Dash Cams...

[digi]

After watching some good road rage/crash videos on YouTube, why does it seem like all the bad drivers have dash cams?? lol

[tp4tissue]

Well, a successful trip to work isn't interesting.

Imagine Cop shows where they do paperwork and nothing else.

They're coming for you bad-boy.

[digi]

Well, a successful trip to work isn't interesting.

Imagine Cop shows where they do paperwork and nothing else.

They're coming for you bad-boy.

Is it popular to have cams in your car? Or is it mostly people with prior incidents who have them?

[tp4tissue]

Is it popular to have cams in your car? Or is it mostly people with prior incidents who have them?

Everything in this wurld is trying to kill you. 

The cam pays for itself when you need it.

[$W4GK!NG]

In my country, some cop will pull you over for stupid stuff you didn't do, and if you have a dashcam, you can show them that you didn't do nothing )))

[fohat.digs]

I know some carpenters and delivery drivers who got them for protection against false claims and charges.

Avoiding one traffic ticket or insurance claim more than pays for the device.

[Maledicted]

I should have had one when some woman cut me off in the center lane of the highway, in heavy traffic, then slammed on her brakes hard. My brakes were in need of replacement, and there were cars on either side, so all I could do is slam on mine and hope she didn't come to a complete stop ... which she did, so collision was unavoidable. I couldn't see ahead of her as I always drive small/cheap economy cars (My Chevy Sonic in this case), but when I asked what the trouble ahead of her was, her only response was, "I don't know".

There was a basketball-sized dent in the bottom of her bumper cover, in a matte plastic portion that looked like it would just pop out, as there was no paint. My front bumper cover cracked and the cheap plastic grill broke.

This was in the middle of January, in Wisconsin, so we were in the single digits Fahrenheit for temperature. She immediately said we should exchange information and just get on our ways, because she had a child in the back seat. The windows were tinted, so I couldn't tell for sure, but I didn't see anything that could be alive back there, but agreed.

I was obviously disturbed by what had just occurred, since this was the newest car I had ever owned, and had only owned it for a year. One of the few things she did say was, "Well, at least nobody was hurt." as if that was supposed to be comforting or something. That became a pretty ironic statement later.

I called the DMV the next day and they said that if the damage was below a certain threshold, I believe it was a few thousand, they assured me that the accident didn't need to be reported. I figured there was literally 0 actual damage to her vehicle, and I planned on just picking up a bumper cover at a pick-and-pull for a few hundred bucks and slapping it on there, so I figured that was a done deal.

A few weeks later the insurance company calls and says that she reported the accident, and asked whether or not there was a child in the back seat. I explained that I couldn't be sure, but I sure didn't see one. They said they would send an assessor, and that was the end of the conversation. Not once did my insurance company ask me my side of the story.

The assessor called a GM dealership and, of course, the dealership came up with some ludicrous number like $3,000. I only paid $4,000 for the freaking car. I eventually found out from him, in later phone calls, that the other driver, and supposed child, claimed to have injuries and was suing my insurance company. I asked him whether or not anybody was ever going to ask me what happened. He seemed stunned at this question, but continued on with the conversation.

Long story short, in the state of Wisconsin, regardless of the circumstances, the first driver to rear end another vehicle ... for literally any reason at all, is considered at fault. This was over a year ago. It was my first and only accident, in driving for the last 15 years. Monthly insurance costs still haven't gone back down to what they were.

I wish I had had a dash cam. That's for sure.

[fohat.digs]

rear end another vehicle ... for literally any reason at all, is considered at fault.

This is the generally accepted rule. Sometimes, eg if there is rain or ice, you won't get charged with a traffic violation, but you are still the wrongdoer.

And these days, pretty much any body work is going to cost $2K-$3K minimum because of reasons ....

Usually they say something like they have to "blend in" the paint over half the car.

