Insurance companies will love this. The Authorities will love this. Wives and husbands being cheated on will love this. In short anyone can, legally or with a little bribe money, find out where your car has been.

Congress is now eyeing new legislation that would force the automotive industry to make safety updates to vehicles in the wake of the massive recalls by Toyota. If the legislation were made into law, all automakers would be required to install black boxes into their automobiles and to pay fees to the government to fund safety agencies.

The black boxes would record vehicle parameters leading up to an accident to help investigators determine if the accident was an issue with the vehicle or driver error. The draft of the legislation was released by Energy and Commerce Chairman Henry Waxman of California. The legislation would also remove any caps on civil penalties a carmaker was subject to.

The legislation would also give the NHTSA the power to order an immediate recall of vehicles if it finds that there is an “imminent hazard of death or serious injury.” Other sections of the draft legislation would impose new safety standards that relate to brake override systems and preventing pedals from being trapped on the floor.




  1. Mextli says:

    #29 # 29 jescott418 “If you drive right you need not worry.”

    I think I saw something like that before, “If you have nothing to hide what’s the problem?”

  2. deowll says:

    They can already track you through your cell phone. Having a tracking device in the car is almost redundant except you might turn your phone off but if the government wants to stick a tracking device on a vehicle they don’t need a warrant.

    Not sure if other people are allowed to do the same thing or not.

    Many black boxes track much more than a few minutes to help the mechanic figure out what issues the vehicle may have. Throw in a gps device and well that pretty much takes care of that doesn’t it?

    Many people and companies do put a gps tracking device into their cars and can turn the vehicle off remotely as part of onstar or some other system.

    Speed limiters and auto braking are on their way if they aren’t already here. I don’t actually try to keep up with this sort of thing.

  3. MacVaultDweller says:

    The only time driving should be considered a privilege is when your parents give you the keys to their car.
    Oh yes first the government chips your car then they chip you.

  4. Alki Area says:

    Er…that doesn’t have ANYTHING to do with privacy, ie. where you are or where you were going. This thing doesn’t have or need GPS. You’re talking about black boxes like airplanes have. Those JUST record speed, G forces (in all directions), control actions (direction, braking, acceleration, etc). That’s ENTIRELY different from ‘big brother’ tracking you. I’d be PERFECTLY ok with just the ‘instrument’ data for the last 10 minutes (all that would need to be kept), but not with any ‘location’ data. There’s no need to know location for these issues.

  5. Skeptic of the AOBCCS says:

    Re #11… myself… “Who’s fault was it.?

    Luckily I had 3 witnesses (strangers with empathy) who thankfully stayed around and told what they saw… which matched what I said. The light runner got charged.

    BUT, if there were no witnesses, I would have been charged. When you make a left turn at a light, get hit, and there are no witnesses, you are automatically guilty of an unsafe turn. It was a very costly accident… 2 cars were totaled, and the guilty party probably had his insurance increase by at least $2000/ year for 6 years.

    There were no intersection cameras, and neither of us had cars with any accident recording device. If I didn’t have witnesses I would have paid a lot for the other guy’s mistake.

    Think of the “black box” as an honest witness. Also think of it as personal property. Unless you hear otherwise, I doubt that anyone can go through that personal property without your permission, or without you due cause… being in an accident.

    Your fear of the device is illogical and unwarranted.

  6. bobbo, telling the difference between privacy and anonymity says:

    Skeptic==so that wasn’t rhetorical huh? I keep getting that wrong on this blog.

    I don’t see how a recorder would have helped you in this case. You made a left turn, the issue is the status of the light at the time, not recorded by any internal system.

    I also don’t think a left turn at a light is automatically suspect for just your circumstance.

    People have a hard time with the truth when it doesn’t match their druthers. “Reality is not your friend” doesn’t win many followers.

  7. Skeptic of the AOBCCS says:

    If the other guy had a black box Bobbo, his braking and then speeding up, and also his speeding in a 60 kph zone (he hit so hard that my minivan skidded sideways 60 feet).

