If there is not a law for having this EVR data so why is this even an issue? Toyota can rip out all the data recorders and thumb their nose to the NHTSA.

 

Perception....what are they trying to hide? and why?


http://www.toyota.com/about/news/corporate/2010/03/12-2-statement-EDR.html

Toyota's policy up till now has been to selectively provide data that suits its needs: selective logging of parameters, selective logging of post crash omitting pre-crash data, tightly controlling access to EDR data required to have Toyota employees present to extract data and only data access tool in the US.

Other domestic manufacturers provide standard pre and post crash data, data is available by standard access tools offer to police and safety agencies, the manufacturer doesn't have to be present to extract the data. The access tools are widely available. Thus once the owner provides permission or the data is subpoenaed the data can be extracted and obtained, the manufacturer acting as an independent third party haven't little to no involvement in the process.

 

I don't get this either. Nothing says you have to have a black box, but suddenly Toyota is shamed for not having the information or because others can't read it...or whatever.

I can tell you this about the USA however....right now people want black boxes to show that the Toyota's are faulty, etc. But down the road when a person is charged or convicted of a crime due to the black box information, these same F*cking attornies will then scream...."it's a violation of my clients rights to have this information."

 

I can tell you this about the USA however....right now people want black boxes to show that the Toyota's are faulty, etc. But down the road when a person is charged or convicted of a crime due to the black box information, these same F*cking attornies will then scream...."it's a violation of my clients rights to have this information."

People want something a certain way UNTIL it affects them in a negative way and then they are against it.

+1 all the way.

Remember....driving is a privilege, NOT a right.

Driving is a cash cow to state governments, who then graciously present it to the public as a privilege. BTW, it's not my intention to take this thread down a tangent from the black boxes, but I had to comment on that.

 

To be fair, Detroit or at least GM seems to a proponent of them

http://www.detnews.com/article/20100320/AUTO01/3200312/1148/rss25

 

I am all for the black boxes also. I think it should record 30 seconds to a minute but if it can be used against a car manufacturer, then law enforcement should be able to use it to prosecute drivers in accidents also. This is where the USA attorneys will say it's a violation of civil rights or whatever.

Trust me...this is how American works.

People want something a certain way UNTIL it affects them in a negative way and then they are against it.

 

I am all for the black boxes also. I think it should record 30 seconds to a minute but if it can be used against a car manufacturer, then law enforcement should be able to use it to prosecute drivers in accidents also. This is where the USA attorneys will say it's a violation of civil rights or whatever.

Trust me...this is how American works.

People want something a certain way UNTIL it affects them in a negative way and then they are against it.

Why do you consider this being used "against" Toyota? Unless they are trying to hide something?

 

As far as I know, there is no law requiring that all private passenger vehicles require Event Data Recorders, so it is even less likely that there is a law specifying what data the EDR must record. GM, Ford and Chrysler are providing EDRs (with a "full suite" of information) out of the goodness of their own hearts, but I would be willing to bet that there are other auto manufacturers out there that do not have EDRs in their vehicles or do not collect the full suite of information that CNN expects them to. There is no law, so Toyota only collects the data that is believes it needs in order to build better vehicles; the data Toyota collects may or may not be enough for full accident reconstruction.

I do see this as a privacy issue, in both Canada and the USA, but especially in the USA. There are jurisdictions in Canada right now that have -- or are trying to -- ban smoking in private motor vehicles, but the argument against it is that one cannot tell a private person what they can or cannot do in the privacy of their own home or motor vehicle. The use of EDR data would seem to fall into a similar area: if you want to find out what a private person was doing in his private motor vehicle, you better have a darn good reason to justify the issuing of a warrant to search the vehicle and the contents of that vehicle.

I can foresee litigation lawyers being on both sides of the fence on this issue, in the same case. At the beginning, I can see the lawyer screaming to have the data released because the client is claiming "I did nothing wrong -- it was the car"; yet when the data is released to the lawyer and it proves that the client was wrong, the lawyer will be in court claiming privacy of information.

I see this as another straw that the American mass media and all the litigation lawyers are grasping at to condemn Toyota. The media may have a faint hope that the EDR data will prove that Toyotas do have problems with their electronic systems, but basically it is just one more way for them to "prove" that Toyota is covering up. Just because one is being quiet -- or saying "no comment" -- does not make that person or that corporation guilty of a crime and cover-up of that crime.

 

As far as I know, there is no law requiring that all private passenger vehicles require Event Data Recorders, so it is even less likely that there is a law specifying what data the EDR must record. GM, Ford and Chrysler are providing EDRs (with a "full suite" of information) out of the goodness of their own hearts, but I would be willing to bet that there are other auto manufacturers out there that do not have EDRs in their vehicles or do not collect the full suite of information that CNN expects them to. There is no law, so Toyota only collects the data that is believes it needs in order to build better vehicles; the data Toyota collects may or may not be enough for full accident reconstruction.