[Rob27shred]

I'm pretty sure most of the crazy dash cam videos from civilians is from Russia. People were pulling staged wrecks & jumping on cars to act they got hit left & right after they went to a free market. It got so bad, everybody starting using dash cams cause without them it was your word vs the supposed victims in court.

[Maledicted]

rear end another vehicle ... for literally any reason at all, is considered at fault.

This is the generally accepted rule. Sometimes, eg if there is rain or ice, you won't get charged with a traffic violation, but you are still the wrongdoer.

And these days, pretty much any body work is going to cost $2K-$3K minimum because of reasons ....

Usually they say something like they have to "blend in" the paint over half the car.

It shouldn't be so, it is ridiculous. That is why you see people on the highway, I kid you not because I have seen it multiple times, keeping pace with a slug in the slow lane, waiting for people to pile up behind them and get impatient, then slam on their brakes. They'll even try to fake them out. They'll slam on their brakes, let off, then slam on their brakes again just as the people behind them hit the gas. I have seen the same person try this 5-10 times in a single trip down the highway (this is when it is down to 2 lanes instead of 3), multiple times.

I have had people try to bait me into that trap at least 2-3 times before myself, and have seen through it.

People just take advantage of the system. There needs to be more consideration for the circumstances.

[Kavik]

I thought about getting one a couple years back but just never jumped on it. What is the Geekhack Approved^TM model in case I ever decide to get one? I've never needed one, but I imagine it's the kind of thing I'll only need once or twice in a lifetime, so I just need to get one and start using it.

[tp4tissue]

I have had people try to bait me into that trap at least 2-3 times before myself, and have seen through it.

People just take advantage of the system. There needs to be more consideration for the circumstances.

2 main reasons.

Income inequality,  annnnd,  Drug Addiction.

[Maledicted]

I have had people try to bait me into that trap at least 2-3 times before myself, and have seen through it.

People just take advantage of the system. There needs to be more consideration for the circumstances.

2 main reasons.

Income inequality,  annnnd,  Drug Addiction.

2 main reasons for what, specifically?

[tp4tissue]

2 main reasons for what, specifically?

A person wouldn't try to net a paltry $600 on the risk of Dying on the Highway without desperation.

That's the average payout on bumper scrapes.

The most common cause would be financial desperation and addiction.

[Maledicted]

2 main reasons for what, specifically?

A person wouldn't try to net a paltry $600 on the risk of Dying on the Highway without desperation.

That's the average payout on bumper scrapes.

The most common cause would be financial desperation and addiction.

I have said it before that drug addiction is a major problem in even rural Wisconsin, including in the areas in which I live and work. That much would not surprise me at all.

If it is because of poverty, then:

1) They're not managing their finances responsibly if they own a vehicle, and are paying for car insurance (hopefully) in order to make a few months worth of insurance costs back by selfishly ruining the driving records of other people.

2) They are wholly immoral people that are probably struggling financially for reasons that are entirely their own doing.

My immediate family has been in debt my entire life. We came close to losing the house entirely because my father was a chain smoker, alcoholic and drug addict who contributed almost nothing to the household for vast swaths of time, while simultaneously wrecking his cars and going to prison, even while my mother was refinancing the house to pay bills as she went back to school (neither of them previously graduated from college, my father didn't even have a GED).

They divorced something like 5 years ago (over him having extorted more than $7,000 from my widowed grandmother trying to get by on Social Security), he's been dead for 2 and a half years, and she's STILL trying to get her head back above water as a result of his reckless actions. I fear that she may not even be able to ever comfortably retire, even though she has now had a decent job as a Nuclear Medicine Technician for the last 15 years or so (If she had not been so when she did, we would have lost everything in the coming years).

As for myself, fearing debt, I have only gotten an associates degree, as that's what I could barely manage to pay off with a combination of a paid internship and subsequent unemployment benefits before incurring interest. That degree is worthless. Now, in the past 8 months, I finally make enough to start saving to try to move out of her house without spending literally everything on just surviving ... I'm 30 years old.

I would never have done what those clowns do, and find it completely reprehensible. I would rather live under a bridge.

[tp4tissue]

I would never have done what those clowns do, and find it completely reprehensible. I would rather live under a bridge.

Your frustration is understandable.

Do consider the fact that the existence of these people is a consequence of income inequality.

A richer person doesn't only have more money, he also has an extra few hours of TIME in the day to communicate with his spouse and children, to educate them or himself. While a rich kid is getting prep-schooled, his poor kids peers are flipping burgers. Neither action guarantees any outcome, but it's clear that flipping burgers on average is worse education with lower income outcomes..

This time constraint goes all the way down the economic line with poor people tied up for the longest away from their family / people / children .

HAD these people had more Income/hour, they too would have some space to improve.


Unfortunately, society is necessarily segregated to produce different labor classes.

Before computers this was the best way, but now that we have better accounting, it's only recently become apparent that we can do better.

There is a time lag, and incumbent thinking needs to be overcome.  Largely this will not be done through discussion. More typically,  as a society, we simply wait for the Old-Generation Oligarchs to die, wait for the New-Gen Oligarchs to fail,  and the Better Pleb-Born nouveau riche to actually initiate change.

This is a process which takes life-times to complete.

[Maledicted]

I would never have done what those clowns do, and find it completely reprehensible. I would rather live under a bridge.

Your frustration is understandable.

Do consider the fact that the existence of these people is a consequence of income inequality.

A richer person doesn't only have more money, he also has an extra few hours of TIME in the day to communicate with his spouse and children, to educate them or himself. While a rich kid is getting prep-schooled, his poor kids peers are flipping burgers. Neither action guarantees any outcome, but it's clear that flipping burgers on average is worse education with lower income outcomes..

This time constraint goes all the way down the economic line with poor people tied up for the longest away from their family / people / children .

HAD these people had more Income/hour, they too would have some space to improve.


Unfortunately, society is necessarily segregated to produce different labor classes.

Before computers this was the best way, but now that we have better accounting, it's only recently become apparent that we can do better.

There is a time lag, and incumbent thinking needs to be overcome.  Largely this will not be done through discussion. More typically,  as a society, we simply wait for the Old-Generation Oligarchs to die, wait for the New-Gen Oligarchs to fail,  and the Better Pleb-Born nouveau riche to actually initiate change.

This is a process which takes life-times to complete.

I see it differently. I see "income inequality" as primarily a result of poor/immoral/selfish choices. Single parent households are the best example, although those are already infinitely better off than deadbeat parents who do stick around and waste even more resources.

I'm not perfect in that regard, but I will not be my father, and as such, with any luck, I'll be much better off than I am now by the time I'm old. That is MY problem, not society's as a whole, although ridiculous social norms lead to these very situations. Already, through no help of anyone else (other than my mother's own shrewd move/gamble to get a college education to keep a roof over our heads), my income is enough to just barely be considered middle class.

We need to change people's hearts and minds. People should not be having children, at all, unless they're financially secure, and responsible with their money. If they're going to have children, they had better get married, and work together for their betterment, even if their current economic situation is dire.

I doubt we'll ever completely reverse the problem, but government intervention has created dependence, which has removed the necessity for personal responsibility, which further perpetuates the problem ... like a disease.

A good example is my own brother. He works at a local factory, screen printing is the trade. He had 0 experience, worked at a pizza place and a local Goodwill previously. He has nothing more than a high school diploma under his belt as far as completed schooling. His factory hires literally anyone, including convicted felons who are on probation/parole ... and then violate that probation/parole.

Such people are sifted out like chaff, but those who take their job seriously, and are competent in doing it, have a steady income. In his case, he was quite good at the task at hand, and was moved up to bigger and more difficult presses. Having worked there for only a few years now, he already makes slightly more than I do. He and his now wife made the mistake of accidental conception, but they had saved their money, and now own their own condo. She, also, works in a factory. The child even had birth defects and they're still getting by, on their own.

[tp4tissue]

I see it differently. I see "income inequality" as primarily a result of poor/immoral/selfish choices.

You're placing these choices as spontaneous / deliberate actions.

The analysis is incomplete because the environment is neglected.

Growing up in lower income means this set of people has fewer long-term option.

A person with 2 nickles is thinking bubblegum and that's about it. For the entirety of his upbringing he's (MOSTLY) thinking short term.

A person given the option of $1000, might think, well it takes only 5 of those to get a Jetski,  Maybe I should WAIT.   <This set> of people will always be thinking slightly LONGER.  Longer decisions take more critical thinking and planning.

So, ON AVERAGE, growing up rich or poor will dictate the depth of mind that is cultivated.

It is then the case, that Income Inequality / Income Class will determine the Type of personality which arises in each individual.


This is not to disregard your personal experience/ expectation for yourself, but know that your confidence and potential success would be an anomaly..  It might not be as uncommon in the digital age, but it certainly would be -pre- computer.
This is affirmed by our attachment to Folk-Heroism and Rags-to-Riches plotlines, because for the majority of history, the climbs were impossible.

[Maledicted]

I see it differently. I see "income inequality" as primarily a result of poor/immoral/selfish choices.

You're placing these choices as spontaneous / deliberate actions.

The analysis is incomplete because the environment is neglected.

Growing up in lower income means this set of people has fewer long-term option.

A person with 2 nickles is thinking bubblegum and that's about it. For the entirety of his upbringing he's (MOSTLY) thinking short term.

A person given the option of $1000, might think, well it takes only 5 of those to get a Jetski,  Maybe I should WAIT.   <This set> of people will always be thinking slightly LONGER.  Longer decisions take more critical thinking and planning.

So, ON AVERAGE, growing up rich or poor will dictate the depth of mind that is cultivated.

It is then the case, that Income Inequality / Income Class, dictates the Type of personality that arises in each individual.


This is not to disregard your personal experience/ expectation for yourself, but know that your confidence and potential success would be an anomaly..  It might not be as uncommon in the digital age, but it certainly would be -pre- computer.

It would be an anomaly because people refuse to take responsibility for/ownership of their own lives and destinies. It is much easier to live and think that way, regardless of upbringing and economic class. I agree that these things are a major factor in the conditioning of the mind, and I myself have wasted plenty of money on frivolous things that could have otherwise been saved.

I think, for this reason and many others that are related, that existential philosophy should be a required course in high school.

The only difference, outside of inheriting wealth (in which case, one's character is basically irrelevant unless they literally squander all of that wealth ... which is actually not uncommon, as rich kids themselves are unlikely to have any immediate need to be taught personal responsibility) is digging in and making a change, or not doing so.

There's always a conscious choice if one objectively weighs the options set before them.

Think about the majority of the peoples who first settled in this country, from the early colonists, to the westward expansion, and beyond. Poor immigrants who maybe couldn't afford land in their native countries. Many came as indentured servants because they couldn't even afford passage otherwise.

This country was built by the poor, with a dream of not being so, and with time, those dreams were realized with enough passion and determination. Losing what's gained is much easier than attaining it.

Take Andrew Carnegie. He was born in a single-room cottage in rural Scotland. By the end of his life, he was determined to give his offspring none of his fortune, because the struggle itself to attain it is what gave him the personal character required to first earn it, and then maintain it.

[Sintpinty]

Is it popular to have cams in your car? Or is it mostly people with prior incidents who have them?

Everything in this wurld is trying to kill you. 

The cam pays for itself when you need it.

hes right you know

[Maledicted]

Is it popular to have cams in your car? Or is it mostly people with prior incidents who have them?

Everything in this wurld is trying to kill you. 

The cam pays for itself when you need it.

hes right you know

Most likely, yes, if you live in a very urban area. My accident was even on country roads. We don't even have street lights over that stretch of the highway. I imagine the risk will be much worse near a major metropolitan area.