    And yes, it’s an automatic penalty in Ontario. So is hitting someone from behind unless you can prove dangerous driving on their part.

  8. Skeptic of the AOBCCS says:

    Should add, that you are partly right. It would be harder to prove my case without witnesses, but something is better than nothing. I’m all for cameras at intersections as well. If someone or something is watching, people are more likely to behave themselves.

  9. I Could Use Me Some says:

    (# 35 Skeptic – Unless you hear otherwise, I doubt that anyone can go through that personal property without your permission, or without you due cause… being in an accident.)

    As an option, fine. But once mandated, I’m betting the option/privacy will disappear. Not saying that’s good or bad — just saying.

    Besides, if Waxman is in favor of it, I’m pretty much alread against it.

  10. Usagi says:

    Where are the tea partyers when you need them

  11. bobbo, telling shit from shinola says:

    Skeptic–you say: “If you get hit making a left hand turn, its automatically your fault unless you have witnesses to prove otherwise.” //// I don’t believe you. Left turns at light controlled intersections could never have such a rule. On a two lane highway–sure.

    I rear-ended a first time driver as she braked for no reason in the middle of making a right hand turn. I think she saw traffic coming in the opposite lane and braked for safety in case they came across the median line in a head on situation. I had to be very polite given my assumption proof she braked unreasonably would be difficult. Luckily, cars were not damaged, just bumped. Her adult supervisor had nothing to say either, so we both said “sorry” and went on our ways.

    Just another case for a personal cam system that records everything we do and say. Good for winning arguments with the wifey. Mine will be mounted to a broonstick attached to my back back. Others may choose the model stuck up their ass.

  12. ECA says:

    tHE DEVICE LISTED ABOVE COULD BE USED for a few things..
    IT WONT stop car wrecks..it wont stop idiot drivers..it wont stop cellphone users..

    It can be used to discern what has happened to the car. IT CAN BE timed and dated, and you will see if there were Sudden stops and turns, if they speed, and with GPS…you dont want to know. The insurance corps would LOVE to know.
    These devices could also be used by police. That do Stop checks to see if YOU had an accident or were driving TO FAST, DRUNK, other things. With GPS, they know WHERE and when you were.

    NOW if you know your math, you could take the data and insert it in a computer and trace it BACKWARDS, and get a GOOD idea of where they have been, RECENTLY and long term..

  13. Floyd says:

    Law of unintended consequences: old cars without the black box will suddenly become very valuable, and mechanics will be busy keeping those old cars running.

  14. A says:

    This isn’t about accidents or invading your privacy, it’s solely about taxes.. at this point. Texas and a number of other states have been testing ‘pay-as-you-go’ car insurance, etc. If I recall Progressive was running it.

    Many states are drooling at the concept of applying road taxes based on usage. The more you drive, the more you pay. Utopian or Draconian, up to you.

    Only a moron thinks the governments gives a crap about your safety beyond keeping you breathing so you can pay your taxes.

    Waxman has always been a puppet, look for the strings. Crap ‘n Trade, now this. Trying to piggyback it onto the Toyota shakedown is kinda lazy. But hey we’re getting dumber, so why make an effort.

    Incumbents out in 2010.

  15. GregAllen says:

    Is there anyway this gizmo could detect cell phone use while driving and issue a ticket?

    Now THAT would make our roads safer. I am so fed-up with these narcissistic jerks swerving around while distracted by whatever little drama they go going on their cell phones.

  16. BigBoyBC says:

    OnStar…any questions?

  17. Glenn E. says:

    Since when do the insurers care whose fault an accident was? That’s why they came up with “No Fault” insurance. Because it cut out the expense of paying investigators, and the litigation costs. Back when I had a fender bender in 1980. My insurer wasn’t even interested in it being someone else’s fault. And my rate went up for a while, regardless. Some years later, a rent van clip my car’s front fender. I got the license number and call the claim into my insurer that afternoon, at work. An “investigator” for the other party came to my house to asses the damage. And two weeks later I was informed that since the van was being used for personal use (picking up a pizza, for the rental agents), and not under lease. The insurer didn’t have to pay me anything! Some sort of limited use insurance, for commercial use. Sweet deal for the renter. But I got stuck with the bill, my insurer had to cover what my deductable didn’t. They didn’t have the balls to pursue the driver of the van.

