This tech should be developed and used to stop chase vehicles. Also if it is used to stop people from going 10 over then we shouldn’t have cops checking people’s speed anymore.
Old cars for the win!
Yet another reason that old cars are looking better and better. We’ll be Cuba at some point.
I love old cars and trucks.
Removed by mod
Technologically speaking, easy.
A - system turns off
B - new speed becomes the current limit
C - reported/ticket/vehicle is disabled.
I’m not talking about autopilot. It’s your job, as it is today, to reduce your speed BEFORE the limit change.
Good.
Why would you need a car that can go 200mph? Where are you going to use it? Oh yeah typically in school zones or some shit. If the limit is 50mph, ITS FOR A FUCKING REASON.
Also, US cites and states, START DESIGNING YOUR ROADS FOR THE SPEED YOU NEED. If you design a road next to a school like a highway, don’t be surprised when people drive 70mph. This simple idea is used all over the place in the Netherlands and guess what? IT FUCKING WORKS BECAUSE IT MAKES FUCKING SENSE .
/rant
Just glossing over implementation. So every car will have to have wireless communications of some sort? Will there be some government system that all California cars will have to be integrated with that tracks where they are at all times so the car can know the correct speed limit?
“I don’t think it’s at all an overreach, and I don’t think most people would view it as an overreach, we have speed limits, I think most people support speed limits because people know that speed kills,” Wiener said.
Not unless they think about it for five seconds.
There is already a good amount of wireless in most cars. We’ve had standards since the Bush administration for cars to wirelessly communicate with each other.
I personally can’t wait to start hacking cars going by on the freeway to make their top speed a negative value.
Similar things have already been done.
https://www.wired.com/2015/07/hackers-remotely-kill-jeep-highway/
Oh yeah, I know.
One way I could think to implement it without any tracking or data connection connection with no data being transmitted from the vehicle would be by placing infrared strobe lights periodically along the road, possibly at the same places we already have speed limit signs. The flashing is invisible to the human eye but could be picked up by cameras on the vehicle, vary the speed or pattern of the strobe to indicate a different speed limit.
Something pretty similar is already used by a lot of emergency vehicles to trigger green lights, just the arrangement is reversed with a strobe on the vehicle and a sensor on the traffic signal.
Of course such a system would potentially be vulnerable to things like power outages (strobe can’t strobe if it doesn’t have power) bad weather (heavy fog, or if the camera and/orr strobe are covered in snow,) and someone could potentially circumvent it by just mounting a strobe light on their car pointed at the camera.
You could probably address the snow/fog issue by locking the car to a lower speed if no strobe is detected, maybe 25 or 35mph, because in those conditions people should generally be driving slower anyway, and then you don’t have the expense of needing to put strobes around lower speed areas. And the power issue could be addressed with the kind of solar panels and/or backup batteries that already power some streetlights and such.
And for those who tamper with the system to circumvent it, we’re never going to stop speeders entirely, but we can increase the fines to make up for lost revenue to keep police departments happy, they make less traffic stops and rake in the same amount of money.
The infrastructure limitation could be resolved by using infrared reflectors along the road instead of lights. Have the car shine infrared light at the reflectors so it’s cameras can read the code on them (like an infrared QR code, maybe?)
I haven’t read the article, so just spitballing here: I have to assume the approach here is to electronically govern the engine to go no faster than the highest speed limit. I don’t know what the limits are in California, but where I live that’d mean the car would be limited to 80mph. If it was electronic, it could be adjusted if then limits were changed.
Otherwise, it’d be insane, and require the crazy infrastructure you describe. And they simply don’t have the money or the wherewithal to build an actual coverage that would allow the limiter to dynamically scale all the time.
Alternatively, I suppose you could imagine a hybrid system—ie an overall limited engine to the max limit, and then some sort of transponder that would throttle the limit down if you were near an important speed limit zone, like a school, which they could manage to deploy a transmitter at… still seems technologically challenging for the state to really pull off consistently though.
Either way, yeah not a fan or including more required tracking tech in vehicles. I don’t think I’d really hate a reasonably limited car—I really can’t justify needing to drive over 80 ever really, even in an emergency, but it would drive me insane to have the car just magically throttling down whenever it thought it was time to. See
I read the article, it definitely doesn’t bother to think about how something like this would be implemented, but certainly seems to be referring to a dynamic Limiting system… good luck.
One of our cars uses GPS and a lookup to show the current speed limit on the dash. It’s often wrong. This will not go well.
