h a l f b a k e r yOpen other side.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
| |
Everyone in the car should get the maximum fine. |
|
| |
Quite often, the young driver is distracted by impressing the young girl in the seat next to him. Said passenger is not being actively distracting, she's just being there. |
|
| |
I'm not sure, but I think this kind of thing is enforced by insuirance companies. If you're young and a high insurance risk, I believe some insurance companies will offer cheaper cover if you only drive in daylight hours or only drive with no passengers. If the report of your accident shows you were driving at night or with passengers, you're not insured. |
|
| |
There's just no end to this business of legislating good
judgment in drivers. Age, alcohol, cellphones, passengers
... you can add to that list indefinitely. The problem is,
driving's a quotidian activity, something ordinary (i.e.
frequently stupid, careless) people do constantly. Ideas
like this don't address the root problem. Unfortunately,
what *would* address it (treating drivers' licences like
pilots' licenses) is not only impractical, but uninteresting
(hence, not even a good halfbakery idea). |
|
| |
An alternative is to expand upon the system whereby
insurance costs increase if you engage in risky behavior
vide supra [hippo]. This works poorly, though, if the
events which trigger a rate hike are rare-but-costly. If you
kill three people in your first accident, only an economist
could take satisfaction in the fact that your insurance
premiums rise, making you more cautious in future. |
|
| |
The only hope I see is for a technological fix, whereby AIs
take over more of the driving. Maybe there's an
intermediate solution, whereby black boxes rat on you to
your insurance company. |
|
| |
...what about the baby in the car seat? |
|
| |