[az968]

"that safety stuff is the other guy's problem if he hits me". This is Complete Bullshit.  I can assure you my brother would rather have his fully functioning brain back and return the insurance money he received in the settlement for his permanent TBI. The other guy's has created a problem my brother will have to live with for whatever life span he has remaining.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

everybody has some story like this.  me too.  the reality is that you take your life into your own hands when you get in a car.  if the driver who rear-ended somebody knew he was going to lose his license, or worse, he wouldn't put himself in that position, and if he did, he deserves what he gets.  it's only because we are so lenient on these things that people get away with it.  i take my driving very seriously.  i NEVER put myself in a position where i might rear-end somebody.  instead of making people responsible for their actions, we choose to regulate everything, and impose ridiculous restrictions.

 

ireland is better, and worse.  the safety nazis are here in force (you can't even buy more than 24 aspirin at one time), but they also make the driver responsible.  it's not a perfect system, but there sure aren't as many accidents.  even with the goat trail roads, the drivers driving down the middle of the road, and a blind corner every 50 yards, they manage not to bang into each other.

 

3rd brake lights may keep a few idiots from ramming you, but the real answer is to correct the driver problem.  reduce the number of drivers by increasing the skill level requirements.  charge a lot more for gas and put the money into public transit, so those people can get to work.  then charge a high annual fee for a license and car registration, impose no fault insurance, and remove the litigation process by imposing fixed extremely high penalties.  that will keep the cars in better shape (nobody would pay high costs for a heap), and ensure that only those who actually need to drive will do so.  problem solved.  of course the insurance and ambulance chaser industries would collapse, and our courts would have to focus on real crime, but wouldn't that be a good thing?

 

and yes, we use the public transit all the time, at any opportunity we can. much better than driving.  i've done that my whole life.

 

this problem will resolve itself soon though.  gasoline and deisel cars are being phased out in europe, in favor of electric cars and alternate fuel cars, none of which will ever be focused on fun, but rather utility.  autodriving cars will soon become the norm in the states.  the experiments with "follow the leader lanes"are working too (though i'm not sure how soon that will be implemented, as it would involve the government and highway system).  but soon enough, driving as we know it will become a thing of the past.  personally, i can't wait.  i've always thought driving was a chore (unless i was on the track, and that lost its luster a long time ago too).  i like cars, and owning them, but not really so much driving them, most of the time.  i have found that better than 90% of the time i am just trying to get from point a to b.  i don't need that to be entertaining.

 

so, the safety nazis may ultimately get their wish, as they find, after trying to regulate everything else and still failing to solve the problem, that the only way to really make driving safe, is to hand it over to a computer.  people will always break the law, and think it doesn't apply to them.  i'm willing to be that everyone reading this, if they are honest about it, has done it today, either by speeding, following too closely, running a light, or some other seemingly innocuous violation.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

Fixing a behavioral problem by legislation or financial fiat has limited impact. For example, dealing and using heroin is illegal. There are huge penalties for noncompliance. Yet we see a steadily increasing problem. People drive after drinking despite the millions of dollars spent to convince them not to and the penalties for noncompliance. People speed and drive recklessly despite rules and regulations prohibiting it and fines for noncompliance.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

actually, the penalties are not nearly huge enough.  people figure they won't likely get caught, and a good lawyer can get them out of it.  how about a life sentence for the first offence?  that's a roll of the dice i think might stand a chance of working.  i'm as guilty as anybody of this, but you can bet that if a life in jail was on the line, my decision making paradigm would shift.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

An additional consideration re the third brake light, or any other similar safety features removal and deliberate tampering ; whereas your insurance policies will typically cover you even if you're negligent , willful misconduct is categorically excluded in all policies. Here's the kicker : your claim will be denied , REGARDLESS of whether or not that tampered safety component was a factor in, or related in any way with the accident ; willful misconduct is considered a fundamental violation of your policy terms & conditions and it invalidates your coverage as a blanket rule. So let's say you run over a pedestrian - your deleted brake light has nothing to do with the accident , but on post accident inspection of the car, or during litigation discovery , the insurance company learns of your having removed A safety feature in the car - claim denied ! No coverage so all of a sudden you're on your own for any and all liability which ensues ; you lose your house, lose your savings, ( and I don't know this but it would not surprised it in some states tampering with safety features may even be a misdemeanor ) and lose the quality of your life ...because you want to enhance the aesthetics of your car ? Like I said, to each his own but make sure if you decide to take a calculated risk you do so with knowledge of all the potential ramifications .


Don't ask me about the removal of the bumperettes, lol, I have no idea if those are considered a " safety " feature ..ostensibly it can be argued they are ..


And yes, I agree that some penalties / fees and consequences should be exponentially increased .. $ 50 for a texting while driving violation ?! Are you f'ing kidding me ?? That should carry a minimum $ 1,000 first offense fee, and a 3 months license suspension . IMHO , that's not just as dangerous as ( if not more so ) drunk driving , and to compound the problem while you may have 1 out of 100 drivers on the road drunk at any given point in time between 6 am and 6 pm peak driving hours , you have probably 30 - 50 drivers out of 100 who are pushing those text keyboards and glancing at their phone screens, with cars everywhere around them . This happens to be my biggest pet peeve on driving , as I was nearly hit more than a dozen times by texting idiots , and had to make sudden and possibly dangerous evasive maneuvers to avoid being side swiped or rear ended, etc. And actually, many years ago one of my Mercedes was totaled by a moron in a pick up truck who slammed into the car while I was on the freeway as all the other cars in front of me were coming to a slow down . I saw him in my the rear view mirror as he approached at a speed way to fast for the condition ..he was looking down at his phone !! ..I knew I was going to get hit and though I had left the usual three or four car lengths in front of me, there was no escape in either of the adjacent lanes which were very crowded , so I did move forward slowly , as much as I could , when I realized my car was just about to be hit, so as to lessen the impact, but it was still strong enough to total my car . I walked away without even a bruise or whiplash or anything , but since then every time I see someone using their phone , which as I said is all the time , I wish there was a police car around, and the penalties as severe as they can be .. Rant over , lol.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

your argument is exactly why no fault insurance, and major tort reform, is a must.  it would remove the issue of the other party from the equation, and limit things to your own issues and losses.  it removes the possibility of losing your house.  further, there should be a complete overhaul of the insurance industry, to eliminate the issues you describe. you should be able to choose not to have certain things on the car, or to not wear a helmet on a motorcycle, but then your own claim can be denied.   it would all come back to driver responsibility, like it should.  get it out of the courts.  nobody should be able to sue.  there should be a fixed price list for body parts and such.  they have an algorithm for child support.  they could certainly come up with one for this.  but then it involves revamping the medical industry to standardise pricing................another conversation for another thread

 

the bumperettes are in fact a feature specifically designed to prevent corner damage at speeds below 5mph.  removal of those could easily increase the damage to that area.  i removed them anyway.

 

FYI - first offence cell phone use penalty here is $1400

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[lbpesq]

Requiring everyone to pass stringent tests and pay high fees to get a license, and then taking it away from everyone who got in an accident wouldn't work in most of the US where public transportation is inadequate, very inconvenient, or even non-existent. We live in a society where, right or privilege, driving is a necessity. If we implemented these policies, the result would be far more people driving without licenses or insurance.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

that's why gasoline needs to be a LOT more expensive, and the money spent on public transportation.  when gas prices go up, people take public transit.  i've watched it in the bay area and in los angeles.  it's plain as day.  they do what is least expensive.  if more people used it, it would expand.  it's a business, and they will follow the profit.  it's the same here. as they add more, it gets used more.  there wasn't much here not too long ago.  now, it's pretty darned good.

 

build it and they will come

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[LES]

This discussion reminds me of another thread where owners were replacing their steering wheel with a non-air bag model.  I wonder how the insurance company would view that modification on the post accident inspection.  I think the issue comes down to how and where you drive your car.  Daily driver...keep the third brake light.  Extra car driven infrequently for recreational drives or to and from car shows during the day...who needs it?  Best solution was found by Anchorman when he installed a third brake light above the license plate but not on the trunk deck.  IIRC, it was difficult to find the replacement light, not difficult to complete the modification and looked great.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

i ran with a non-airbag wheel for almost the entire time i had the blue car.  insurance company could care less.  i had a couple of claims too, where they had to inspect the car.  just not a thing.  that being said, if there were an airbag wheel the right size, i would have run it.  i removed the stock wheel because that airbag is dangerous.  it has exceeded its lifespan, is an old type 1, which caused numerous injuries when they were new, and at this point is essentially a grenade in front of your face, just waiting to go off.  frankly i wouldn't be surprised if insurance companies started denying claims for injuries due to those old bags.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[ds968]

 frankly i wouldn't be surprised if insurance companies started denying claims for injuries due to those old bags.

They won't , but if the claim payout is large enough they'll then try to subrogate ( going after the air bag mfg or even the car manufacturer )


On the safety side of things, one city here took the first step in the right direction ( IMO ) - they introduced a measure to ban use of cell phones by pedestrians while in cross walks . Not sure how realistic / practical enforcement would be , but if nothing else if it passes , and well publicized, it may prevent some percentage of offenders from continuing that habit .


Baby steps, baby steps ...

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Waylander]

flash, on 12 Sept 2017 - 6:52 PM, said:

lol - i did delete those seat belts, and the airbag steering wheel.  i also deleted the red at the end of the tach.

 

p.s. - sold the car with no problem.

 

i don't include "safety" items as things i look for in a car.  i was fine driving an old mgb on a daily basis, and riding my motorcycle without a helmet.  that safety stuff is the other guy's problem if he hits me.

 

that being said, the roads would be a lot safer, and everyone would save a lot of money in insurance premiums, if they charged a high fee for a license, had regular and rigorous testing, and no fault insurance.  then you wouldn't need those silly lights and such, just to prevent idiots from hitting you, as they would not be on the road in the first place.  driving is a privilege, not a right.  if you cause an accident, like rear-ending somebody, you should lose your license.   you were following too closely, no matter what happened in front of you.

 

you should see what it is like over here.  insanely difficult to get a license.  very expensive too.  high registration and insurance costs.  in 3 plus months of being here though, i have only seen one accident.

 

I have missed three filghts out of Dublin Airport due to crashes on the ring road, I have been driven past the Guinness Plant in Dublin at 4 in the morning by a very drunk Irishman in a 350bhp 944 Turbo, sideways in the poring rain

 

love Ireland to bits, one of my Friends has 4-5 944's and 5 928's including a GTS manual, I going to visit him in the 968 next summer, lives just outside Dublin.

 

He used to be a Rally driver in the 80's /90's in a Cosworth Sierra, In the Irish Rally Championship

 

no crashes, you live in the wrong bit of Ireland, Galway is one of my favourite places 

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Rap]

When my passenger airbag discharged on my red car the plastic piece broke the windshield. 

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Ernie]

The airbag delete steering wheel was a direct consideration of the old takata airbag. Never know what would happen if that thing went off...after all... how many people have been injured by them? I just wish I could de-activate the passenger side airbag... as my significant other "airbag" is 5'2" and potentially in danger from it.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

you can disable, and even delete the passenger airbag.  i did.  once removed, that's where a lot of the stereo electronics lived.

 

re: dublin crashes, the airport area does seem to be a focal point.  i am down near greystones.  so far, just one accident i have seen, and it was halfway to dublin.  we don't even have many signal lights.  lots of roundabouts though.  everybody seems to work it out just fine.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[94SilverCab]

Hi Folks,

 

This is a thread about the 3rd brake light....time to open a new thread or get this back on topic.

 

968Forums.com does not recommend, or endorse, disabling of any factory safety equipment.

 

Thank you,

 

Jay

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Waylander]

Hi Folks,

 

This is a thread about the 3rd brake light....time to open a new thread or get this back on topic.

 

968Forums.com does not recommend, or endorse, disabling of any factory safety equipment.

 

Thank you,

 

Jay

exactly, i even added a third brake light to my coupe but not the factory one, I also have LED daylight running lights, so the blind aged (my next door but one is 93 and still driving !!!!) can see me through the cataracts

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

lol - yeah - i'll take the hit for contributing to the diversion.

 

i knew there was a reason i like the ROW cabs more than the US ones.  no third brake light.  i had to go back and look at a bunch of pictures to be sure, but yup - much better.  makes the car look much wider, and lower.  weird but true.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[Kim]

My 92 cab - Canadian - had a third light.  Not sure if it was classed as ROW or not.

 

Sometimes truth is stranger than fiction - I go there everyday.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.

[flash]

canadian cars are sort of an oddball when it comes to this stuff.  i've seen this with other models too.  they have some US stuff, and some ROW stuff.  i think it's because you can drive from one country to the other.  i think the canadian cars also came with the front bumperettes, instead of the ROW lenses.  i'm also not sure the CS was available in canada.

Partial Post: Please Login or Register to read the full post.