fullmoon97

yea. dfelt didn't get that joke....

the problem with your ideas of the 500 is that the car has a wide stance. from above the car is pretty much a square and smaller at the top. te car is built like a pyramid which is next to impossible to topple over. the rollover is not a real issue.

this will be what makes Chrysler stand out. not what kills them. there are alot of people who dont like the boxy 300 and have been calling for a smooth sleek looking 300 for some time now. this MAY be the return of the intrepid but who knows. with the problems they had with the 2.7 they may not want to bring that name up again no matter how good of a car the intrepid actually was. i hope they do keep what makes them different. such as the Cross hairs with dodge.

not the right to drive topic again.

Would you be surprised to hear that I hope I am wrong? I can't imagine that kind of thinking today. Today the general thought is more like 'whatever..I don't agree with what you say, so F you..." And that's really too bad, since it cheapens the right of free speech. not one bit. i believe you believe 100% of what you are saying. im sure everyone hopes you are wrong. but with the information i have been given. i can ONLY see that you are wrong. i may call you crazy because i cant see your scenario with the clear lines that have been placed. this isnt about the government. i don't think they care one bit. maybe some special interest groups do. but they have even more limits on what they can do. insurance groups have this (i believe) to ensure their fiscal well being. and honestly is that a bad thing? lawyers will use anything. but if the other lawyer is good enough they can show the real picture. i dont think you should worry about "big brother" watching you.

well a wise man once said you have your right to be wrong...

the government doesn't take green cars seriously. you see any green limos? i think not. maybe hybrids but those run on gas as well. again. i am tired of this you crazy people are giving me heartburn. if this really does become an invasion of privacy. (again idk how a cop catching you speeding and getting your black box to prove it is an invasion of privacy.) you really think people will stay quiet? NO! if the tea party, occupy movement, and oh idk the hundreds of protests going on around the world, should tell us anything its that people dont stay quiet when they feel threatened. FACE IT! the house wont see this as a big deal and they will pass it. it will be a thing. learn your rights. know them well. if you know your rights they cant touch you. you people are crazy...

wow you really are paranoid. this will be used OBVIOUSLY along with other things. if your rear 1/4 pannel is smashed and it shows full throttle. then lets see maybe he was trying to get out of the way. im getting tired of this. sure its a tool of the insurance companies. but not to make more money its so they dont have to pay more. but guess what if they dont have to pay more. GUESS WHO IS DOING THEIR JOB! the less they pay the more people are alive. im seeing the big picture here. you are seeing pictures that aren't there..

no.... i am a constitutional conservative. i HATE big government. you on the other hand sound like someone from Coast to Coast AM screaming about black helicopters and UFOs. cars are just a thing... the only reason the government pays any attention to them is because of the oil they consume. if cars didn't run on oil then it would mean as much to the government as a big wheel a toddler plays with. like i said before if this was paired with some sort of green driving bill. i would be against it. but this thing will only record what happens mechanically to the car. and used when needed. seriously guys its ok...

ok let me spell it out for you here. the reason why the patriot act was a thing was because phone lines are a public thing. not private. same with email and cellphones. all of those are public. the car is a privately owned machine. as is your house. police need warrants to search your house BECAUSE it is privately owned. this black box is PART of the PRIVATELY OWNED car. which if we remember what i said before police need warrants to search. as does FBI. idk what goes on with the NSA and CIA. now let me spell out this next part for you as well. wouldn't having all of the crash data from the black box help car makers make cars safer? maybe something failed in the car. numbers wouldn't add up. you put 100% brake force on the peddle but the car only puts out 60% something is wrong there. this is not an invasion of privacy because the only time this will be looked at is when it needs to be. if you have done nothing wrong then its just a hunk of metal and silicon in your car. but if something goes down and your car does not have this box. but the other guy does. maybe it can show that it was him at fault and not you. maybe he applied no pressure to the brakes. well guess what you dont have to pay anything. seriously. im only defending it because its not wrong. we are not sheep being lead to the slaughter because there is nothing to slaughter us. just a little 5x5 hunk of metal and silicon.....

what you guys don't understand is a warrant would be needed anyway to view it. they cant just say oh give me your black box. because the car is still under private ownership as is the black box. you aren't under surveillance the government isn't going to probe you. the aliens aren't going to take you to their leader. but the black box could possibly save your life. and like JB said they are already in a lot of cars. this law is making them mandatory in new cars. it says nothing yet on law enforcement. because they know it will be privately owned and subject to the same laws and privately owned items. warrants will be needed. since cars have nothing to do with terrorism i highly doubt the US government would care much anyway. which is why the local authorities will still need warrants. they still need warrants, THEY STILL NEED WARRANTS. there hopefully that made it through some of the thicker skulls

im sorry... but you all are crazy... it is harmless... take off the shiny hats.

