Solution to noisy vehicles

In article >,
Jim Yanik .> wrote:
>
>Actually,it's more "I do not want to get involved" on the part of people
>today. They will watch a woman get killed and not call police.

How's it go..."Avoid the legal nets/that entangled Bernhard Goetz/Yell
"Help, Help Police"/Like Kitty Genovese"... something like that,
anyway.

But a car alarm doesn't really fit in. If people yelled "HELP, HELP
POLICE, <softly>that man is looking at me funny" all the time, you can
bet that the cry would soon be ignored by all, and not just in New
York City.
--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

On Fri, 11 Mar 2005 17:15:26 -0600,
(Brent P) wrote:

>In article >, Nate Nagel wrote:
>> Daniel J. Stern wrote:
>
>>> What'd I leave out?
>>
>> 5 MPH bumpers: No (although I believe they are now 2.5 MPH, yes?)
>
>Those aren't a safety item. They are a consumer regulation. The idea was
>that people paid too much for bumping into things so there had to be no
>damage below certain speeds. It fits into things like regulations on the
>switches, arm rests, that sort of thing. Not really safety, just minimum
>product design standards.
>

I wish today's bumpers actually worked as bumpers.

I pulled an idiot maneuver last week avoiding a Coca-Cola truck that
was parked right in front of a convenience store last week while I was
backing out of the space next to him.

Since I couldn't turn the wheel to the left as I backed because of the
truck, I went back further than I normally would have.

I was just slowing to put the car in forward and drive off when I hit
the concrete post protecting the gas pumps.

If I had backed straight into it, my bumper might have helped, and at
the very slow speed I was going any damage would have been very
insignificant.

Instead, it broke the lens on my taillight and put a nasty scratch
right next to it.

If I had done that in any of the cars I had owned before this one, the
bumper would have caught the post and not my taillights.

It kind of sucks - I guess the cheapest way to fix it is to see if I
get lucky in a junkyard, although I'm not sure how to remove or
install it. Hopefully I can find a repair guide in a library or
online somewhere.

Cartlon Shew > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 17 Mar 2005 23:22:48 -0800, John David Galt
> wrote:
>
>>Jim Yanik wrote:
>>> 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.
>>
>>If an alarm is capable of being triggered by noise (other than
>>specific sounds such as glass breaking), that alarm is too sensitive
>>to have any business being used in a residential area.
>>
>>Car alarms should be required to be silent, since bystanders never pay
>>attention to them anyway, even when annoyed or awakended by them.
>
> You must not have an alarm on your car.
>
> People with car alarms will look to make sure it is not their car
> being stolen.
>
> Furthermore, even if the owner doesn't hear it, car alarms DO make
> some car thieves back off.
>
>
>> Let
>>the alarm summon the car owner by pager, so he can arrive in time to
>>catch Mr. Thief in the act. If he's not willing to go and do that,
>>screw him.
>
> How about alarms on businesses and homes?
>
> Should those be required to be silent as well?
>
>
>


They even have alarms as OEM equipment on new cars now.
Most new cars have some sort of anti-theft alarm tham is audible,not
silent.

So,it seems that people WANT them.
(and they have some level of effectiveness.)

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:14:28 -0600,
(Matthew Russotto) wrote:

>In article >,
>L Sternn > wrote:
>
>>And apparently, it takes a VERY long time for some people to realize
>>that most of the cries of "wolf" these days are actually real.
>
>ROTFL. You work for a car alarm company, right?

Right. Don't you think if I did, I'd be saying the Brand X car
alarms are not susceptible to false alarms?

On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:11:14 -0600,
(Matthew Russotto) wrote:

>>"Some idiot"? As in only 1 car alarm in the whole complex would go
>>off in a thunderstorm?
>
>You misunderstand: it didn't go off just for thunderstorms. This
>one went off when it was merely raining. And it would keep going off
>every few minutes as long as it was raining.

So it probably shorted out - it's still a rare exception rather than
the norm.

Why don't you tell us how many cars in the lot NEVER had a false alarm
despite having an alarm system.

On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:38:23 -0500, "Daniel J. Stern"
> wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, John Harlow wrote:
>
>> > The old-car problem is easy to factor out of the question: Cars made
>> > before 19XX are exempt, same as is done with seatbelts, sidemarker
>> > lights, airbags and all other now-mandatory equipment. They're not the
>> > ones causing the problem; it's the kidzzz with their Honda Civiczzzz,
>> > Dodge Neonzzzz, Chevrolet Cadavalierzzzz, etc.
>
>> And the harleys and modified jap bikes.
>
>...and BS groups with names like Motorcycle Riders Safety Foundation are
>onhand to bleat "Loud pipes save lives! Loud pipes save lives!".

I think it's time we proved them wrong. If someone has a loud bike,
run them off the road.

L Sternn > wrote in
:

> On Fri, 18 Mar 2005 12:11:14 -0600,
> (Matthew Russotto) wrote:
>
>>>"Some idiot"? As in only 1 car alarm in the whole complex would go
>>>off in a thunderstorm?
>>
>>You misunderstand: it didn't go off just for thunderstorms. This
>>one went off when it was merely raining. And it would keep going off
>>every few minutes as long as it was raining.
>
> So it probably shorted out - it's still a rare exception rather than
> the norm.
>
> Why don't you tell us how many cars in the lot NEVER had a false alarm
> despite having an alarm system.
>
>

What's he think about how auto alarms are now common as STANDARD
EQUIPMENT(OEM) in many new cars? B-)

That's an indication that people want them,value them.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

L Sternn > wrote in
:

> On Thu, 10 Mar 2005 15:38:23 -0500, "Daniel J. Stern"
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Mar 2005, John Harlow wrote:
>>
>>> > The old-car problem is easy to factor out of the question: Cars
>>> > made before 19XX are exempt, same as is done with seatbelts,
>>> > sidemarker lights, airbags and all other now-mandatory equipment.
>>> > They're not the ones causing the problem; it's the kidzzz with
>>> > their Honda Civiczzzz, Dodge Neonzzzz, Chevrolet Cadavalierzzzz,
>>> > etc.
>>
>>> And the harleys and modified jap bikes.
>>
>>...and BS groups with names like Motorcycle Riders Safety Foundation
>>are onhand to bleat "Loud pipes save lives! Loud pipes save lives!".
>
> I think it's time we proved them wrong. If someone has a loud bike,
> run them off the road.
>

Today I encountered a jacked-up pickup truck with knobby,off-road tires
that made so much racket,you could hear it coming a hundred feet away,what
a drone! It sounded like a jet engine approaching at ground level!

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

On 20 Mar 2005 02:04:38 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:

>>>...and BS groups with names like Motorcycle Riders Safety Foundation
>>>are onhand to bleat "Loud pipes save lives! Loud pipes save lives!".
>>
>> I think it's time we proved them wrong. If someone has a loud bike,
>> run them off the road.
>>
>
>Today I encountered a jacked-up pickup truck with knobby,off-road tires
>that made so much racket,you could hear it coming a hundred feet away,what
>a drone! It sounded like a jet engine approaching at ground level!

Yep - I've seend and heard those also. I wonder how much a set of
tires like that costs. Probably not cheap. It'd be a shame if
someone slashed them.

L Sternn wrote:
> On 20 Mar 2005 02:04:38 GMT, Jim Yanik .> wrote:
>
>
>>>>...and BS groups with names like Motorcycle Riders Safety Foundation
>>>>are onhand to bleat "Loud pipes save lives! Loud pipes save lives!".
>>>
>>>I think it's time we proved them wrong. If someone has a loud bike,
>>>run them off the road.
>>>
>>
>>Today I encountered a jacked-up pickup truck with knobby,off-road tires
>>that made so much racket,you could hear it coming a hundred feet away,what
>>a drone! It sounded like a jet engine approaching at ground level!
>
>
> Yep - I've seend and heard those also. I wonder how much a set of
> tires like that costs. Probably not cheap. It'd be a shame if
> someone slashed them.

(shakes head)

you complain about noise but fantasize about property damage. No wonder
our country is so ****ed up when there are people like you in it.

nate

--
replace "fly" with "com" to reply.
http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel