Solution to noisy vehicles

"Motorhead Lawyer" > wrote in message
oups.com...
>
> Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>> "Motorhead Lawyer" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>> >>
>> >> And I'm pushing 50. But I'm young at heart, and no one thinks I
> look
>> > my
>> >> age. I bet you do, though.
>> >
>> > 'pushing 50'? Hell, you're just some young whippersnapper! So
> how's
>> > about you shut yer yap and respect your AARP card-carryin'
> *elders*?
>>
>> So you want to shut me up, C.R.?
>
> Not really. Sarcasm, dude. Fell into that 'Grandpappy' mode and
> couldn't get out. ;^) Don't take it personally.

My bad. I'll be more watchful in the future.

>> There are some old folks who can't stand
>> change and hate being challeneged. That would explain a lot in your
> case,
>> C.R.
>
> It might if it were true. I love change and I love a challenge. So
> give us some substance to your arguments so we can stop trading
> insults.

Howzabout we just stop insulting, period?

>> > 'Young at heart' means, when you get right down to it, "You're only
>> > young once but you can be immature forever." Words to live by. At
>> > least I do.
>>
>> We can see that in almost every one of your posts, C.R. I do enjoy
> reading
>> what you post; at least those when you aren't whipping out a one-inch
> dick
>> in an effort to show what a big man you are.
>
> Hey, I'm a pretty tolerant 'New Age' kinda guy and all, but I wouldn't
> *think* of whipping out your dick ...

I do appreciate that--my reaction would constitute a felony, and I really
don't have time for all that paperwork...

>> > Still waiting for those definitions you're so clearly willing to
> change
>> > the subject to ignore ...
>>
>> I don't have a problem with that.
>
> Geez, is that a white flag already?

Hardly.

>> You may, but your problems aren't mine.
>
> Sounds frighteningly like a certain Texas LEO (named after a large,
> noisy, essentially harmless blue bird) we all know ...

I suppose we all have at least one thing in common with everyone else.

"Motorhead Lawyer" > wrote in message
ups.com...
>
> Skip Elliott Bowman wrote:
>> "Motorhead Lawyer" > wrote in message
>> oups.com...
>> >
>> > Damn, you're perceptive! Or are you a psychic? What would you say
> if
>> > I mentioned that the BMW has a full stock exhaust system on it,
> Skippy?
>>
>> I love BMWs--I'd like a garage full of them, no lie. I miss my R80
>> something fierce.
>
> '88 535is: ~$5000
>
> '95 Honda Shadow: ~$3500
>
> You thinking I *rode* a Beemer and *drove* a Dodge: priceless.

Nothing personal, C.R.; different strokes for different folks and all. But
the only way you'd find me driving a Dodge is if a big-arse bomb was ticking
and the Dodge was the only car in the vicinity. I do like that 535i
series, though.

I like Honda's cars; can't stand their motorcycle line though. Same as with
Dodge; too many bad experiences with poor ergonomic design.

"Ignasi Palou-Rivera" > wrote in message
news:1110919884.b0d5b6e2f52998bf96de3a265337f795@t eranews...

> It's easy to find examples at both sides of the line. The tough part
> is to draw the line and sort the ones thast are close to it. It's a
> simple concept, really.

A line has to be drawn, though. And to be effective in this case, it has to
be hard, definitive, but flexible. It can be done.

"PaulR" > wrote in
:

>>
>> True. I realize that *I* will be the only one to check on my car if
>> the alarm is triggered.But the presence of an alarm does keep the
>> Midnite Auto Parts thieves from beginning work on it,as they did
>> prior to my installing the alarm.And it does give me a chance to
>> catch them if they do try.I'm well prepared for that situation.
>>
>> And I do not live in NYC.
>>
> BTW, I don't live in NYC either.
>
> But my point was that, especially in cities cars are often parked at
> quite a distance from the owner. In that case you're counting on a
> neighbor to call the police if an alarm goes off. But there are so
> many alarms, that people just ignore them (except when they trash the
> car). Maybe the answer is to absolutely outlaw noisy alarms, while
> permitting (encouraging?) alarms that either send a silent radio alarm
> or telephone the owner.
>
> I'm in favor of LOTS of voltage on the inside of the car, but I
> realize that the law takes umbrage on this.
>
> Paul R
>
>
>

Well,it's not my fault people do not care about their neighbors enough to
check on an alarm.If it were a common problem of false alarms,then action
(alarm adjustment) should be taken,and would in my case,as I detest
falses,too.I don't want to get up any more than the next person.

But vehicles should not be so noisy as to trigger alarms.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

In article . com>,
Motorhead Lawyer > wrote:
>
>>
>> No, they don't.
>> They have restrictions on exhaust brakes, often known as "Jake
>> Brakes".
>> Air brakes are entirely different.
>
>Correct. And, what I see in many communities is a stupidly misguided
>sign that says, "Engine Braking Prohibited". Anybody want to guess
>what I do as I roll by that one in my BMW? On my Shadow? =;^)

As a law abiding citizen, you assiduously avoid engine braking by
flooring the accelerator pedal, assuring an unrestricted throttle
opening.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article >,
Jim Yanik .> wrote:
(Matthew Russotto) wrote in
:
>
>> Then you should be fined for noise pollution (for the auto alarm).
>
>It usually only triggers the warning chirps.

Smaller fine, then.

>And it would not be noise pollution,as the alarm WAS triggered by
>something.(not going off on it's own,with no external influence.)

