to_install_technology_that_keep_cars_from_going.html

The other day I was watching a panel of reporters on TV (I believe the show was Chris Hayes on MSNBC) and they were talking about self-driving cars.  The panel noted the technology to make self-driving cars existed already, and the only thing keeping self-driving cars from becoming a reality were issues regarding the law and insurance.

Mr. Hayes noted that the mortality/accident rates for air and rail travel were almost non-existent compared to the same for automobile travel, and that it is strange we as consumers aren’t more alarmed by this.  He stated, quite rightly I felt, if the same mortality rates were present in air travel as they were in automobile travel, no one would use an airplane.

The article above notes that the European Union is being proactive in trying to lessen the mortality/accident rates on the road and that by having technology in a car that stops drivers from speeding those rates are bound to drop.  I agree with this as well, but feel that if we go to completely driver-less cars, the rate will drop even more.

Granted, there will be people who want to keep driving on their own, just as surely as there will be a large contingent of people who will be only too happy to let a computer focus on their morning and evening commute while they engage in any number of things with their now free time, from reading the paper to watching a movie to checking their email/texts.

I suspect driver-less tech will slowly work its way into the big cities and will not only reduce the rates of mortality/accidents but also significantly reduce traffic jams and the rush hour commute.  By the above action, the European Union is essentially taking the first step toward driver-less tech by implementing their system to keep drivers from speeding.

On the other hand, the book writer in me can’t help but think of the possible scenarios where a computer driven car might be a very big danger.  Perhaps I should keep those scenarios to myself…there’s always the next book to write! 😉

We live in interesting times!

…although I suspect its a rather unique way:

www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/04/16/dmitri-krioukov-physicist_n_1429545.html

This article, concerning the way physicist Dmitri Krioukov managed to convince a judge -via mathematics!- that his ticket for failure to come to a complete stop at a stop sign was incorrect, has to be one of the more interesting ways to get out of a ticket.

It does bring up an interesting point:  I recall going to traffic school many years ago (I was cited for speeding…I was going five miles over the speed limit in a 30 mile per hour speed zone) and the police officer giving us the lecture asked something to the effect of: “How many of you have received your first traffic ticket?”

Along with my hand rising were several others.  One middle aged/elderly woman (she may have been in her late 50’s or early 60’s) not only raised her hand but noted with great indignity that in all her years of driving this was her first ticket.

“Why did you get the ticket?” the officer asked.

“They said I didn’t come to a full stop at a stop sign.”

The police officer shook his head and said the following:  “I don’t feel any sympathy for you.  Every day every driver on every street commits on average at least five traffic offenses.  You’ve been lucky that in all these years, this is the first time an officer caught you doing something illegal on the road.”

The statement, frankly, made my head spin.  Now, I can’t speak to the veracity (or lack there of) of the police officer’s statistics.  For all I know, he may well have made them up for effect or heard someone else say them and believed them to be true.  The opposite, of course, might be true as well:  Maybe we do break the traffic laws many times each day, maybe even more than five times.

Also, and to be fair to the officer, the quote presented above isn’t absolute verbatum.  Its been many years since I received that ticket and participated in the class and I don’t pretend to recall every single word the officer uttered.  Well, with the exception of that first line.  Yes, the man did say he felt no sympathy for the woman and her ticket.  And yes, he went on to quote that five time a day lawbreaking statistic and did pronounced her lucky for having only received one ticket in all these years.

But to my mind, the most important thing I came away with regarding his statement was questioning traffic laws in general.  If we are to assume those statistics cited by the officer were accurate and if the traffic laws are such that on average a driver breaks at least five rules each day, then the laws, I think it could be argued, are way, waaaay too tough and/or arbitrary.

I suppose that traffic laws, in the end, simply fall into much broader gray areas than other laws.  After all, in the eyes of the law if it is proven you steal, you’re a thief.  If it is proven you killed someone in cold blood, you’re a murderer.

If you’re traveling at 100 miles per hour in 30 mile per hour speed zone, you’re clearly a menace.  However, if you’re going 35 miles per hour in that same 30 mile per hour speed zone, you’re just as guilty of breaking the law.  While you may not be a “menace” to others and the nature of your “crime” isn’t quite as serious, you’re still breaking the law.

It’s an imperfect system but it is tough to think of good alternatives to it.  Though the police officer’s remarks to the woman might have been brusque, he may well have been right.  And yes, while traffic laws may be impossible to follow 100% of the time each and every day, should we get rid of them because of this?  And if we do, then what?

In the end, I guess we can swallow our collective pride and pay the fee for getting “silly” traffic tickets now and again, provided when we do drive we know that others on the road recognize there are laws on how we should follow, and those laws not only protect ourselves, they protect others on the road.

At least that way we don’t feel like anything goes.