You realize your car already knows what speed it’s driving without GPS, right?
Sure, the car knows its forward speed from its speedometer.
It doesn’t know the speed limit of the road it’s currently riding on, that’s not as easy to directly measure. Currently the most straightforward way to do this is have it look up its location using GPS, use that data to look up what road the car is driving on, and then look up the speed limit for that section of road. This is far from error prone; GPS isn’t perfect and could, for example, confuse your current position for another road nearby; it might think you’re on a slip road next to the interstate you’re driving on, or think you’re on rather than under an overpass, that sort of thing. The database might be out of date or in error, the data connection to that database might be unreliable…
The California legislative process: First, say something totally reasonable. “People should be able to tell if the products they buy contain poisonous or carcinogenic chemicals, let’s require consumer goods that contain hazardous chemicals to bear a label describing them as such.” Next, do absolutely no research, consult no technicians or engineers, only lawyers and yoga instructors get a say. Once you’ve got all the spelling errors ironed out, have it carved into adamantium so that it’s more permanent than god. Finally, strictly enforce the letter of the law in any way it could be interpreted. Which is why literally every single product that might get sold in California up to and including bottles of mineral water all say THIS PRODUCT CONTAINS CHEMICALS KNOWN IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA TO CAUSE CANCER on the label, and since literally every manufactured good is labeled as hazardous, consumers have exactly no more information than they used to.
I’m a software engineer with colleagues who work with various localization and short range communication. This is totally technologically feasible. All the “what if it’s not sure” cases just default to the higher limit. It won’t be sufficient for self-driving cars to know how fast to drive, but it will prevent the vast majority of excessive speeding.
The what-ifs are just people either flailing around to not have their speeding curtailed or people who assume half-assed apps from companies that don’t have any reason to care if they’re right are the state of the art. They always come up with absurd reasons why they need to speed or why implementation is impossible whenever any road safety improvement is proposed. It’s a boring and pathological response.
I don’t think you’re following the implication.
What, that up to date speed databases are an impossible problem to solve? Or that you couldn’t possibly get current speed limits from a non-GPS method? These aren’t hard problems.
If it’s not a hard problem, it wouldn’t happen.
You’d be amazed how many problems can be solved when the people involved have legal liability. My first GPS unit was out of date from the moment I bought it. It wasn’t because keeping a map up to date was hard, it was because they didn’t care, you’d already bought the GPS and it was better than not having one at all. This isn’t a technological problem.
Your car’s GPS-localized speed map is wrong because no one cares enough to make it right, not because it’s an unsolvable problem. It’s a gimmick to get you to buy the car, and you already bought the car.
Apple and Google also have problems with speed limits being updated, and they actively attempt to keep their maps updated. Even Waze has incorrect data sometimes, and that can be corrected by anyone. So I don’t think it’s quite as simple as you think it is.
Speed doesn’t kill.
It’s the sudden stop that kills you.
…or the sudden start.
Lol correct. Speed doesn’t kill, acceleration does
Belter slingshot racers know this all too well. NOTE: Spoiler for an episode in the Expanse which everyone should watch if they haven’t already.
Be careful, or politicians are gonna draft a bill preventing your from applying too much braking force too quickly. Thats about in line with the logic on this bill.
Funny enough, they already did long ago. It’s call ABS. :)
Doesn’t abs make you stop sooner than both slamming on locking braks or manually pumping them? Idk sounds like more of a sudden stop to me, congress gonna ban ABS next
ABS also shortens your stopping distance. At least good ABS does, originally it sucked.
or the car use gps, gps is not able to track you(at least not it alane), and you still know where you are
Mechanical governors for ICE vehicles have been around for over 120 years. It wouldn’t be hard to make an electronic version for e-vehicles.
Those are fixed speed governors for fleet fuel economy and/or manufacturer choice to prevent operators from turning their engine block into something externally ventilated. Not variable governors that require knowledge of where the car is to adapt to the local speed limit, a significantly more complex challenge, and one with a solution that is inherently insecure, privacy-violating, and almost guaranteed to instantly be abused.
Do you think GPS units are broadcasting their location to know where they are? They just download maps and use the signal to localize themselves. Too many people acting like they know how tech works without understanding the basics of the largely non-networked world that existed before smartphones and spyware apps absorbed every feature.
Did you think about this for even 5 seconds?
Yes, but speed limits change. There’s no way of reliably knowing what the current speed limit is without wireless communication.
