Posted by jim beam on February 27, 2010, 2:59 pm
On 02/26/2010 10:15 PM, Ashton Crusher wrote:
> wrote:
>> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 01:01:03 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> A woman testified before Congress that when her Toyota began
>>>> accelerating uncontrollably she "put the car in neutral and it had no
>>>> effect, I stepped on the brakes and it had no effect, I applied the
>>>> emergency brake and it had no effect, I even tried to put the car into
>>>> reverse and I couldn't."
>>>>
>>>> Huh? Putting the car in neutral had no effect? Someone provide with with
>>>> a clue on this one.
>>>>
>>>> BTW< the car was a Lexus.
>>>
>>>
>>> And do you know for a fact that the transmission is mechanically shifted
>>> or if it's all electronically controlled? If it is electronically
>>> controlled, do you KNOW that when that model Toyota is being driven that
>>> it can be shifted into neutral?
>>
>> Nope. I don't.
> And yet you attack the woman who made the statement. Tells plenty
> about you.
ad hominem? you can't address the facts so you attempt to discredit the
person pointing them out to you? [rhetorical]
>> What about the OFF button?
> What about it? As many have already said, it seems that you have to
> hold it for 3 seconds. She probably didn't hold it that long. Most
> likely it's the ONLY on/off button on anything she owns that has to be
> held for 3 seconds to turn off.
so read the freakin' owners manual!
besides, unless this is absolutely the first time this person has ever
sat behind the wheel of this vehicle, and hasn't yet turned it off, they
will have LEARNED that the button needs to be pressed for THREE SECONDS
to switch off the vehicle. duh.
>> So, do YOU know if it can or can't? Add something instead of blather for
>> once. You seems to be adept at ruining transmissions.
>>
> Really? Shows your reading comprehension problem. The ONLY
> transmission that has not been up to the task of MY *normal* driving
> is the junk in the Toyota Tercel. Whereas my domestics last forever
> it seems,
"forever" and "it seems"? those are well known legal and scientific
terms that tell us precisely NOTHING.
> the Toyota only lasted a month.
right, we believe you. the millions of tercel drivers out there that
have hundreds of thousands of miles on their cars - they believe you too.
> Since they work so well
> for you I'll assume you drive like you write, sloppily, slow, and all
> over the place, whereas I'm tight, fast, and on the mark.
except that you're not. see above.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Posted by jim on February 27, 2010, 4:05 pm
jim beam wrote:
>
> so read the freakin' owners manual!
How is that going to help someone with an out of control vehicle?
>
> besides, unless this is absolutely the first time this person has ever
> sat behind the wheel of this vehicle, and hasn't yet turned it off, they
> will have LEARNED that the button needs to be pressed for THREE SECONDS
> to switch off the vehicle. duh.
that may well be easy to do when you are stopped in your driveway, but
if you are careening down the highway at an unreasonably fast speed your
perception of how long 3 seconds is may be a tad altered.
you are obviously a loon if you are trying to defend this as good
design.
Posted by News on February 27, 2010, 4:07 pm
jim wrote:
>
> jim beam wrote:
>
>> so read the freakin' owners manual!
>
> How is that going to help someone with an out of control vehicle?
Maybe they should have considered that (RTFM) before engaging the starter.
Posted by jim beam on February 27, 2010, 4:32 pm
On 02/27/2010 08:05 AM, jim wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>>
>> so read the freakin' owners manual!
> How is that going to help someone with an out of control vehicle?
so, when you're cleaning your guns on the kitchen table, and your kid
comes in and wants to play with them, do you just hand them and the
ammunition over and let them emulate what they see on tv? or do you
take a moment to point out the differences between the safe end and the
dangerous end, and keep the ammo locked away?
same with getting behind the wheel of a car dude - you are responsible
for familiarizing yourself with the controls before pressing the "start"
button.
>>
>> besides, unless this is absolutely the first time this person has ever
>> sat behind the wheel of this vehicle, and hasn't yet turned it off, they
>> will have LEARNED that the button needs to be pressed for THREE SECONDS
>> to switch off the vehicle. duh.
> that may well be easy to do when you are stopped in your driveway, but
> if you are careening down the highway at an unreasonably fast speed your
> perception of how long 3 seconds is may be a tad altered.
what is "altered" about pressing the freakin' button until it works?
you keep pressing the brake pedal until you can tell it's working don't you?
> you are obviously a loon if you are trying to defend this as good
> design.
no dude, i'm pointing out the facts:
1. a driver is responsible for familiarizing themselves with the
operation of the vehicle.
2. a driver that already knows the vehicle takes three seconds to
shutdown from their experience on the driveway but "forgets" it on the
road is going to be subject to "natural selection".
just like firearms, chainsaws, high buildings with open balconies, there
has to be a basic level of competence for which a manufacturer cannot be
held responsible.
--
nomina rutrum rutrum
Posted by jim on February 27, 2010, 6:02 pm
jim beam wrote:
> On 02/27/2010 08:05 AM, jim wrote:
> >
> >
> > jim beam wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> so read the freakin' owners manual!
> >
> > How is that going to help someone with an out of control vehicle?
> so, when you're cleaning your guns on the kitchen table, and your kid
> comes in and wants to play with them, do you just hand them and the
> ammunition over and let them emulate what they see on tv? or do you
> take a moment to point out the differences between the safe end and the
> dangerous end, and keep the ammo locked away?
> same with getting behind the wheel of a car dude - you are responsible
> for familiarizing yourself with the controls before pressing the "start"
> button.
Did i say the driver is not responsible? Or are you having a hallucination?
> >
> >>
> >> besides, unless this is absolutely the first time this person has ever
> >> sat behind the wheel of this vehicle, and hasn't yet turned it off, they
> >> will have LEARNED that the button needs to be pressed for THREE SECONDS
> >> to switch off the vehicle. duh.
> >
> > that may well be easy to do when you are stopped in your driveway, but
> > if you are careening down the highway at an unreasonably fast speed your
> > perception of how long 3 seconds is may be a tad altered.
> what is "altered" about pressing the freakin' button until it works?
> you keep pressing the brake pedal until you can tell it's working don't you?
Nope. That isn't what many people do. If the brakes don't work they may pump
them. They may repeatedly press a button also if they don't get the response
they are expecting. The fact that she failed to hold the button for 3 seconds
in a crisis is completely believable.
The point is it is not unbelievable that a driver couldn't get her vehicle
under control. A lot of horror movies are built around the premise that when
faced with a frightening situation the obvious simple way out of the crisis is
often overlooked. Incompetence does exist. I don't think she is lying. I do
think she is incompetent.
The point is that if toyota was taking money from fools without a care or
thought given to making that transaction foolproof - well shit happens. It is
not as if there isn't a long history of other manufacturers getting burned in
exactly the same way. that they could have referred to.
> >
> > you are obviously a loon if you are trying to defend this as good
> > design.
> no dude, i'm pointing out the facts:
No you're ignoring the facts and revising what happened to fit your fantasy.
This appears to be all you are capable of....
> 1. a driver is responsible for familiarizing themselves with the
> operation of the vehicle.
So?
> 2. a driver that already knows the vehicle takes three seconds to
> shutdown from their experience on the driveway but "forgets" it on the
> road is going to be subject to "natural selection".
OK and a car maker that is responsible for offing fools is going to get a
reputation for that. So its all as it should be. No?
Except there are other people who never bought a Toyoat getting hurt, which
is why the govt. is stepping in.
> just like firearms, chainsaws, high buildings with open balconies, there
> has to be a basic level of competence for which a manufacturer cannot be
> held responsible.
No but if Toyota had any foresight they might have realized they could get their
image damaged. If we look at the history of unintended acceleration complaints,
in the end NHTSA as always will probably find that Toyota did nothing wrong.
>> On Wed, 24 Feb 2010 01:01:03 -0700, Ashton Crusher wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>> A woman testified before Congress that when her Toyota began
>>>> accelerating uncontrollably she "put the car in neutral and it had no
>>>> effect, I stepped on the brakes and it had no effect, I applied the
>>>> emergency brake and it had no effect, I even tried to put the car into
>>>> reverse and I couldn't."
>>>>
>>>> Huh? Putting the car in neutral had no effect? Someone provide with with
>>>> a clue on this one.
>>>>
>>>> BTW< the car was a Lexus.
>>>
>>>
>>> And do you know for a fact that the transmission is mechanically shifted
>>> or if it's all electronically controlled? If it is electronically
>>> controlled, do you KNOW that when that model Toyota is being driven that
>>> it can be shifted into neutral?
>>
>> Nope. I don't.
> And yet you attack the woman who made the statement. Tells plenty
> about you.