but what would the government want with you car data other then to catch you speeding and solve crimes? useing car info to entrap people is STUPID. sure GPS data but most new cars already HAVE THAT! how do you think NAV systems know where you are? there would be no point to tracking what goes on with the car. now if this bill was paired with some sort of "green driving" bill then yea id say screw that. we drive how we want. but having that information available does not mean it will get misused. again especially if the info is ON THE CAR. onstart is different because the car is always connected to some sort of receiver the only thing in this would be a device for recording the car data and possibly GPS but again most cars already have that.

the idea that this will be used for anything other then crash data, operational data, and law enforcement ( again given you are actually caught speeding) is silly and with the storm going on here it sounds like you guys think it wants to probe you. those 3 points i have no problem with. i don't see many ways this could be abused. i mean really its not like it will store months of data. so there really isnt much that can be used against you. especially if the info is kept on the unit. this is more of a "if a tree falls in a forest" kind of deal. i don't think this box is pushing any constitutional limits.

ok i think this is harmless. and you have to understand i am against things like SOPA and what ever the new one is called. but what you guys are talking about is down right unconstitutional. without any type of warning. (not a warning given to us but a warning given to them. like something unlawful being discussed in a car or whatnot.) they cant do anything. even the patriot act needed something to start the surveillance. things like searching bomb, bus, and things like that. to actually start the tapping. what this will do is if you are pulled over for speeding and you take it to court they will refer to the black box. i DONT think that this will record audio within the car maybe outgoing calls made with the built in phones the cars have now but even then they would need a probable cause. its too small of a unit to record the massive amounts of data that audio would take up. well if you wanted quality audio that you could understand. most likely it will be information such as speed, tire pressure, different ratios. idk but things that the cops (NOT THE GOVERNMENT) can use to solve crimes. dont believe me that its too small? this is the size of the unit. the hard drives that are that big can only hold a couple of gigs of audio. if you want car info in with that its just too small. http://www.blogcdn.c...ack-box-opt.jpg

GET READY!

TOP Freedom of Speech, Press, Religion and Petition Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. TOP Right to keep and bear arms A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. TOP Conditions for quarters of soldiers No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. TOP Right of search and seizure regulated The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. TOP Provisons concerning prosecution No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. TOP Right to a speedy trial, witnesses, etc. In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense. TOP Right to a trial by jury In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law. TOP Excessive bail, cruel punishment Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. TOP Rule of construction of Constitution The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. TOP <a href="http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment10/">Rights of the States under Constitution The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. yea..... i see nothing saying congress shall make no law making it illegal to drive. while people may dissagree with this fact. that does not make it any less true.

ok while i enjoy driving and don't really want a computer driving my car (mainly because of nostalgia and the fact that i really don't mind having to commute.) driving is NOT a right, no where in the bill of rights or any political document that i have ever heard of does it say that it is every Americans right to drive a car. we drive because we can not because we have to. we COULD walk every where and as a nation maybe that would be a good choice . maybe then we wouldn't be so fat. we have the right of free religion, the freedom of speech, the right to PURSUE happiness among a few obvious ones. no where is the constitution does it say anything that it is your right to drive a car.

i think he said we are always welcome in his shed!

Welcome to the madhouse!

i got a set of rims ive been wanting to fix up (they have some salt damage and peeling) going to strip and sand them then repaint with a two tone silver and gunmetal paint. going to look pretty good! and thanks to Dodgefan for rendering the idea i have for what the wheel will look like when i am done. possibly going to get the front suspension replaced as well

I don't know about you Balthy, but 98% of the police officers I have met in Jersey, both locals and troopers are pretty fit, and would have no problem doing a one-on-one unarmed take down on the Internet desk jockeys who's wittiest comments involve donuts. If they read the article, the previous vehicles were Zafiras... 15 inches shorter and 3 inches narrower... but 6 inches taller. The Zafira's fit the police fine. Sounds like the Insignias are severely ergonomically compromised. Of course, its typically a good thing to have beefy, tall police. It helps establish authority and helps them take down criminals. One dude I knew in a drug induced jumped off the 3rd floor casino garage, broke both legs, yet still ran another couple blocks and it still took about 15 AC police to finally stop him. He hurt a few of them in the process, too, IIUC. If the police are expected to shrink with the CAFE-required cars, about 2025 we're going to be hiring only 'little people' to be police officers and crime is going to skyrocket.

me and a few others from the site were talking and said it looks like new Camaro rear ended a Porsche cayenne which then hit a lambo. for an SUV it does not look bad. but for a 200k plus lambo i wouldnt even think about it. also the interior is horrendous.

welcome fellow PA resident. im from the lehigh valley area.

See here I again disagree with you as the Fiat has a Hot Wheels look to it. In regards to how people think about Fiat, around Seattle they hear that name and what comes to mind is an OLD SOCIALIST GARBAGE Making car company. Fiat had lousy cars last time they were here in the states and still do not make that great of cars based on experiance of being in them over in Europe. I would take many other car companies over Fiat if I was in Europe. Fiat has returned after 27 years and for young teen and 20's it might be considered a new company, but for those of us who have been around a bit longer, they are bottom of the bucket garbage cars that we remember when they were here back in 1985. also idk what the civic choices have to do with the quality of the car. i dont hear people calling Ferrari "old socialist garbage"