It's a false alarm and noise pollution whether it goes off entirely on
its own or due to a benign external influence. Some idiot in my old
apartment complex used to have one which went off in the rain; that's
an external influence too.

--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

In article >,
Jim Yanik .> wrote:
(Matthew Russotto) wrote in
:
>
>> In article >,
>> Jim Yanik .> wrote:
(Matthew Russotto) wrote in
:
>>>
>>>> In article >,
>>>> Jim Yanik .> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Taking the manufacturer's (stock) muffler off and installing a noisier
>>>>>one.
>>>>
>>>> So taking a quiet car and changing the muffler in a way that makes it
>>>> louder, but not as loud as some other car which comes stock with a
>>>> noisier muffler, is noise pollution?
>>>
>>>How many cars these days come stock with a -noisy- exhaust system?
>>
>> Unless they're all exactly the same, some come with a noisier exhaust
>> then others.
>
>That's a non-answer.These days,cars are quiet.

You can't even define the term.

--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

>
> It's a false alarm and noise pollution whether it goes off entirely on
> its own or due to a benign external influence. Some idiot in my old
> apartment complex used to have one which went off in the rain; that's
> an external influence too.
>

I guess I'd claim that it's noise pollution even if the car is indeed being
stolen. Unless, of course, the owner is close enough to hear it, and
interested enough to rouse his rump out of bed and come to the car. My
experience is that most alarms are spurious, and the owner either lives too
far from the car to hear it, or if he does hear it, decides to wait it out.
So the entire neighborhood is disturbed by this guy's decision to buy an
alarm.

Again, if he bought a silent alarm alarm, I'd certainly have no objection to
it. He'd be awakened. He could react (or not) as he chose. IMHO an alarm
that notifies "the public" is only justified if action by "the public" is
expected. Question: If you park your car in front of my house and your
alarm goes off, do you really expect me to react? Ya know, if I were a car
thief, I think I'd just wear ear plugs and ignore the alarm, since everyone
else does. I'd expect that I'd be just as "safe" stealing an alarmed car as
a non-alarmed car. If no one's going to react, what's the point?

Paul R

PaulR wrote:
> >
> > It's a false alarm and noise pollution whether it goes off entirely
on
> > its own or due to a benign external influence. Some idiot in my
old
> > apartment complex used to have one which went off in the rain;
that's
> > an external influence too.
> >
>
> I guess I'd claim that it's noise pollution even if the car is indeed
being
> stolen. Unless, of course, the owner is close enough to hear it, and

> interested enough to rouse his rump out of bed and come to the car.
My
> experience is that most alarms are spurious, and the owner either
lives too
> far from the car to hear it, or if he does hear it, decides to wait
it out.
> So the entire neighborhood is disturbed by this guy's decision to buy
an
> alarm.
>
> Again, if he bought a silent alarm alarm, I'd certainly have no
objection to
> it. He'd be awakened. He could react (or not) as he chose. IMHO an
alarm
> that notifies "the public" is only justified if action by "the
public" is
> expected.

Good Point.

> Question: If you park your car in front of my house and your
> alarm goes off, do you really expect me to react?

Clearly the owner of the alarm equiped car expected you to have
his/her/its car towed at his/her/its expense to a distant impound lot
where it would be safe from the big, bad car theives.

> Ya know, if I were a car
> thief, I think I'd just wear ear plugs and ignore the alarm, since
everyone
> else does. I'd expect that I'd be just as "safe" stealing an alarmed
car as
> a non-alarmed car. If no one's going to react, what's the point?

To wake people up and **** of everyone.

>
> Paul R

"PaulR" > wrote in
:

>
>>
>> It's a false alarm and noise pollution whether it goes off entirely
>> on its own or due to a benign external influence. Some idiot in my
>> old apartment complex used to have one which went off in the rain;
>> that's an external influence too.
>>
>
> I guess I'd claim that it's noise pollution even if the car is indeed
> being stolen. Unless, of course, the owner is close enough to hear
> it, and interested enough to rouse his rump out of bed and come to the
> car. My experience is that most alarms are spurious, and the owner
> either lives too far from the car to hear it, or if he does hear it,
> decides to wait it out. So the entire neighborhood is disturbed by
> this guy's decision to buy an alarm.

They should be disturbed if the car is being burgled.
Far too many people turn a blind eye to this stuff.

>
> Again, if he bought a silent alarm alarm, I'd certainly have no
> objection to it. He'd be awakened. He could react (or not) as he
> chose. IMHO an alarm that notifies "the public" is only justified if
> action by "the public" is expected. Question: If you park your car
> in front of my house and your alarm goes off, do you really expect me
> to react?

Why not? Do you not care about your neighbor's property? Would you want
them to do the same for you? I'm not referring to confronting the crook,but
looking out the window,maybe calling the police.
How SELFISH you are,worried more about your sleep than a valuable piece of
property being burglarized.No wonder such crime happens.
Maybe if your house caught on fire,I would not call 911,or try to wake you
to get out safely.
People like you disgust me.

>Ya know, if I were a car thief, I think I'd just wear ear
> plugs and ignore the alarm, since everyone else does. I'd expect that
> I'd be just as "safe" stealing an alarmed car as a non-alarmed car.
> If no one's going to react, what's the point?
>
> Paul R
>

It's a sad commentary on our society that people would ignore an alarm or a
crime-in-progress.



--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net