Teacher throws himself on car of line cutting parent

[Purpelia]

If a country does it on purpose than it is legal by definition.

Well, no, not quite. The government can still break the law. Legality is a bit more complicated than "if the government does it, it's legal".

In the context of what I was saying however it is true. There is nothing that can be illegal about a government instituting a mandatory car GPS program.
Really any objections to such a thing fall into the same category as people who fight seat belt laws or mandatory motorcycle helmets.

[Alvecia]

There's a lot of electronics stuff in cars these days. A quick google shows a couple examples.
The first with people hacking into the electronic fob lock to steal cars.
The second where they literally turned the car off mid drive (though in a controlled experiment)

Off the top of my head, even knowing that you're not in the house would be handy if I was thinking about going round to rob it.

Every system can be abused by evil people. This does not mean we should not use it.

The only people who think like that are the amish.

It doesn't mean it should either. Cost/Benefit.

[Purpelia]

Every system can be abused by evil people. This does not mean we should not use it.

The only people who think like that are the amish.

It doesn't mean it should either. Cost/Benefit.

I concur. I just wanted to preemptively diffuse the situation back to that point because internet forums can go down the deep end of panicked fear about these things too often for my liking. Like we literally have a thread right now on this forum debating if Russia secretly shot down flight 370.

[Ifreann]

None of that is true.

It is true. Your mobile phone pings cellphone towers to tell its location. This can be used to gather very precise information if you are in an urban area. Maybe not so much in the middle of nowhere. But even so you could still get good info AND have it transmit driving telemetry for those beautiful ticket fees.

Your phone does not tell towers its location, because on its own your phone does not know its own location. Its location can be narrowed down by checking which towers it is in range of.

Now obviously you'd have to build up a much more dense tower infrastructure to get proper coverage and more accurate monitoring. But that's something you'd have to do anyway to cope with the increased bandwidth issues. Than again you have to do that already with the rising amount of mobile devices.

Anyway the point is moot because of a stupid mistake I made in neglecting a far more preferable system to use for this sort of thing. And that's car GPS systems. These would be a far superior candidate for this sort of effort than cellphone based systems.

Have you ever used the GPS on a phone? They're not that accurate. If you want them to be more accurate then you could launch more satellites. Might slightly increase the cost of this project.

Imma stop you here. Everything you're proposing is impossible or illegal.

If a country does it on purpose than it is legal by definition.

In your fantasy world, are government actions never found to be illegal?

Also, this exact system was proposed by Infected Mushrooms some time back. His idea was much more fun, as he proposed making tunnels illegal and going to war with every nation on Earth.

Would you kindly insert a long and rude remark here as I do not feel like writing curse words. But like, assume I did and be insulted please.

So no global war to retrieve tourists who break traffic laws?

[Reploid Productions]

Spike strips are cheaper and probably far more effective for keeping hyper-entitled reckless mothers from going through a blocked entrance than convoluted tracking and auto-ticketing systems.

[Vallermoore]

A GPS program could be hacked by terrorists, other countries or just bored hackers and used to run people over, whilst an auto ticket system could be hacked by someone wanting revenge on an ex.

[Galloism]

Spike strips are cheaper and probably far more effective for keeping hyper-entitled reckless mothers from going through a blocked entrance than convoluted tracking and auto-ticketing systems.

We had a fun thread on this once.

[Conservative Feminism]

The moment the teacher touched the vehicle is when the teachers behavior became the bigger problem. The woman should not have been doing what she was doing but what the teacher did is not only dangerous, but it is also potentially damamaging someone's property, it wasn't protecting anyone.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

The moment the teacher touched the vehicle is when the teachers behavior became the bigger problem. The woman should not have been doing what she was doing but what the teacher did is not only dangerous, but it is also potentially damamaging someone's property, it wasn't protecting anyone.

I would argue that sending a message that the staff aren't going to idly stand by and let someone flout their rules is itself an act of protection.

[Conservative Feminism]

The moment the teacher touched the vehicle is when the teachers behavior became the bigger problem. The woman should not have been doing what she was doing but what the teacher did is not only dangerous, but it is also potentially damamaging someone's property, it wasn't protecting anyone.

I would argue that sending a message that the staff aren't going to idly stand by and let someone flout their rules is itself an act of protection.

This isn't Tiananmen square, it's a school parking lot. Jumping on a moving vehicle that is someone private property is absolutely over the top and unessesary. They could have tried to file legal action against her or banned her from the premises after. This was not the only solution.

[Pope Joan]

If you had a self driving car, could you order it to drive through the cones and it would do so?

Could the school somehow override those commands, electronically?

[Ifreann]

If you had a self driving car, could you order it to drive through the cones and it would do so?

No.

Could the school somehow override those commands, electronically?

No.

[Katganistan]

The moment the teacher touched the vehicle is when the teachers behavior became the bigger problem. The woman should not have been doing what she was doing but what the teacher did is not only dangerous, but it is also potentially damamaging someone's property, it wasn't protecting anyone.

Driving the wrong way through a closed entrance that was closed for staff and student safety was potentially harmful to any students in the way of the entitled dipshit who refused to stop her car.

[Katganistan]

I would argue that sending a message that the staff aren't going to idly stand by and let someone flout their rules is itself an act of protection.

This isn't Tiananmen square, it's a school parking lot. Jumping on a moving vehicle that is someone private property is absolutely over the top and unessesary. They could have tried to file legal action against her or banned her from the premises after. This was not the only solution.

And if she hit a kid because she was driving the wrong way, oh well?

[Arkeyana]

This parent either fell asleep at driving school, is selfish/flat out stupid, OR just really doesn't give a fuck about traffic laws because "Oh my daughter will be late." Yeah Yeah, mind if I say how many times I've been late for school? and all those times no traffic laws were violated?

[Conservative Feminism]

The moment the teacher touched the vehicle is when the teachers behavior became the bigger problem. The woman should not have been doing what she was doing but what the teacher did is not only dangerous, but it is also potentially damamaging someone's property, it wasn't protecting anyone.

Driving the wrong way through a closed entrance that was closed for staff and student safety was potentially harmful to any students in the way of the entitled dipshit who refused to stop her car.

That's assuming this person was willing to run over a bunch of students. Doesn't seem like a reasonable assumption to me. Waiting to see a defense of the teachers actions that isn't a ridiculous reach.

[Conservative Feminism]

This isn't Tiananmen square, it's a school parking lot. Jumping on a moving vehicle that is someone private property is absolutely over the top and unessesary. They could have tried to file legal action against her or banned her from the premises after. This was not the only solution.

And if she hit a kid because she was driving the wrong way, oh well?

That's reaching. You're making the assumption she's okay with harming people, that hasn't been proven. The only person putting lives in actual danger is the teacher.

[Shazbotdom]

If that was here in New Orleans, she would have been given a traffic citation and possibly even had charges of Child Endangerment against her for driving into a coned off area where she could have possibly hit children.

[LimaUniformNovemberAlpha]

Driving the wrong way through a closed entrance that was closed for staff and student safety was potentially harmful to any students in the way of the entitled dipshit who refused to stop her car.

That's assuming this person was willing to run over a bunch of students. Doesn't seem like a reasonable assumption to me. Waiting to see a defense of the teachers actions that isn't a ridiculous reach.

1. "Willing" or not, one can do so by accident.

2. We already know she was willing to break traffic laws in a school zone. Why should we put anything past her?

[The Lone Alliance]

That's assuming this person was willing to run over a bunch of students. Doesn't seem like a reasonable assumption to me. Waiting to see a defense of the teachers actions that isn't a ridiculous reach.

1. "Willing" or not, one can do so by accident.

2. We already know she was willing to break traffic laws in a school zone. Why should we put anything past her?

This is the era where mass killers have decided the car to be their newest weapon of choice when they can't get a gun in time.