42955 15JUL88-1103 General Information
Sony KV-1311CR
From: BILLWILSON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Hi Marty. I meant to send this in here instead of in the Mail section. I recent-
ly received a Sony KV-1311CR and I still get the machine language programs in
black and white, games, ect. I’m probably either doing something that is just
plain simple(wrong), or not doing something at all. Any help or advice (please
go easy on me, I know you’ve probably answered questions like this before). I
also would like to that the owner of Howard Medical, where I purchased the
monitor, and Dave, for being very patient with me in helping me to get the thing
up and running, (pressing the two buttons on the front at the same time). Dave
and I had a very nice chat on the phone, and despite wet coffee beans and a
lousy goverment, you still have a couple of fans out here!!
42957 15JUL88-1549 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 42955)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
The folks at Howard Medical are indeed nice people.
As for color on the KV1311CR…
It SEEMS like you are asking about getting color in
the “PMODE 4 artifact color” mode of the computer? No?
RGB will not under any circumstances render such colors…
you’ll see a black and white screen with vertical lines
or patterns. You need to use composite video to see artifact
colors. Thus, you must hook the composite video jack
on the Sony to the composite video output jack on the CoCo.
Now, the Sony is such a high resolution TV that it
does not do artifacting all that well. Artifact
colors on the Sony tend to be more pale, in my experience,
than with other, sloppier, lower res monitors.
But, at least MY Sony KV1311CR does show artifact colors
to some reasonable extent.
Note, too, that you must use the front panel
to SWITCH between RGB and Composite video inputs.
Does this help???
If you need to ask more, it would help me to help you
if you explained in rather more detail what sort of
set up you have… how (with what cables going to where)
you attached the monitor to the computer, and what switches
on the monitor (if any) you used to try to switch between
RGB and composite video. AND, it would help a lot if you
would be very specific in describing the programs that
“don’t show colors”. Your original note was rather vague,
and I had to make a number of guesses about what was going
on when I wrote this reply.
—marty
42960 15JUL88-1901 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 42957)
From: BILLWILSON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Hello again Marty. Thanks for your quick reply. Your information plus a little
noodle scratching did the trick. All I had to do was add another cable between
the CoCo (vidio output) and the vidio input on the monitor and depress just the
video (notice the difference in spelling) button on the front of the monitor,
and I was in business. Now I do get the PMODE4 artifact colors. Thanks once
again for your help-in more ways than one, for I read your column every month.
—-Bill—–
42969 16JUL88-0144 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 42960)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
And now…
I NEED to know….
I spend a GREAT deal of time writing of an EXHAUSTIVE four
page documentation sheet for Howard Medical, to be sent off
with that cable that they include with the Sony (which I made
That would be most irritating to me.
IF they did not send it, send me a stamped (45 cents)
self addressed envelope I will send you the doc sheet for
that cable… which includes tips on how to get rid of that
awful Joystick Plug, which messes up the joystick port
and makes the joystick UNUSEABLE while you use the monitor,
unless you do one of the fixes I suggest in the sheet.
—marty
42974 16JUL88-0538 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 42969)
From: BILLWILSON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Hi again, Marty. No, I didn’t receive the documentation that you mentioned.
The cable that they sent me DOESN’T have the Joystick Plug that you mentioned.
I think that I will, (if I ever get around to it), send you the SSAE for the
documentation anyways. More information can’t be as bad as none at all!!
Thanks once again.
—Bill
43014 17JUL88-0231 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 42974)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
Ah! You got one of my CUSTOM SPECIALS… made ONLY for Howard Medical…
and it will only work with THAT particular Sony KV1311CR, for
Howard Medical has made a VERY minor modification inside that Sony
to allow that special cable to work!!!
In that case… FORGET about the joystick plug…
but just note that that particular cable requires a source
of +5 volts on pins 1 or 2 of the 34 pin Sony RGB connector.
Now, SOME Sony 34 pin RGB connectors have that (the old
Sony Profeel has +5 volts on pins 1 and 2) and the
Sony KV2711CR has it there too. For some reason,
they used a slightly more limited implimentation of
their own protocol on the KV1311CR. The mod Howard
Medical did (at my instructions) involved “upgrading”
pins 1 and 2 of the 34 pin connector to match the
more eleborate Sony standard used on some of their other
monitors.
I had a very special and DIFFERENT documentation sheet
for those custom jobbies… but I don’t have a copy of THAT
one around… for some reason I lost my master!
So… just make a note of what I wrote above, …
it all means that if you buy ANOTHER KV1311CR from some
OT work with it unless
you make an internal modification to bring +5 volts
to pins 1 and 2 of the 34 pin connector.
That cable WILL work with the old Sony Profeel
and the KV2711CR, tho.
OK?
—marty
43052 17JUL88-1713 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43014)
From: BILLWILSON To: MARTYGOODMAN
HI Marty. That is an “OK” on your last message about the custom designed cable.
Anyways, there is a SSAE on the way to you. Maybe you could put something else
of use in it for me. By somethnig else of use I mean anything that will fit
inside it will help me. I havn’t been at this as long as you have and I need
all the help I can get. All I do for a living is drive trains for ConRail.
Computers are a new hobby for me. Thanks again.
–Bill
43066 18JUL88-0418 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43052)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
Sounds like a pretty responsible job to me… I’d not make light of it!
After all, when computers crash, usually the worst that happens
is irritation. When TRAINS crash, however…
—marty
43103 19JUL88-2016 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43066)
From: BILLWILSON To: MARTYGOODMAN
I have not had the misfortune of being in a crash, thank goodness! However,
irritation is still a very large part of any railroader’s diet. I’m referring
to constantly changing rules, incapable and sometimes suprisingly ignorant non-
agreement personnel, (officials), ect. Probably the largest thing that is
looming over us is the proposed random drug testing. Personally, I am not con-
cerned about it, believe it or not, I am one of the few people that has never
used or had any desire whatsoever to even try drugs. The thing that really bugs
me is seeing people drive around lowered crossing gates and try and beat the
train. I can’t even remember how many times I’ve seen this happen, only to look
down in the back window of some lucky jerk only to see the wide-eyed looks on
the faces of their kids as I miss them at fifty or sixty or whatever the speed
limit is in the particular area. I mean if a person wants to play with his own
life (whoops, wasn’t watching the screen)
that’s fine, but don’t take somebody else with you. I, unfortunately, have been
in that situation more than once, and it is not pleasant, believe me. I could
ramble on forever, but I know you’ve better things to listen to. WOW, it seems
every time I get going on this subject I get a little carried away. To each his
own. Once again, thanks for all your help.