As someone with an Audi that will adjust your cruise control automatically based on speed limit (or rather what it thinks the speed limit is) I couldn’t be more against this. I had to disable the feature after multiple times where it thought I was on some 15mph ramp rather than the freeway and slammed on the brakes in the middle of traffic going 70mph.
VW and BYD as well, but VW has been the most accurate I have driven. Even with that I would say at best 80% accurate on what the speed limit is.
Almost every new vehicle is already sending info to the manufacturers now.
Every car I’ve hired in the last ten years has the current speed limit displayed on the dashboard. It does not require the car to communicate any information, only to receive it.
That is a different question from how car manufacturers could abuse the requirement to get more data to sell, of course. But there’s nothing in this bill that would require the car to collect any data that isn’t already publicly displayed by the roadside.
So Uber already does this. Yes, you need to have GPS enabled, but Uber can tell when you’re speeding. Same with insurance companies and their apps. The technology to determine what street you’re on, what the limit is, and how fast you’re going already exists.
Will there be some government system that all California cars will have to be integrated with that tracks where they are at all times
We have that already. They are digital license plates. It’s voluntary right now fortunately.
Folks… it’s available as a subscriptionnn!!!
I really don’t understand why this is a product at all. What value does it provide me for $250/yr?
Saves a few seconds of applying registration stickers every year?
Anti-theft…
Kinda makes sense for fleet vehicles I think, where you’re already installing trackers anyway.
Privacy nightmare for personal vehicles!
I’ll buy the argument on a fleet vehicle. But I miss any reasonable use case that justifies the price for Joe Blow the consumer.
Why not just make people follow the speed limit? Why let them go 10mph over in the first place?
To allow for vehicles to pass one another before the end of this century.
If they’re going fast enough that the speed limit isn’t fast enough to pass them, maybe you don’t need to pass them.
If I’m stuck behind a tractor on the road, they’re probably going 15 mph and I can easily pass them by just going the speed limit. If you’re stuck behind someone going 50 in a 55, tough luck. It’s not like you’re losing that much time anyway.
You save like 3 minutes over 30 miles. It’s nothing. People just think it’s so much faster because they don’t do the math.
You sound like someone who has never themselves driven in real traffic before.
You mean like the jackholes who think the best way out of a traffic jam is to drive on the shoulder so they can pass everybody? 🙄
“Real traffic” is nearly a dead-stop and you’re not in a position to gun it to get ahead in most cases.
Source: The real traffic of Seattle.
I lived in Seattle for 7 years and am well aware of what I5 traffic through Tacoma is like during rush hour. I used to drive to visit friends down in Portland on Friday after work pretty frequently.
🙄 That leapfrog shit where you zip in and out of crawling traffic every time there’s a gap is dangerous and people shouldn’t do it in the first place. If traffic is super slow then the speed limit is easily fast enough to pass anyway.
Also, it shouldn’t be your job to speed to make up for bad traffic. That’s a failure of public policy and engineering. We should fix that.
There are a number of scenarios where one might do 10+ over the speed limit to get around someone on the highway that does not involve the leap-frogging-in-crawling-traffic maneuver you’re referring to.
Yeah, you might want to get around them, but only to save a couple of minutes. If someone is going slow enough for me to give a shit, the speed limit is enough to pass. Otherwise, tough luck, you have to go 50 in a 55
Not being able to pass a slow car just angers people.
People who are angry about the slow car are probably going to ride their ass.
People riding other people’s ass don’t have enough following distance to react to an emergency brake.
Now there’s an accident and traffic comes to a half.
People coming up from behind are in the same scenario.
Now there’s a pileup.
Congrats! You’ve now made the roads less safe.
And pileups never happen when people speed 🙄
You know what? You’re right.
Let’s ban private car ownership.
Let’s ban private car ownership.
Or even better, just create viable public transportation, and discourage the plague of suburbia. Let the people who want to drive drive. And the people who only see it as a means to get from point A to B out of cars.
Except those people who want to drive have a huge burden on society for basically no reason. Fuck em. Nobody gets to drive.
If everyone is driving 10mph above the speed limit, we’re back to square one.
Ah. No thanks. New cars already bend us over a barrel for our data. I don’t need you monitoring me 24/7 on my speed and location. I like the side guards on semis idea though. Run with that one, Wiener.
Nothing about the proposal requires any tracking.
Can’t go 10 over the speed limit, right?
How the hell will they know the speed limit where I am at?
Pre-download speed maps or passively receive speed broadcasts from the roadside.
Good God, use your imagination just a tiny little bit!