    So all in all, I highly doubt these “black boxes” are for the insurance carriers’ interest. More like it’s for the automakers’ protection, from false claims. But they’re getting the gov. to require it. And pretend to be a “big brother” about it. Rather than doing it on their own, and taking the PR heat for it.

    Kind of like how the cigarette makers lobbied Congress to have Tv ads removed. When they were faced with counter-smoking ads, under the fairness regulation. If they had pulled out of Tv ads themselves (all brands). It would have looked suspicious, and made the news as to why. Congress gave them the excuse for doing it, by playing the “nanny”. A role it rarely does, with the concerned industries’ consent.

    A tiny little data recorder (no GPS, so no “where you were going” data), in the more expensive models. Will save the makers millions in future legal hassles. Especially as such cases have apparently become the latest graze of attorneys, these days. They’ve got to eat too, ya know.

  18. Sock it to me says:

    # 45 A : Many states are drooling at the concept of applying road taxes based on usage. The more you drive, the more you pay.

    Sorry. Since a huge portion of gasoline’s cost is “road taxes” aren’t we already paying based on usage?

  19. brm says:

    Anyone who thinks this is a good idea is an asshole.

  20. brm says:

    And I thought the problem with these Toyotas was the electronics?

    So to make them safer we put in more… electronics?

  21. GRtak says:

    Your cell phone is capable of all of that tracking stuff, and it has all of your calls too. And you pay the phone company to track you all of the time.

  22. Skeptic of the AOBCCS says:

    Re: #41, “I don’t believe you. Left turns at light controlled intersections could never have such a rule.”

    Bobbo such a a weak argument, even for you. The rules may be different where you are, but there are so many accidents of the 2 types I described, that expedience is the rule here, and I suspect the same in other areas of the country.

    Your little bump, where no damage was done, is hardly an example to illustrate laying of blame.

    Bobbo,I found this link in about 5 seconds. Do your own search and prove me wrong.
    http://www.wheels.ca/Auto%20Know/article/245084

  23. noname says:

    # 53 GRtak,

    Wow, I didn’t know my cell phone can validate someones clam they physical applied the brake yet the car still accelerates. That’s one smart phone!!

  24. A says:

    # 50 Sock it to me:

    My understanding is that the idea is to apply a ‘surcharge’ to heavy users. And would like the idea of ticketing based on GPS data. Similar to electricity usage, you pay a base rate and then a 2nd tier price if your usage goes beyond that.

  25. bobbo, failing to tell shit from shinola says:

    #54–Skeptic. I apologize.

    This will also make me a better driver.

    Thank you.

  26. Skeptic of the AOBCCS says:

    There’s an impostor posing as Bobbo!

    (Someday I’ll tell you about the time I rear-ended a member of the Canadian Armed Forces.) 🙂

    PS, Thanks.

  27. BubbaRay says:

    Glenn E. said, on May 1st, 2010 at 9:49 pm

    >>Kind of like how the cigarette makers lobbied Congress to have Tv ads removed.

    Don’t you mean not removed?

    From the WSJ: “The four “appointees have pronounced and disqualifying conflicts and biases arising from their active and zealous participation as paid expert witnesses for plaintiffs in lawsuits” that attempt to cripple or destroy the industry, the letter said.”

  28. KarmaBaby says:

    #45, there’s already a ‘pay-as-you-go’ tax system. Its called “The Gasoline Tax”. Its low-tech and reliable (no way to hack it or cheat). Don’t see how a black box would improve on this.


0

Bad Behavior has blocked 4608 access attempts in the last 7 days.