I do see this as a privacy issue, in both Canada and the USA, but especially in the USA. There are jurisdictions in Canada right now that have -- or are trying to -- ban smoking in private motor vehicles, but the argument against it is that one cannot tell a private person what they can or cannot do in the privacy of their own home or motor vehicle. The use of EDR data would seem to fall into a similar area: if you want to find out what a private person was doing in his private motor vehicle, you better have a darn good reason to justify the issuing of a warrant to search the vehicle and the contents of that vehicle.

I can foresee litigation lawyers being on both sides of the fence on this issue, in the same case. At the beginning, I can see the lawyer screaming to have the data released because the client is claiming "I did nothing wrong -- it was the car"; yet when the data is released to the lawyer and it proves that the client was wrong, the lawyer will be in court claiming privacy of information.

I see this as another straw that the American mass media and all the litigation lawyers are grasping at to condemn Toyota. The media may have a faint hope that the EDR data will prove that Toyotas do have problems with their electronic systems, but basically it is just one more way for them to "prove" that Toyota is covering up. Just because one is being quiet -- or saying "no comment" -- does not make that person or that corporation guilty of a crime and cover-up of that crime.

Remember....driving is a privilege, NOT a right.

 

These claims starting escalating after the Saylor incident in San Diego became known and the San Diego county sheriff dept. did find the cause of that accident...an improperly used all-weather mat from the wrong vehicle incorrectly placed over the regular carpet mats. Then more started happening after Toyota announced the stop sale for the sticky gas pedals which had only 3 documented cases prior. Now, everyone and their uncle claims "the pedal was stuck when I was driving", "my pedal was jammed to the floor I don't know what to do" and of course Sikes' "the pedal did something funny and just stuck there".
,,
I don't think you can find a solution, when the problem is American greed and idiocy.

 

There is more to it than those few cases. There are hundreds and hundreds of documented cases of SUA. Many of which were NOT attributed to floor mates or sticky gas pedals.

But I am sure you will continue to deny it all so you can feel better about Toyota and sleep at night. Do what ya gotta do, more power to ya. :thumbsup:

 

Guys, lets try to keep it on topic, please.


**Edit**

If anyone accuses someone else of beating their wife again, they are banned. This is a Toyota Enthusiast site, please stop the personal bickering and personal attacks!

 

http://www.safetyresearch.net/toyota-sudden-unintended-acceleration/

Oh, and Thanks Dana! :chug:

 

The evolution of the EDR came from air bag deployment, so manufacturers could improve their air bag systems. They were never intended to recreate crash data, although some of the information would be particularly useful to law enforcement. Now, however, the analogy is used that they are similar to airplane's black boxes. That simply isn't true. A plane's black box contains a TON of information, whereas these vehicular EDRs do not, and developmentally are inferior to a plane's black box.

Manufacturers may be facing mandates soon that require EDRs in all vehicles under a standardized system (likely SAE specification) so that data can be retrieved using a single tool (much like OBDII). This would make the system much more consumer friendly, but remember, the EDRs only record information when the air bags deploy. So, what's the use, really? In the end, the main beneficiary will be law enforcement if EDRs continue their development and record more vital information. In CA, EDR data is the property of the vehicle owner, so if you live after the crash, you can refuse to release the EDR data into the custody of the police. However, a warrant can quickly override that, if necessary.

I'm all for the development of EDRs, but consumers will eventually sue under the premise that these devices violate their privacy. You have the right to privacy in your own vehicle, but not while driving because as others have said, driving is not a right. It is most definitely a priveledge, much like flying and a plane's black box has shed light on a number of crashes.

 

I think that the government is using the media to mess up toyota. what next, will they force us to buy a gm product to help the economy? buy health care or go to jail, buy gov.motors or go to jail, all these pretty faces on t.v. telling us how bad it is. same in in d.c. if i can, i will move out of this country.

 

I think that the government is using the media to mess up toyota. what next, will they force us to buy a gm product to help the economy? buy health care or go to jail, buy gov.motors or go to jail, all these pretty faces on t.v. telling us how bad it is. same in in d.c. if i can, i will move out of this country.

Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya. :hi:

 

and what does that mean?

 

It means....Don't let the door hit you in the ass on the way out (of the country).

 

Like the old joke about having to buy a new a$$ as the old one had a crack in it. HA HA HA

Boy it's amazing how easily some of these threads derail.

 

Like the old joke about having to buy a new a$$ as the old one had a crack in it. HA HA HA

Boy it's amazing how easily some of these threads derail.

:lol:

My old man used to tell me if I kept running my mouth he would "crack my ass the other way"....kind of disturbing actually :facepalm: