Would You Still Want to Drive . . .
https://www.ericpetersautos.com/2024/03/24/would-you-still-want-to-drive/
Excerpt:
What if you had to obey – to the letter – every single traffic law, from no-right-on red to no-passing if the pass requires “speeding,” even a little bit? How about no “speeding,” ever? You drive the speed limit, period.
No faster, ever.
Imagine your car enforcing traffic laws – by not allowing you to ignore them. Well, that’s coming. In fact, it’s already here, in bits and pieces that will likely all be coming together. In order to make most of us not want to drive anymore – much less make monthly payments for the privilege.
Might as well just wait for a ride. It amounts to the same thing – sans the monthly payment. Oops. There will still be a payment – per the ride. But at least you won’t have to bother with a driver’s license anymore – although you will still be obliged to get and renew your national ID card and biometric identifiers, so that you can be scanned and debited per each ride.
You’ll need that ID to be allowed to buy cough syrup, too.
Sound dark? It’s very real. And – as I have said – bits and pieces are already here, with more to come and soon all to be networked together. What do you suppose Advanced Driver Assistance Technology is? What do you suppose is implied by the term? If the driver needs assistance then arguably he ought not to be driving, at all.
Per Red Dragon, we are privy to a great becoming. And just like the victims in the movie, none of us asked to be part of it.
Yet, curiously, we all are. At least, everyone is who has bought a new car since about five years ago – when all-of-a-sudden these “assistance technologies” became standard features in practically every new vehicle. Italics added to highlight the most relevant fact. These “technologies” were not offered to buyers as an option. That is to say, available to those who wanted them. More finely, those who did not want them were stuck with them – unless they elected not to buy the car.
Just like ASS – the aptly a acronymed term for the “technology” that automatically shuts off a vehicle’s engine every time the vehicle stops moving – as for a red light. Along with the engine, engine-driven accessories such as the AC also shut off. You may have noticed how the breeze suddenly goes warm. Then noticed – when the light goes green and you take your foot off the brake – that the engine chuffs back to life. After a brief but noticeable pause. Which results in a brief but noticeable wait before the car goes.
I know of no one who likes ASS. Who would have checked the option box for ASS. Yet ASS is a de facto standard “feature” in pretty much every new vehicle, too. As is Lane Keep Assist, Automatic Emergency Braking Assist, Speed Limit Assist and several other iterations of “advanced” driver assistance “technology.” The air fingers quote marks to make a point about how the terms are used to make something cloying and insulting come across as cutting-edge and high-tech.
......No more doing anything except what is allowed. Because the car’s “technology” won’t allow it. If you think that won’t happen, think again. There are already “calls” – as it’s often put when a totalitarian demands – for electronic speed limiters, which is precisely what the “technology” styled “speed limit assistance technology” is ultimately there to do. It knows how fast you are driving. It knows how fast you’re allowed to drive. It has the technology to slow you down. It just hasn’t been fully enabled – yet.
It will be.
.....
That’s why my 2013 Dodge Challenger R/T is the last new car I will ever buy. “last of the V8’s!”.
-SB
US Judge Accepts Lawsuit From The Mexican Government Against Arizona Weapons Manufacturers
Translated excerpt:
Rosemary Márquez, of the Federal Court for the District of Arizona, based in Tucson, ruled, on March 25, 2024, that the Mexican Government could move forward with a lawsuit that accused five arms sales companies of said entity of the United States. Of participating in the trafficking of weapons and ammunition to drug trafficking cartels in Mexico.
The federal judge rejected the arguments of the distributors - Diamondback Shooting Sports Inc, SnG Tactical LLC, Loan Prairie LLC, Ammo AZ LLC and Sprague’s Sports Inc -, who argued that they enjoyed a so-called “immunity from prosecution” under the Trade Protection Act. Arms Law (PLCAA), which since 2005 has shielded US manufacturers and distributors from receiving civil complaints for misuse of their products.
Márquez said the Government of Mexico made plausible claims that were exempt from PLCAA protection, including that the five companies violated several US laws related to firearms, causing harm to the Central American country.
The Government of Mexico alleged that Arizona gun dealers facilitated the trafficking of military-style assault weapons such as the AR-15 and ammunition to drug cartels through reckless and illegal practices, including the sale of firearms to front buyers, who illegally acquired these products for third parties.
But while the federal judge allowed much of the lawsuit to move forward, she dismissed several of the Mexican government’s individual legal claims, including the allegation that the companies violated U.S. organized crime law and caused public nuisance.
Following the decision of the US judge, the Mexican Ministry of Foreign Affairs (SRE) indicated that in the following stages of the lawsuit, evidence would be presented to demonstrate the “negligent conduct” of said companies and an attempt would be made to obtain compensation for the damage.
.....“Following today’s decision, the District Court can continue studying Mexico’s claim. In the following stages, evidence will be presented to demonstrate the negligent conduct of the defendants, seeking to obtain compensation for the damage that will be determined by the judge,” the Foreign Ministry detailed.
.....Lawyers from Mexico, including Jonathan Lowy, president of Global Action on Gun Violence (GAGV) - a US-based gun control advocacy group - explained that they hoped to strengthen this case in court.
“Today’s ruling is a big step toward holding the gun industry accountable for its contribution to gun violence and stopping the flood of guns being trafficked to cartels,” Lowy said in a statement.
*******
The whole lawsuit should be thrown out. B.S. ruling by IMO biased judge and given who is one of Mexico’s lawyers one knows it is political more than legal. Mexico is under the thumb of the cartels so they try to defer blame knowing with the FJB turds in DC they may get better decisions.