—Bill
43117 20JUL88-0316 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43103)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
I can well understand your feelings about fools who try to zip across railroad
crossings,
risking not only their own lives and those of their
passengers, but the lives of folks on your train as well!!
As for random drug testing, you may be aware that I vehemently
oppose such measures when used as a SCREENING test.
The reason for my opposition is both political AND technologic:
(1) Current drug testing technology is utter unable in the
OST recreational substances to distinguish between
the recreational use of a substance days or weeks (or in some
casese MONTHS ago) and someone being in a state of intoxication
on the job. Thus, the testing is utterly WORTHLESS for its
intended purpose… to detect intoxicated workers.
(2) This worthless testing will undoubtedly be used primarly
to harass and demean workers. Potentially, it can be used
to allow management to arbitrarily fire workers they don’t like
by faking test results.
(3) The false positive rate is sufficiently high that thousands…
probably TENS of thousands… of workers would be subject to the
repulsive situation of being under a cloud of suspicion…
in many cases workers like yourself who never even chose to
use recreational drugs even on their own time! Note that although
more sensitive tests and/or retests would supposedly “clear”
such victims of these test errors, they would always be
under suspicion by management ignorant of the problems
involved in the testing, and probably subject to further
harassment at least in the form of more frequent testing.
The only sensible use for urine testing technology is
as a means of confirming cases of suspected drug abuse
where the suspicion has arisen due to observation of
behavior. And in some cases for monitoring admitted
and identified abusers during treatment programs
and recovery. But NEVER for mass random screening.
Such technologically inapproprite and police state
invasion of privacy should be vigorously fought by
all unions facing such testing.
Folks want “quick fixes”. They prefer to ignore
the real causes of drug abuse, and the real reasons
why it continues in the workplace. Those REAL
reasons include the fact that both workers and management
are unwilling to deal with the problem… or even admit
it exists. Mass screening is NOT a substitute for
education of the population about the realities of
drug use and abuse.
The current load of lies and distortions from
this puritanical “just say no” administration
only fosters MORE drug abuse.
—marty
43137 20JUL88-2125 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43103)
From: DENNYSKALA To: BILLWILSON
We seem to have an amazing number of railroad crossing deaths here for a
metropolitan area of our size. And I have a good idea why. A big reason
why people run the crossing gates (here, anyway) is that, as often as
not, the %&$# gates come down about a minute and a half before the train
gets there! After several unnecessary ten minute waits for a long, slow
freight to get by, one is *STRONGLY* tempted to go around the gate (after
making sure the train won’t be there for a while). I would imagine that
after doing this successfully a number of times, people get careless,
with the inevitable result.
I would think that it should be quite possible to make a practical sensor
which calculates the time until the train will arrive – instead of
relying on the distance, and assuming it will be going at the maximum
speed. Once people realized that the gates were working as they should,
and not unnecessarily delaying them, I think the crash rate would go
down. Of course, nothing will stop the idiot who thinks he can beat the
train at the last moment, but realistic timing on the gates would make
the rest of us respect the crossing gates a little more.
***** Dennis *****
43121 20JUL88-0402 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43117)
From: BILLWILSON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Well Marty, your last message just about sums it up for about 99.9% of all
railroad workers, including me. If there are any other railroad workers out
there, you have probably just added them to your fan club. You want to hear
something really out of it? Whenever an auto runs around lowered crossing gates,
and gets hit, and there is a serious injury or fatality, who do you think is
the first ones they want to haul off to the hospital for testing? I’ll give you
a clue; it isn’t the idiot who went around the gates, even if there are w
witnesses! We had a case similar to that up here about a year ago. One of our
trains was traveling through a town and a part-time school janitor–volunteer
fire department member received a suicide threat. In his hurry to get to the
person (he knew him), this man drove straight into the side of the train. There
were no bells or flashers, but there were crossbucks and a standard STOP!!!
sign. The man was killed. The local law officer rather rashly ordered the entire
crew off of the engine and made them walk at least a quarter of a mile in snow
and ice to the patrol car to take them to be tested. About a week and a half
later, the engineer, whose health wasn’t at peak, died of a heart attack. From
subsequent rumors that went through our grapvine, the man who was killed in the
first place, was tested (posthumosly) and found to be either under the
influence, or had an unacceptable level of drugs, or as you mentioned, something
that indicated drugs in his blood. Oh well, don’t you wish that all we had to
worry about was how to get my new monitor running?? Maybe we should change the
subject of this thread!!!! See ya later.
—-Bill
43128 20JUL88-1917 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43117)
From: COCOXT To: MARTYGOODMAN
Part of the motivation for random / screening testing is to identify “high risk”
employees. This is the same type of discrimination an insurance company applies
when it charges a higher rate to a single male under 25 for auto insurance than
it does for a woman the same age. Yet this type of statistical discrimination
is LEGAL. So is saying “I don’t care if Mr. Jones has AIDS, but my CUSTOMERS
care, so I have to fire him”. Legal discrimination.
Discrimination used to be a good word. “A man of discriminating tastes”. There
are differences between people and between genders; this is undeniable. Seek
not equality, but equivalence.
Another place where we are applying statistics is in process control. Many
manufacturing companies now use statistics to achieve “defect free”
production. The current statistics kick is a boon for actuaries and other
people who make a living by playing the odds — the odds of people, processes,
and things. I don’t agree with random drug testing any more than I agree
with having to pay a higher rate for insurance because I am in a “high risk”
group (I’m not in the high risk group, relly — I’m married and over 25, but you
see my point). But if we eliminate one, why not eliminate the other as weell?
43150 20JUL88-2200 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43117)
From: COCONAUT To: MARTYGOODMAN
Marty,
What about those who use drugs, and then operate trains and other forms of
mass conveyance? I live about 35 miles from the infamous site of the
Conrail/Amtrak disaster in Chase, Md. The operator of that train was
(admittedly) intoxicated on marijuana at the time and had not only disabled
the warning systems on the train, but ignored three stop signals before
the collision. Something has to be done to control this sort of CRIMINAL
behavior, not to mention those who endanger our lives on the highways!
The operator of that train, by the way is now a proponent of drug testing!!!
If drug testing had been in effect at the time, he would not have sixteen
deaths on his conscience today. While I agree that drug testing is not
always accurate on the first try, until something better comes along, it is
certainly better than nothing.
Doug Fisher
43124 20JUL88-1825 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43121)
From: ZACKS To: MARTYGOODMAN
I basically agree with your position, Marty. If you watched Jesse
Jackson give his stirring speach last night, you would have heard
some thing he said which I totally agree with. He said that the
White House’s “Just say no” program just isn’t enough. Drug abuse
is a supply & demand business. Best to go after the supply as well
as the demand.
43143 20JUL88-2133 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43121)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
I think we pretty much covered the topic. I got your letter,
and the buck, by the way. I’ll try to type up SOMETHING to send
you regarding that Sony you have. Tho I believe I told you most
of what is relevant to your system here in the forum.
One thing… should you encounter ANOTHER Sony KV1311CR monitor,
and want to modify it to work with that cable you now have, here’s
how:
Look for two chips… one 14 pin and one 16 pin… located
very near the 8 pin TTL RGB connector on the accessory
circuit board that supports all those connectors. You will
find a source of regulated +5 volts on both Pin 14 of the 14 pin
chip and Pin 16 of the 16 pin chip. Run a wire from either of those
two pins to pins 1 and 2 on the 34 pin connector, and the cable
you have with your current Sony KV1311CR monitor will work.
By the way… HOW do you like the TV picture on that KV1311CR, eh?
Purdy Durn Sharp, eh? heh heh.
—marty
43145 20JUL88-2141 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43124)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: ZACKS
Well… I must say I do not agree with that statement by Jessie Jackson.
The experience of prohibition shows most conclusively that
illegalization and efforts at enforcement are not merely
totally ineffective in combatting abuse of drugs… in many cases
they make matters FAR worse.
The most recent and proposed laws that alledge to “get tough on
drug dealers” will not curb drug abuse at all… but they DO
lay the groundword for serious erosion of civil liberties, and
the eventual institution of more of a police state than we currently
have.
Making all intoxicants legal, and available in pharmaceutically
pure form where appropriate, would at once eliminate half or more
of the small scale robberies and assaults in urban centers.
And would remove one of the most lucrative sources of revenue
for organized crime. With needles and syringes freely available
(sterile and disposeable) at low cost, the AIDS epidemic among
IV drug abusers could be slowed… and that means less risk of
catching AIDS for all… including the non IV drug abusing population.
Consumer Reports a while back reviewed the record of enforcemnt
type approaches to drug abuse, and conculed that such
efforts were farces at best. And also HIDEOUSLY wasteful
of public funds. Several major TV specials were done
on this subject, with the same conculsion: Enforcement
will never make a dent in the drug problem. Note the
sources I am citing are NOT wide eyed radicals… they
are “mainstream” providers of information.
—marty
43147 20JUL88-2149 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43128)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: COCOXT
Well… your analogies are interesting, but have some problems:
I never opposed the concept of identifying employees who
have a substance abuse problem… that is a DESIREABLE thing
to do. What I said was that urine testing is NOT an effective
way to distinguish between those with substance abuse problems,
OT have a substance
abuse problem, and those who never ever use recreational drugs.
OT succeed in doing that, and ends
up at best “fingering” lots of innocent folks, and at worst
getting abused by those who administer it.
As for your examples of “legal discrimination”…
I’m not sure that straw may you set up was done quite properly.
I mean, I THINK the law protects the confidentiality of medical
OT have to
wear an “I Have Aids” sign in the work place, eh?
The issue of urine testing is certainly a complex one,
and the basis of my opinions on it are a COMBINATION of
a straghtforward TECHNOLOGIC evaluation of the testing technology,
a policical assessement, and an assessment of the technology
in the context of this society, and a general philosophical
assessment. In the case of this issue, as far as I am concerned, uring tesing
is a BAD idea
no matter HOW you look at it… urine testing for mass random
screening, I mean.
As I’ve said before, I have no proble with urine testing
being used AFTER a drug abuse problem has been identified,
or is specifically strongly suspected for some OTHER reason
that can be clearly documented.
—marty
43148 20JUL88-2154 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43137)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DENNYSKALA
ACTUALLY… the “sensor mechanism” used by railroad crossing gates
in my area is one that I admire greatly. It is a technologly that
is more rugged than any other, and over a hundred years old:
When there is sufficient conductance between the two rails, the
gate comes down. When that conductance goes away, the gate goes up.
NO censorable micoprocesors to blo out, or even transistors
or other electronic components. Just totally rugged, reliable
electromechanical stuff.
I checked this out by hooking a set of 8 gauge copper
jumper cables across the tracks at a crossing a 3AM one
night in San Francisco. Sure enoung, the lights started flashing
and the bells started ringing and the gates came down!
That oughta be able to be used in SOME chase sequence movie
some day, eh?
—marty
43212 22JUL88-1347 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43137)
From: BILLWILSON To: DENNYSKALA
Hi Denny. I agree with you about the gates that come down two weeks before the
train gets there. However, I have noticed that many of the crossings on the
territory that I cover, as they are being renewed or upgraded, are being
equipped with some sort of motion-detecting device(s) that not only allow the
trains speed to be sensed, but will also tell whether the train is stopped or
moving. So if my train is moving let’s say, at 30 mph, the gates will come down
in a time span in accordance with that speed. If I am moving at 50 mph., the
same applies, so the slower the train is moving, you still only have to wait
the same (approx) time for the train to get to the crossing. If the train pulls
right up to the crossing, the gates will time out and go up after a short
period of time. These new systems really make it easier on us, because there
are several places in my territory where certain operating procedures require
us to do just that (pull up to a crossing and stop). It is not fun having a
bunch of irate people honk, hollar, scream, and throw things at you. Of course,
none of this sophisticated technology will help when you have the little jerks
who have discovered that at most all you have to do to make the gates come down
is lay a piece of metal or wire between the rails to complete a circuit. Then,
unless the gates are on a special timer, they will stay down forever. Then you
will always have the inevitable “equipment failure” which at times can’t be
helped. Of course all this new equipment costs money!!!!!
Bill
43418 29JUL88-2124 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43137)
From: MAXXUM To: DENNYSKALA
AT RAILROAD CROSSINGS
HERE’S HOW TO FIGGER…
IN CASE OF A TIE
THE ENGINE’S BIGGER!
SORRY, COULDN’T RESIST.
DAVE HAMMOND
TOLEDO, OHIO
43156 20JUL88-2250 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43148)
From: ARTFLEXSER To: MARTYGOODMAN
Seems to me that something based on VIBRATION of the tracks could be made
pretty reliable too, and be better at having the gate stay down for an
appropriate time. So that the gate wouldn’t stay down for a HALTED train near
a crossing.
Of course, in California, where you keep having those pesky earth tremors……
43161 20JUL88-2358 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43148)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Beeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee careful! I understand (but don’t know for SURE) that
the voltage used in those railroad tracks is pretty high, at least, in
modern railroad tracks!
43227 22JUL88-2328 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43148)
From: DENNYSKALA To: MARTYGOODMAN
Foolproof is a definite requirement alright. But the old time system
produces frustration and accidents. There’s got to be a better way which
is cost-effective and fail-safe as well (easy for me to say, right?).
***** Dennis *****
43247 23JUL88-0433 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43148)
From: JIMREED To: MARTYGOODMAN
Now, really, Marty,
That is about the most juvenile thing . . .
. . . I have heard in a long time. Just install a jumper between R1 and R2,
eh.
Hmmm, now where are my jumper cables?
— Jim
43157 20JUL88-2317 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43156)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: ARTFLEXSER
Vibration sensors (for that application) would be pretty durn
unreliable, Art… and a maintenance nightmare.
On another order of magnitude, remember the vibration detectors that were
once used on auto alarms? If a CAT jumped on the car, the alarm went off!
(Which, at 3 AM, reeeeelly endeared the car owner to his neighbors! Hehe!)
Dh
43166 21JUL88-0259 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43156)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: ARTFLEXSER
Any vibration detector would fail due to the rumblings made
by trucks causing false positives. At that point you are talking
elaborate “intelligent” computer pattern recognition.
And when you bring in a computer, you bring in
unreliable operation, expense, and all sorts of trouble.
NOPE… I think the way the DO do it is by FAR the best way.
—marty
43164 21JUL88-0249 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43150)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: COCONAUT
Doug,
I must strongly disagree with your statement that random urine
testing is desireable, and that the implication that it alone
could have prevented raiilroad and airplane accidents caused by
intoxicated drivers.
I have several reasons for saying this:
(1) Cost vs Benefits:
Even if it were the only or the most effective way of
preventing such situtions, urine testing for mass random screens
should be vigorously opposed on civil liberties grounds alone.
The harm it would do to hundreds of thousands of hard working
innocent people vastly outweighs the few hundred deaths that it
proponents alledge it could avoid. Recommending it is a nutty as
saying we should allow the police to search our person and house
at will (without probable cause), because that will better allow
them to catch criminals.
(2) Scientific Facts:
You and others are probably enamoured of urine testing
because you share the mistaken belief that such tests can
distinguish between one who is intoxicated and one who is not,
more or less like the alcohol testing that is legal and routinely
done in most states if the police suspect drunken driving.
Urine testing for intoxicants other than alcohol is in most cases
utterly incapable of distinguishing between a state of sobriety
and a state of intoxication. The marijuana urine test, for
example, will be positive if you were in a room where it was
smoked in the last several weeks. Would you have a total non user
of marijuana accused of killing people due to on the job
intoxication on the basis of such a test? Even tho follow up
tests (at GREAT expense) can quantitate levels of the drug
somewhat better, it they still cannot determine whether or not one
was intoxicated at the time.
You see, alcohol is uniquely amenable to the testing
technology, because it is so quickly eliminated from the system.
This is not true of many other commonly used intoxicants. Note,
too, that the current use of alcohol testing of automobile
drivers (which I heartily APPROVE of, by the way) is only in
situations where there already is reasonable suspicion (based on
the smell, appearance, walk, speech, and other behavior of the
suspect, as detected by police with training in looking at such
indicators) that a person is intoxicated.
(3) There are effective alternatives
I do NOT adovcate just throwing up one’s hands and giving up
on fighting intoxication in the work place. Quite the contrary.
An effective campaign against such dangerous and irresponsible
actions should consist of educating folks to recognize the
physical behavioral signs of intoxication, and reporting them to
organs within a company trained to dealing with such problems.
Presently, in most cases, intoxication in the work place is
ignored, or actively hidden. ONLY when this behavior (which
constitues tacit approveal of the behavior by the society) is
altered can such practices be effectively combatted. There is NO
“quick technologic fix” that can substitute for this. ONCE there
is reasonable suspiction of intoxication, blood and urine testing
technology can be effectively used to to support or reject that
impression.
Why is it such testing so good when there is suspicion if it
is so rotten where there is no suspicion? Well, first of all,
where there is probable cause, there is a massively smaller chance
of the test being abused by those who do it to fire workers not
liked by management. And of innocent, responsible recreational
users and non users having to deal with the emotional trauma and
stigma of a false positive test. As important, since far, far,
fewer tests will be ordered in such cases than for mass
screening, more effective (more quantative and more accurate, less
vulnerable to false results) technologies can be employed, because
the greater expense of such technology would not be as much of a
problem hen the nuber of tests is so much smaller.
Urine and blood testing is also quite useful during treatment
for and recovery from drug abuse, and I support its use in that
context, too.
(5) The Larger Picture:
I’ve said there are no technologic “quick fixes” to deeply
rooted social ills. This is true of the idiotic notion that
“star wars” (SDI) technology can make the world safe from the
threat of nuclear war (the truth is quite exactly the reverse, for
while utterly ineffective in preventing nuclear attack, some of
the technologies being developed are directed at first nuclear
strikes against the Soviet Union, thereby making nuclear war MORE
likely). This society is a very sick one, with obscenely neurotic
attitudes toward both sex and recreational use of intoxicants.
Note how utterly the current administration ignores the experience
of the (alcohol) prohibition years with its insane “Just Say No”
campaigne and emphasis on enforcement of laws against “illegal”
drugs. Quite predictably, the result has been both an increase in
use of illegal drugs and a massive increase in revenues of
organized crime. This insane attitude has also been responsible
for thousands of deaths due to AIDS among the IV drug abusing
population, which in turn has unquestionably resulted in other
deaths from AIDS even among “straight” non drug users. Quality,
accurate education of youth and adults is needed about both the
real dangers and the real pleasures of intoxicant use. This
cannot happen, tho, in a climate of self righteous, puritanical,
anti-pleasure hysteria.
Yes… if everyone were put under 24 hour surveilance by
television cameras in their houses and in public places, with
transponders on them monitored 24 hours a day, it would make
tracking criminals easier. But that does NOT make that a sane
thing to do!
(Conclusion) For those who do not wish to live in a police state,
there is no alternative to vigorously opposing the use of urine
testing as a means of mass random screening.
—marty
43167 21JUL88-0301 General Information
Railroads (Re: Msg 43161)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DONHUTCHISON
Naw… there’s no voltage on the tracks that cross the roads…
it would be too hazardous to the public if there was, I suspect.
I mean.. if some one crossing the street on a warm day (who had
lots of skin exposed) fell and contacted both tracks (as really
could happen) they’d get fried. I seriously doubt there is
any danger there. In any case, I DID use well insulated handles
on the jumper cable clips!
—marty
43213 22JUL88-1359 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43161)
From: BILLWILSON To: DONHUTCHISON
Hi Don. The voltage that you are wondering about in Marty’s little jumper cable
episode is not at all that great. I’m no expert on the matter, but I can tell
at is used. Of course I’m talking about in
my area where we use diesel-electric locomotives instead of overhead cantenary
systems. Where I live I could go up and touch both rails with no harm whatsoever
to myself. I have been told this by the signal maintainers that I know and work
with here. Maybe that might answer a question or two.
Bill
43170 21JUL88-0319 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43157)
From: ARTFLEXSER To: DONHUTCHISON
You are probably right, inasmuch as the thing would need to be designed rather
carefully in order to tell the difference between a faraway train with lots of
cars and a nearer one with only a few cars. But I doubt that the cat situation
is comparable, in
that a train
ought to vibrate the track in a sustained manner that would pretty uniquely
indicate that something was ON the track rather than crossing it.
43171 21JUL88-1117 General Information
Railroads (Re: Msg 43167)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: MARTYGOODMAN
As you might suspect, there are two types of power distribution systems for
railroad motive power:
(1) AC, using an overhead contact wire, where the nominal voltage level is
11,000 volts, 25 Hz, single-phase. Commercial-frequency high voltage AC
(25,000 volts, 60 Hz) seems to be destined for greater use in main-line
applications. (Voltage levels in Europe and Japan have operated for years
between 6,600 and 25,000 volts at 50 Hz.)
The three-phase system using TWO overhead contact wires has disappeared
entirely, although some work has been done in applying 3-phase, 3-conductor
third-rail power for rapid-transit application.
(2) DC, using an overhead contact wire or a third rail, where the voltage
level may be 600, 1200, 1500, 2400, or 3000 volts. As much as 750 volts DC
may be satisfactorily carried in a third rail, but higher voltages are usually
carried in overhead trolley wires. (Like… in San Francisco.)
Modern rapid-transit systems, by the way, are nearly always operated with the
third rail at 600 volts.
In any case, the running rails are used for the power return. Rail joints are
loosely installed to permit temperature expansion and contraction, and the
joints are bonded to provide conductivity for large currents. Natch, there
shouldn’t be any voltage across the rails since they are supposedly at ground
potential . . . but there CAN be.
On American railroads, the distance from the running tracks to the third rail
is usually between 20 and 28 inches, while the third rail may rise 7-8 inches
above the level of the tracks themselves. While the third rail is protected
pretty well, especially in the case of rapid-transit systems using fences,
it’s not impossible to get the charge of your life from a railroad.
Those are some of the reasons why I say it’s best not to tempt fate with the
battery cables. Auto battery cables, after all, need only be constructed to
provide 12 volts worth of insulation resistance. The extra bulk is for
ABRASION resistance.
I’ll bet you were about 12 yers old when you pulled this stunt,
right? (Hahaha!)
Don
43172 21JUL88-1118 General Information
Railroads (Re: Msg 43170)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: ARTFLEXSER
Oh, I just mentioned the cat example because a friend once designed a
“burglar-proof” system for his Corvette using a mercury switch, which was
supposed to sound the alarm in case the car was being bounced around. He
reasoned that such vibration might indicate someone trying to force his way
into the car through a window, or maybe an attempt to get the car on a dolly.
Imagine his surprise when his own cat set off the alarm at 3 AM!
The cat was not amused, and left a small, brown remembrance on the car’s hood
to commemorate the occasion.
43176 21JUL88-1605 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43171)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DONHUTCHISON
Er… well.. actually… I tried that out a few WEEKS ago!
The tracks I did it on were ones that crossed a San Franisco street
right in the middle of the city. There was no visible third ral
nor was there any overhead wire. I assume that the train was powered
by some combustion type locomotive (Diesel?). Or do they still
use such things these days???
—marty
43186 21JUL88-1828 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43171)
From: HARBIE To: DONHUTCHISON
at 600v , i’d say it’d be the charge of your DEATH !
43178 21JUL88-1730 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43147)
From: COCOXT To: MARTYGOODMAN
Good points. I was trying to point out that a lot of unfair practices
are commonly accepted, and the examples were not the best. I have heard
of cases where the (er — a case) “xxx doesn’t bother me, but it bothers
my customers” argument has been used successfully to fire someone or
refuse to hire them; by analogy, “I don’t mind if Mr. Jones uses drugs,
but my customers mind” should also be legal justification for hiring or
not hiring someone. I f a man is Black, it’s no sin — but those who
would be prejudiced against him know right away that he is Black. A
society prejudiced against drugs does not have this “luxury”; they
must use the guerilla tactics that you oppose so vehemently.
Like Jesse said — drugs are also a supply problem. Too bad we can’t
test MONEY for its connection to drugs.
43199 21JUL88-2246 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43178)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: COCOXT
well… overall… I think there is FAR too much focus on enforcement…
with resulting immense waste of public resources and utter failure
in combatting drug abuse. Only with education… and understanding
about the real distinction between drug USE and drug ABUSE… is there
any chance of lessing the amount of drug abuse in this country.
Nancy Reagan is the best friend an unscrupulous syndicate drug
dealer EVER had. So long as her ravings are given the least little
bit of credance, there is NO chance of effectively attacking the problem.
—marty
43206 22JUL88-0230 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43172)
From: ARTFLEXSER To: DONHUTCHISON
I have myself set off such alarms in other people’s cars on at least two
occasions, by nudging them when parallel parking in a tight space. Once, I set
one off
just by slamming my car door when parked close NEXT to the other car! No
wonder passersby ignore car alarms
these days, and burglars aren’t very afraid of them!
43210 22JUL88-0256 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43206)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: ARTFLEXSER
You have put your finger on the main failing in most home burglar
alarms too.
I knew of someone who was a professonal burglar at one time
in his life. He just LOVED burglar alarms. He’d trip them
every night (and disappear) after he had spotted a likely
target house, and eventually the owner would decide the system was
faulty and shut it down. When the alarm failed to trip, finally,
he’d strike. This process has the added advantage of
conditionning the neighbors that the alarm in question was
faulty and to be ignored.
—marty
43211 22JUL88-0305 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43210)
From: ARTFLEXSER To: MARTYGOODMAN
I would have imagined that it would be rather difficult to trip a HOUSE burglar
alarm without actually entering the premises or at least leaving some signs of
attempted entry.
Guess it depends on the type of alarm!
43226 22JUL88-2327 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43210)
From: DENNYSKALA To: MARTYGOODMAN
Now *THERE’S* your movie idea, but its already been done. Topkapi -
Michael Caine I believe, about 20 years ago or so. They did about what
you described. They hid inside a museum after closing, and repeatedly
set off an elaborate alarm system until the guards turned it off in
disgust. Was a very amusing sequence.
***** Dennis *****
43214 22JUL88-1848 General Information
Railroads (Re: Msg 43213)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: BILLWILSON
Oh, yeah… agreed! The normal two running rails are at ground potential
and don’t pose a threat under normal conditions.
But, where third rail systems are used, there is a significant voltage on
the “third rail.” That’s the point I was trying to get across.
Dh
43215 22JUL88-1849 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43176)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Yeah, I’d say you found the tracks for an OLD combustion type railroad, where
the tracks are used simply for direction rather than for providing power to
the engine.
Dh
43225 22JUL88-2327 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43145)
From: DENNYSKALA To: MARTYGOODMAN
Marty, I think the bottom line here is – people will simply not obey laws
that they perceive as unfair, biased, unnecessary, or arbitrary (unless
of course the penalty is extreme or they are monitored very closely).
Like prohibition, 55 mph speed limit, seat belt buzzers, sodomy laws,
etc. Likewise with drug laws. An addition absurdity here in making an
addiction illegal. Like making breathing illegal for the rest of us.
***** Dennis *****
43228 22JUL88-2328 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43212)
From: DENNYSKALA To: BILLWILSON
Glad to hear about the new sensors. Would make me even happier to hear
that they were being installed on all the crossings here. Our problem is
that to travel North to South, in one section of town the underpasses are
about 5 miles apart. So avoiding the crossings is difficult. And yep,
nothing makes for really p***ed off motorists like a nice long freight
slowing down to a stop across the crossing.
***** Dennis *****
43231 23JUL88-0246 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43212)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
Cute comment about the “little jerks” who falsely trip
the gates. Sheesh! I sorta had FUN doing that a few
weeks ago… tho it was at 4:00 AM in a place where
there were absolutely NO cars or trains at the time.
I just wanted to test that that actually worked.. the
ole “jumper cable trick”.
heee.
—marty
43230 23JUL88-0244 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43211)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: ARTFLEXSER
As you say, it depends on the alarm.
Here are several ways to trip an alarm:
Throw a rock at (if need be thru) a window. If the alarm
system is equipped with sound descriminators, it will
trip the alarm.
Remove a screw or three from the alarm bell, and begin to open
the casing of it. Most such alarm bells have a “tamper switch”
on their case, which will trip the main alarm if you
mess with the case’s hold down screws. This can be a bit
tricky, for properly placed bells are located
high enough so that a ladder is required to reach them.
As far as breaking in to the house is concerned,
often merely opening the door will trip the alarm.
If the door does NOT have a simple slide bolt
(or wedge “police lock”) on it, any decent lock
pick can get in in a minute or two. Good lock
picks can go thru 99.9% of house and commercial
doors in 15 seconds or less. I know! I’ve seen
a master at work on some of the best name brand
six and seven tumbler locks!
—marty
43708 5AUG88-2229 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43211)
From: COCONAUT To: ARTFLEXSER
Quite true! A good home alarm (not one of these new electronic gizmos) is very
difficult to trip without doing some sort of visible damage. My folks have a
system that is strictly hard-wired, relay controlled, and uses only pushbutton
switches on doors and windows (including interior doors which can be switched
in or out of the system with toggles on a hidden control panel. It never
falses-out and the only way to set it off is to open a locked door or window.
Marty’s cat-burglar friend would have had a fit with that one!
DougFisher
43232 23JUL88-0248 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43214)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DONHUTCHISON
No argument there, Don… that third rail is a REEEEEEL Sizzler!
—marty
43238 23JUL88-0331 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43225)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DENNYSKALA
I agree that unenforceable laws are (most of the time) bad laws,
both because MOST such laws are idiotic in the first place
(anti drug use laws, anti this or that consenting sex act laws, etc.)
and because they breed disrespect for other, needed laws.
There are cases where hard to enforce laws still make some sense.
Anti-jaywalking laws, for example. My parents jay walked
regularly (which is dangerous at times, you must admit)
until they got a ticket for it. After that they obeyed the law,
and probably were safer for it. Of course, they are fundamentally
law abiding, and even the impact of a simple “ticket” was sufficient
to deter them.
But, to my knowledge, “addiction” itself is not illegal anywhere…
it is the sale, purchase, or posession of the illegal drugs
that is illegal.
I should here once again emphasize that there is a major distinction
between drug USE and drug ABUSE. With many drugs (such as marijuana
and alcohol) the vast majority of folks who ever use them never
abuse them. The problems there are that tho only 10% of those who
try alcohol abuse it, that 10% is still 20 million addicts to
a hideously toxic drug.
Cocaine (in its purified preparations, especially crack)
seems intrinsically more addictive… with a large fraction
of users getting into an unhealthy relationship with the drug.
But even there, there are folk who can use it without getting
addicted. But the risk of addiction is FAR higher. I, for one,
have no desire to even try crack, in part for that reason. But
that is my choice.
Narcotics fall somwhere inbetween… and differ, too, in that
once addicted, if the drug is available in inexpensive
and pure form, many narcotics addicts can regulate their
addiction to a given level and continue for decades as
quality and successful doctors, lawyers, etc. Such
regulation and “plateauing” of the addiction level
is more rare and more difficult (by orders of magnitude!)
in the case of crack.
Thus I guess one can very crudely divide drug use into
four categories:
(1) NON users… those who abstain. One perfectly sane
alternative when faced with the question of what drugs to try.
(2) Recreational users… those who use one or more
mind altering substances in an infrequent and rational
manner… in most cases this means once a week or less,
and of course NEVER while on the job or operating
a motor vehicle or the equivalent, and USUALLY also
implies the drug used socially… certainly NOT
as a treatment for stress or depression.
(3) addicts whose addiction is under control.
This situation occurse with narcotics and some marijuana
addicts. It is not a manner of drug use that I would
approve of, but the “victim” who has stabilized their
drug addiction is often unlikely to seek treatment.
And, in some cases, may not really NEED treatment.
(4) addicts whose addiction is out of control.
This happens with most nicotine users, and is
often the fate of alcoholics. It seems to be
common among cocaine users, too. It is rare among
marijuana users.
I’d consider category 1 and 2 to be healthy, sane,
“Normal” behavior. Frankly, I PREFER to be a category 2
person, and studies may indicate that category 2 folks
in many populations are happier, better adjusted, than
(on the average) category one persons.
Those in category 3 and 4 are in trouble, in my opinion.
The distinction between 3 and 4 is that those in 3 may
stay that way for life, and remain relatively happy and
productive to society as well.. whereas those in category
4 are going down the tubes, making themselves and those
close to them miserable, and costing society immense
amounts of resoruces for their medical care and
the mistakes they make.
—marty
43239 23JUL88-0332 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43226)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DENNYSKALA
Sadly, that apparantly is a frequently employed technique in
“real life”.
It works, too.
Just like in that movie!
—marty
43240 23JUL88-0334 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43230)
From: ARTFLEXSER To: MARTYGOODMAN
Perhaps we should archive that message in a new “Tips for Burglars” database?
43241 23JUL88-0337 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43227)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DENNYSKALA
Bill Wilson’s description of that system that senses the train’s
speed and reacts accordingly in terms of timing when the gate
goes down sounded desireable.
The obvious problem is that such systems have to function
out in the open air, exposed to the elements to one or
another extent. Certainly to temperature, and parts of them
to moisture and oxidation as well… not to mention
lightening and such. So engineering such a “smart”
set up that is not constantly breaking down is no
mean feat. Oh… I suspect it can be done…
at least, something that could be relied on for X no.
of years, and then replaced on a ROUTINE maintanance schedule.
But again.. stuff exposed in that fashion is VERY non trivial
to engineer for reilable long life!!!
Obviously those parts of the system that CAN be sealed up
in more or less environment proof ways would be…
dunked in epoxy, lightening protected, opto coupled, …
whatever. But still the SENSORS would HAVE to some exent
be exposed to air, or sun, or whatever. And THEY might
prove to be the achilles heel of the set up.
—marty
43243 23JUL88-0341 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43238)
From: ARTFLEXSER To: MARTYGOODMAN
Not to mention (speaking of burglary) the cost to society of all the burglaries
and other assorted
crimes that get committed by the “out of control” segment of drug
users.
43245 23JUL88-0343 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43241)
From: ARTFLEXSER To: MARTYGOODMAN
Dunked in epoxy?? Whatever might have given rise to that thought?
43246 23JUL88-0345 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43245)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: ARTFLEXSER
Actually…
Electronic stuff has been potted in epoxy for ages, for
quite “legitimate” reasons of environment prooffing.
But yes… there WAS another reason why epoxy-coated
electronics was on my mind. Heeeeee!
—marty
43255 23JUL88-1911 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43240)
From: BILLWILSON To: ARTFLEXSER
WOW!!! I didn’t mean to start all of this! All I was doing was getting a little
fuzz off my chest. HaHa.
Bill
43257 23JUL88-1919 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43232)
From: BILLWILSON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Just a little sound advice to whoever you would like to hear groan.
“Never make love on the railroad track–cause the train might c*me first!”
Bill
43268 24JUL88-0052 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43255)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: BILLWILSON
Ah! But THAT is the very nature… the very ESSENCE…
of public bulletin boards… this elaboraton and extention of,
and wandering from, existing “threads”. It’s a pleasure to
have ya here, for (among other things) precisely the reason
that your comments interest other folks, and spark other
discussion.
—marty
43707 5AUG88-2207 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43164)
From: COCONAUT To: MARTYGOODMAN
Marty-
First of all, I apologize for the delay in this reply, by my Coco got zapped
while writing the message you are replying to. I certainly do not recall
saying that I was “enamored” of random urine testing. What I said was
basically that until people in positions potentially hazardous to many others
are able to show some responsibility, something MUST be done. This is not to
say that all such persons are irresponsible, but obviously enough are to create
a problem. Untill someone can come up with a perfect solution, anything is
better than doing nothing at all. Today, two blocks from my office, a mother
and her 14 year old son were murdered by the driver of a dump truck, who due
to excessive speed and negligent, erratic driving was unable to stop for a
signal and literally ran over their car. People at the scene could hear the
mother’s screams for help as she burned to death in the resulting fire. The
driver of the truck was councilled by a psychologist at the scene to keep
him from possible psychological harm and released! ABSURD!!!!!!!
Doug Fisher
43720 6AUG88-0331 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43707)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: COCONAUT
I fear you are responding emotionally, not logically, to
a very real terrible tradgedy. Actually, in your description
of that awful accident, there was NOTHING you said that in any
way demonstrated that the dump truck driver was intoxicated
on any substance. He could merely have been incompetent.
Or totally distracted by, say, a fight with his wife when he
left for work, or overdue bills, or whatever. This is not
meant to excuse his behavior, just to note that it is not clear
that drugs were in any way related to it.
Further, I take STRONG… VERY VERY VERY STRONG… issue
with that I see as an hysterical and emotional statement
that “doing anything is better than doing nothing”. THAT
makes NO sense wha
t ever to me! There often are situations
where doing ANYTHING is a terrible mistake, and doing NOTHING
is the wiseest course. Example: Forest Fires. Folks
often made the MISTAKE of fighting forest fires, before they
learned that in many cases 90% of the fires in a given region
were “natural”, set by lightening, and served to burn small
areas and PREVENT the occurance of MASSIVELY destructive fires
that would occur if the smaller fires were prematurely put out
by stupid, medling, do-gooding humans.
In the case of drug abuse, I never advocated “doing nothing”.
I have in message after message proposed DOING a lot of things
to counter drug abuse: Legalize all intoxicant, teach those
who insist on using drugs HOW to use them safely, make
pharmaceutically pure and comtaminate free drugs available in
consistent doses, provide free medical care for all, including
treatment for drug abuse, make decent housing and education
available to all, to help eliminate the hopeless rural
and urban poor for whome drugs make sense as the only
“way out” to temporary happiness. Establish sensible
on the job programs to detect and treat drug abuse, as opposed
to fasistic police state tactics that are technologically
and philosophically inappropriate to the task. And much more.
Your comment seemed to me about the same as advocating
putting land mines in no parking zones, because that tactic
would effectively eliminate recidivism among parking offenders.
—marty
43721 6AUG88-0335 General Information
RE: Railroads (Re: Msg 43708)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: COCONAUT
I heartily endorse your folks’ idea of a good burglar alarm.
VERY heartily. I agree fully that a simple, non electronic
(electro mechanical) based alarm is often FAR superior to
an overly complicated (and overly sensitive to false triggering)
electronic jobbie. Actually, I currently HAVE a commercial
electronic alarm in my house, but it is one of the simplest
variety of such systems, and to date (4 months) there have been
no false alarms. Oh… it’s caught ME from time to time
when my girlfriend leaves the house early and absentmindedly
sets the alarm, resulting in my hitting one of the pressure
pads when I wake up and start moving about… but no
real FALSE alarms.
