Go Down

Topic: tailgating deterrents for car drivers  (Read 6084 times) previous topic - next topic

GoForSmoke

Something more easy to make may be a used motor oil dispenser pump to just squirt all over the tailgater's car.   Whoops, it must be hazardous to follow so closely if the car ahead of you has a bad leak.   
Just get a real old car. I had one for a while that leaked from the rear main seal, a Fury 400. Nobody stayed close behind. A friend of mine told me that "following you put black spots all over my windshield".

A couple of diffused (shot through a pinhole or slit) lasers *might* put out an interference pattern that close enough would light up even micro-scratches on the followers windshield. The closer it gets, the tightr and brighter the pattern.
1) http://gammon.com.au/blink  <-- tasking Arduino 1-2-3
2) http://gammon.com.au/serial <-- techniques howto
3) http://gammon.com.au/interrupts
Your sketch can sense ongoing process events in time.
Your sketch can make events to control it over time.

Boardburner2

Being caught in possession of an unlicenced firearm (whether loaded or not) results in a mandatory 5 year prison sentence.
Supposedly.

I recall one case where said convict was allowed bail before starting sentence and promptly offended again.

Also regular purges of overcrowded prisons mean many do no serve much time.

Luckily guns are much harder to get in the UK Europe is not so fortunate.

Boardburner2

I find it difficult to imagine that it's illegal for you to defend yourself.

That can be the case in the UK unfortunatley.

It comes down to reasonable force and its the defendant not the atacker who has to prove that.

Henry_Best

Supposedly.
I recall one case where said convict was allowed bail before starting sentence and promptly offended again.
Where did I claim that the legal system is perfect?

Quote
Also regular purges of overcrowded prisons mean many do no serve much time.
The time served may be shorter, but the SENTENCE is still 5 years.

Henry_Best

Quote
I find it difficult to imagine that it's illegal for you to defend yourself.
It's quite legal for us to defend ourselves, but only up to the limit of 'reasonable force'.
If someone punches you, you are entitled to punch him back, but not to shoot him.

Boardburner2

#50
Jan 12, 2016, 11:01 pm Last Edit: Jan 13, 2016, 02:32 am by Boardburner2
It's quite legal for us to defend ourselves, but only up to the limit of 'reasonable force'.
If someone punches you, you are entitled to punch him back, but not to shoot him.

Absolutley, but if your attacker is winning and you have a family to defend you have to either give up and accept the death or injury of your family or escalate.

I have been in this position and chose to give up and hope for the best,The attacker decided to punish me severely for my cheek and am now severely damaged, i hope my surviving kidney will last.


Boardburner2

Where did I claim that the legal system is perfect?
The time served may be shorter, but the SENTENCE is still 5 years.

Boardburner2

Yes it is , but what is the point ?

Its not actually a deterrent to anyone who does not care about the law.

Back on topic, a tailgater does not care either , just wants his own way, and ability to speed.

Not wise to tangle with them IMHO just pull over and let them pass, winding up Hannibal Lecter just because of his bad driving is not sensible IMHO.


Boardburner2


Boardburner2

Absolutley, but if your attacker is winning and you have a family to defend you have to either give up and accept the death or injury of your family or escalate.

I have been in this position and chose to give up and hope for the best,The attacker decided to punish me severely for my cheek and am now severely damaged, i hope my surviving kidney will last.

BTW that was outside my home in Ealing west london about 10 PM at night

weedpharma

Wish i had a gun  :o
As this discussion has been allowed to continue, I will re enter the discussion.

Guns have been accepted in some countries as the answer to personal protection. These same countries have large firearm death rates. Many of the casualties are miscreants and probably many would say "good riddance ".

These people are still someone's family member and may well have not been killed if firearms were not readily available. It is likely they may have had a gun but if they were not so readily available, they would not have.

What about the regular accidental shootings of kids that have found loaded firearms because their parents or others have the firearm ready for use to defend themselves and family?

I have rifle for farm use. I would never dream of having it loaded and accessible for self defence. My grandchildren will probably be taught about firearms when they are 10 years old. They will only be able to use my rifle under very close supervision to shoot cans. My daughter is in the army reserve and uses more powerful weapons. I still hold my rifle when targets are being checked.

There are too many people around that think firearms are the answer, but too many of these are not prepared to look at the safety aspects of ownership. Yes, I know there are many responsible owners. It is the irresponsible owners that are the problem.

Weedpharma

Boardburner2

Not sure where you are weedpharma, but i think that public gun ownership is a very bad thing except for specific needs.

I was at hungerford and elsewhere post incident.

The possesion of assault rifles and hand guns i agree should be only in the hands of law enforcement.

I have been in gun clubs for fun in the distant past , lots of excuses given for sporting use, but these weapons are primarily designed for killing people , no other reason.

You can take rabbit with a single .22 shot you do not need a machine gun for that.

Not sure of ammo cost these days but probably cheaper to buy a chicken from tescos.

Boardburner2

I have rifle for farm use. I would never dream of having it loaded and accessible for self defence. My

Weedpharma
I recall about 40 yrs ago of a local farmer who used to prop his door open with his rifle, we would not dream of touching it though.

weedpharma

Not sure where you are weedpharma, but i think that public gun ownership is a very bad thing except for specific needs.

I was at hungerford and elsewhere post incident.

The possesion of assault rifles and hand guns i agree should be only in the hands of law enforcement.

I have been in gun clubs for fun in the distant past , lots of excuses given for sporting use, but these weapons are primarily designed for killing people , no other reason.

You can take rabbit with a single .22 shot you do not need a machine gun for that.

Not sure of ammo cost these days but probably cheaper to buy a chicken from tescos.
Basically I agree. I see no need for "assault rifles" or hand guns for non professional use.

I live in Australia.

Weedpharma

Go Up