—marty
43748 6AUG88-1932 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43720)
From: COCONAUT To: MARTYGOODMAN
MARTY:
Perhaps I am not making myself clear, as you seem to misunderstand what I say.
In respect to the dump truck driver in question, my feelings were not that he
was necessarily intoxicated, but that no effort was made to determine what his
condition was at the time. Visual appearances are every bit as faulty (if
not more so) as the testing that you despise. I used to know a guy that could
smoke marijuana all day and hide it quite well even though he was quite high.
Secondly, and I REPEAT that I certainly do not feel that drug testing is
effective or adequate, but there is a certain portion of the population that
will be intoxicated on whatever is available to them no matter how much money
and “happiness” is thrown at the problem. Granted, making drugs legal, and
offerring the proper counciling will help in some cases, but it seems to me
that more people will be willing to try drugs that have been legalized because
Uncle Sam has put his “Stamp of Approval” on them. Case in point – Nutrasweet.
Nutrasweet is a substance that is definately harmful to some, possibly harmful
to all and practically nobody worries about it because the FDA has allowed its
sale. I realize that this is a simplistic comparison, but I’m sure that you
can see my point.
DougFisher
43777 6AUG88-2334 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43748)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: COCONAUT
Actually… I don’t know of any significant harm done by Aspartane
(Nutrasweet). It would seem to be likely to be utterly harmless,
so similar is it to natural amino acids that float around in ya
all the time, anyway.
Legalization of intoxicants is not, in my opinion, “approveal”
of the use of them… nor is it “disapproveal”. It would
merely be a recognition of what I see as the FACT
that individuals have a RIGHT to CHOOSE to alter their consciousness
using drugs… provided they do it in a responsible manner,
on their own time. Note that I APPROVE of laws making it
a crime to drive while intoxicated, etc. That is, I approve
of laws against the inapproprate and reckless use of intoxicants
in a fashion that endangers not only onself, but others,
in a very direct way.
In the case of the dump truck driver… or of ANY public “driver”
(dump truck, plane, train, taxi cab, etc.) who gets into an accident…
it is a tricky question as to wheter drug testing should
be mandatory. My best answer to that question at this time would
be that such testing MIGHT be in order, but ONLY if the test in question
really DOES offer a chance of determining whether the individual was
actually INTOXICATED at the time the accident happenned.
I mean… a marijuana urine test would be TOTALLY inappropriate,
for it is not quantative, and would be positive for ANYONE who
had a puff of grass in the last several weeks, or who even was in
a ROOM where the stuff was being used. Surely you agree that THAT
kind of test does not detect whether or not our unhappy driver
was “under the influence” at the time of the accident??!
As I noted in a previous essay on this subject, it is very difficult
to use blood and urine testing to determine intoxication.
Curiously, alcohol is probably THE most amenable to that
sort of approach. With other drugs, the correlation between
the levels found and the presence or absence of intoxication
is much worse.
In any case, I certainly see it as appropriate to give that
driver on the spot a neurologic exam (walk a line, touch your nose,
etc.) to check for HARD evidence of impaired FUNCTION… and
follow that with appropriate tests for intoxicants if the neurologic
exam shows any real deficits.
By the way… *I* was in that situation myself, once.
I was falling asleep at the wheel, having been up about 20 hours
and returning from a major mountaineering climb in Baja.
Driving down California Interstate Highway 8, I began to “weave”
across FOUR lanes… back and forth. The highway patrol
stopped me, and administered what I judged to be a VERY appropriate
neurologic test for alcohol and other intoxication. They quickly
ascertained my story (too tired to drive… too tired
to exercise proper JUDGEMENT to get off the road!) was a true one,
gave me a stern warning, a $100 ticket, and left. But, on the
basis of their test, and their smell of my breath, they did NOT
waste my time, or the people’s money, on a breath or blood
alcohol test. I was lucky back then (15 years ago) that
the freeway was essentiall EMPTY at 3:30 AM!
—marty
43806 7AUG88-1341 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43777)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: MARTYGOODMAN
Maybe I watch Perry Mason and/or Matlock too much, but I think I heard once
that eating several soda crackers would cause the BreathAlyzer test to show a
driver as being totally snockered, when he might not have had even a single
drink…?
I guess that’s one reason the lawyers advise their clients to INSIST on a
BLOOD alcohol test if they are pulled over on suspicion of driving under
the influence… because a false conviction based on a BreathAlyzer test
is extremely difficult to have overturned.
Don
43813 7AUG88-1505 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43806)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DONHUTCHISON
I don’t know one way or another about that “soda cracker false positive”
problem, but certainly agree with you that the blood test for
alcohol is likely to be more accurate.
—marty
43827 7AUG88-1657 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43806)
From: ZACKS To: DONHUTCHISON
I really don’t know for sure, but I have heard that if the
authorities are not equipped to perform a blood alcohol test,
that you may request a 30 minutes waiting period before actually
taking the test. This is due to the fact that if you had had only
one mixed drink just minutes before driving and being stopped,
the breathalyzer will give a false reading of true blood alcohol
level. Once the alcohol has had enough tine to be totally absorbed
by your system a more true result will occur. I think they came up
with 30 minutes to give any persons body the chance to absorb every
thing so far consumed.
43861 8AUG88-0126 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43806)
From: COCONAUT To: DONHUTCHISON
Don,
Smoking ordinary tobacco cigarettes can also give a false positive on a
breathalyzer!
DougFisher
43829 7AUG88-1729 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43827)
From: DONHUTCHISON To: ZACKS
Of course, one school of thought says you should ALWAYS request a BLOOD
alcohol test… because you will probably need professional medical
services for such a test, which gives your body time to metabolize the
alcohol to a “safe” level. Better not to drive under ANY influence,
though… that’s what taxis are for. (I guess one could always argue
who is the better driver, though… a drunk or a cabbie! Hahaha!)
Don
43835 7AUG88-2040 General Information
RE: Sony KV-1311CR (Re: Msg 43829)
From: MARTYGOODMAN To: DONHUTCHISON
The Cabbie who picked me up late one night in Seatle was not
intoxicated. Still… I did feel rather uncomforatble
riding with him, for he had a battery operated 5 in B&W TV mounted
on the dash, which appeared to absorb nearly his full attention
as he drove me to the airport. Sheesh!
—marty