Ok. I’m using it.
My car has the hover ability from Back to the Future 2, and they are still going to track me. What now?
How about your car has maps stored on it that contain stored limit information?
Not everything is about tracking you.
Isn’t this already happening though?
Some have them. Wouldn’t mind seeing them on all trailers.
This is fantastic! Fuck cops. If the cars can do the crime, then there’s no need for speeding tickets.
Wow I’m so happy I won’t have to be part of the world you live in - where it’s OK for idiots to speed and where cops (because they’re law enforcers) are “bad guys.” Jesus what a messed up set of values you people have. No wonder our country is going down the toilet.
It’s supposed to say can’t… If the cars can’t let you speed, then there should not be any speeding tickets anymore. Right?
Ok that makes sense, hopefully if cars can’t speed there wouldn’t be any need for speeding tickets. But there will always be a need for police, people are still going to drive under the influence, act like idiots and cause accidents as a result.
Why not just make vehicles that can’t do insane speeds?
I had a fucking 4-cylinder Ford Ranger from the 80’s that topped out at 65mph. I don’t mean the speedometer stopped at 65mph, the speedometer went to 80. I mean with the pedal fully floored, that’s the fastest I could go.
This is a choice by automakers, just like the oversize way-too-tall child-killing truck hoods are too.
Just making a car that can’t go that fast was always a solution and honestly, the fact that we just let automakers make cars that can go like 200mph when they’re supposed to be “street legal” is a fucking joke and a half. Nobody needs that shit, but every chucklefuck who wants to bang a young woman thinks some sports car is how they’re gonna do it. Fucking pathetic.
You talk as if cars are appliances. Hell, even appliances go overboard. Why does a toaster or fridge need WiFi? Why does my washer or dryer have downloadable custom cycles? Because innovation is what sets companies and products apart. It’s not always done “right”, but who’s to judge if a feature is superfluous? You? What makes you qualified?
Cars aren’t just machines to get you from A to B. They certainly can be, but they’re also a fashion item, a status symbol, marvels of engineering, and a tool for testing your skill. Cars can be taken to a racetrack and driven hard. Just because something is being misused doesn’t mean it should either be illegal or shouldn’t be made. Your view on this is incredibly myopic. Just because you aren’t into cars doesn’t mean the “right” thing to do is make all cars the same. And before you suggest making fast cars track only, that would be absurd and make the hobby even less approachable. Not everyone can have two vehicles (apartment buildings that only allow one vehicle, or a city with limited parking). That would be the same as when governments require permits for a product or activity, but make the permits impossible to get.
Other countries have figured out how to handle this situation in different ways. Germany has a harder test for getting your license. Not every idiot can pass. Some countries in Europe make fines a percentage of your income instead of a flat fee. That means breaking the law hurts everyone to a similar degree, rather than rich people paying the fine without a second thought as just the cost of doing business. If you really have a problem with cars then at least get creative with your solution. Trying to stamp them out is genuinely worse than this proposed bill.
Excuse me, I live in a country where little kids are dying because to get around regulations about cars vehicle companies started pumping out giant SUVs and trucks that are outright designed dangerously and put more pedestrians in danger (you literally can’t see kids over the top of the hood).
I would give a shit about “doing it a different way” if I had any faith that US congress could pass anything let alone as something as useful or “complex” as actually fining rich people related to what they’re worth.
Nobody in charge gives a shit about what I think anyway, you’re myopic thinking a bill like this would actually pass or that the US federal or state governments actually give a shit about the well-being of their citizens. Pro-tip: they don’t.
It feels like you completely ignored my argument against outlawing fast cars and simply moved to your argument about SUVs and trucks. If you choose to hand-wave my points because you’re “thinking of the children”, then I see no merit in your argument. And you’re saying that what I said is invalid because I believe the bill will pass? But that you can say whatever because you’re fed up with the government’s ineffectiveness so you’re just being bombastic? That detracts from your own statements, if you’re admitting your own rhetoric is just for effect because you have no faith in politicians.
I’m not talking about SUVs, trucks, politicians, or the US legal system. You made a point that cars that drive over 65 shouldn’t be made, and I countered. I don’t hear anything from you except “politicians won’t fix it” while turning around and saying “fast cars should be illegal”, which would require those very same politicians you’ve lost faith in to somehow be effective enough to pass that very legislation.
“fast cars should be illegal”
Literally did not say that, I just said “why not just not make them.”
Maybe I’m not engaging with your argument because you’re doing dumb shit like this and misrepresenting the point.
Also, once again, nobody in charge gives a shit what I say, I’m just some guy on the internet without an ounce of influence. Do you really need to win this argument with a nobody? You’re acting like I’m the governor ready to pass the bill! Guess what, I’m not Gavin Newsom, thankful to say.
Buddy, I hope you have a better day than you’re currently having. I’m not sure what purpose putting your opinion on the Internet served if you were going to pretend it and any responses to it are pointless. Take care of yourself, man. You’re talking like nothing and nobody matters. In the cosmic sense, you’re right. Humanity, is just a flash in the pan, so none of us individually matters. In a human sense, even a small act of kindness might change somebody else’s life, and I think those moments DO matter. I don’t want to tell you how to live your life and I genuinely hope you don’t misconstrue what I’m saying. I do actually hope you can live just a small amount less cynically and can see some positivity, despite how our political system and news keep pushing the negative in our faces day after day. I don’t think hope is just for fools.
I don’t think hope is just for fools.
Are you gonna magically pay for my $16k a month cancer medication? Fuck off.
Hope is for fools.
I lost my job six months ago and am currently struggling to find another. Even if I did find another job that paid what I was getting paid before, I would not and could not pay for your cancer medication. But that doesn’t mean I would choose to turn a blind eye to it. I would continue to fight for basic human rights to water, food, a home, and healthcare, because that’s what I’ve believed in and will continue to believe in. Maybe I wouldn’t change anything in your lifetime or mine, but I’ll still try. And maybe in a few generations, once we’re gone, we opened the door for them to have those things that allow us to keep our dignity.
I won’t pretend to know how you feel, so I won’t give you any platitudes. How you choose to live your life is your own decision, and I won’t insult you by pitying you. Your struggle doesn’t mean it’s impossible for you to make somebody else’s life any better or worse, though, just through simple human interactions. Sure, people are starving, dying, and going through much worse than me, or even you. That takes nothing away from the problems we encounter, the joy or pain we feel. I’ll do what I can to influence my circumstance, because nobody gets to tell me I can’t do something. When possible, I’ll try to do the same for others, even if nobody sees it or gives me a pat on the back. I’ll hold out hope that others might do the same for me when they can, but I won’t expect it because I’m not owed it.
I’m not saying any of this to prove I’m better than you in any way or to win an Internet argument. Call me whatever names you like. I promise I won’t respond beyond this comment. I simply wish you well, or at least better than at present.
In high school I drove an old Vanagon camper that could hit 65.
With a tailwind.
Downhill.
i had a high miles, no-frills mustang with the base engine (same 4cyl used in the pinto) that was basically the same. it could barely make it to 65 and it took forever to get there.
If the speed limit is 10 then that wouldn’t help at all.
To be clear about my position on this though, it’s dystopian as could be.
10mph is also slow enough to be relatively safe during an accident, which kind of makes your point more moot.
EDIT: Under 20mph is pretty safe. 20mph-35mph you’re risking higher likelihood of some minor injuries in an accident. 35-55mph is when serious injuries and risk of fatality begin to happen and over 55mph you’re dealing with crashes that are almost always fatal. Keeping the top speed to just barely over 55mph actually does help in a lot of ways.
Cars are designed for fuel efficiency (well, it should at least be considered.) To make an IC engine efficient, it has to be able to rev higher, and reach higher speeds. So while it can technically reach 100 mph, it’s most efficient at 55.
If you make an engine with a top speed of 65mph, and run it at 65mph all the time, it’s going to guzzle fuel like an alcoholic going through an angry divorce.
that may have been the case during the carter administration, but the efficiency curve of a modern car tops out a fair bit higher than 55.
Citation needed. Hybrids and EVs at least are actually most efficient at even slower speeds.
Okay, but that’s only because the top speed is much higher to bring the RPMs down into the efficiency sweet spot.
…and EVs are just as terrible for the environment as ICEs in respect to the fact that they’re not public transit. They produce more microplastic/microrubber waste from tires because they’re heavier than ICE vehicles. More tires on the road, more microplastics.
EVs don’t reduce traffic and while there is an energy savings, it would be a lot bigger if we were dumping all those EV batteries into trains and buses, both of which reduce traffic. (and reduce tires on the road)
Beyond this, every EV is a luxury item. I’ll start giving a shit about EVs when I can get one with roll-down windows, no AC, no sensors, no rear-view camera, no stereo other than an FM radio, because then you’ll see some fucking energy savings over time. Every EV has a bunch of extra shit drawing power in them.
I’m pro-EV, but not for individual consumers. Cars have broken society. It’s time to return to public transit.
Especially in places like Seattle, because the promise of “going wherever you want, whenever you want” by owning your own car is a fucking joke its impossible to get anywhere in a reasonable amount of time with so much traffic. Buses and trains reduce traffic.
If it’s energy savings we’re actually going for, EVs as they are aren’t the answer.
If it’s energy savings we’re actually going for, EVs as they are aren’t the answer.
If we take the real awnser of public transportation out of the picture then moving to EVs as a replacement for SOVs does in fact conserve our energy.
An internal combination engine are Only 35-40% efficient as a lot of heat is generated and lost. A gas turbine on the other hand can be as as high as 80% efficient .
It’s more efficient for us to burn fuels to generate electricity to power EVs including transmission losses and charging losses than to burn them in ICE vehicles. Again though public transportation is the better solution overall.
Lol get a grip. This comment is immature as shit.
I’m sure you have never in your life exceeded 10 over to make some sort of maneuver in traffic.
Hmm. I’m always crusading for people to slow down and stop being in such a frantic hurry all the damn time. In Utah, people go 85 in school zones (in fact 125 in some cases) and kids are being killed every day because of it.
Is 10 mph over the speed limit too much speed? I don’t know, but I know that too many people drive as IF they were having a life-threatening medical emergency rather than following safe speed limits. If the weather is good and the road is clear, it’s fine to go a few miles an hour over the speed limit.
But, speed limits aren’t there just to make your life inconvenient. There’s a reason they deem some zones safer for going faster than others, usually because of residential areas having lots of kids around, etc. Speed limits aren’t just arbitrary.
In some places where drivers are not usually exceeding the speed limit I can see where this could be a nuisance. But in Utah, where almost nobody drives at a sane speed, and people go WAY over what could be called acceptable levels of speed, nothing else has worked to slow drivers down. So, this seems like it could be a real step in the right direction.
If people WON’T do the right thing, should we FORCE them to, especially if it saves lives? That’s the question.
If people WON’T do the right thing, should we FORCE them to, especially if it saves lives? That’s the question.
Isn’t that just what a law is
Yep I think so. And I’m pretty law-abiding, which makes me an enemy in the eyes of other people for some reason. Personally I think it’s imperative to act responsibly as a driver and obey the speed limits and take weather and road conditions into account.
I know that all seems kind of “no duh” but you wouldn’t believe how many people in Utah speed through lights and intersections and construction and school zones as if their asses were on fire. Really, nothing so far has helped stop the excessive speeding.
It’s usually “if people won’t do the right thing, should we punish them for it?” Rather than forcing them to obey.
I don’t think it’s punishment to make people follow sensible speed limits, at least it SHOULDN’T feel like a punishment. Like I said, those limits aren’t there just to make life inconvenient. Frankly I don’t see why people behave like driving is a race to a finish line.
I’d rather think that we should educate people better in the first place, instead of waiting and then punishing them. But in Utah, people do not listen and do not have the responsibility to drive with care and caution. What do you do when people just refuse to do what’s right?
I think you’ve misunderstood my point. The punishment is things like traffic tickets, fines, license suspensions, and so on. Laws don’t magically force you to drive at the speed limit, they institute punishments that are applied to you when you exceed it.
The reason “punishments” like traffic tickets exist at all is exactly what you said - laws by themselves don’t seem to work to get people to drive at the speed limit (or close to it even). How else can you regulate and enforce them? If not by issuing tickets or fining people who SHOULD know better (and yet continue to act like imbeciles behind the wheel).
The speed limit laws are there for a reason. People ignore them because people are assholes. So - how do you enforce the law when people WILLFULLY refuse to see the reason to follow them?
To the contrary, in my experience most people actually do stick to the speed limit.
It’s obvious you don’t live here in Utah. Nobody who has lived or traveled here would ever say people obey anything close to the speed limit here. Just last night, another batch of stories on the local news about drivers going too fast, that killed several school kids and one that wiped out a whole family who were stopped on the side of the road.
Utah is all about idiots willfully killing people. That really should be our state motto.
would be a prohibitively expensive and complex system to implement and maintain, what an incredibly stupid idea… even if every single person drove the exact same brand and model of car, it would be astronomically expensive to implement, and incalculably expensive to maintain… a billionaire must have thought of it…
This is a good idea if they only put it in public service government issue cars.
Great. Now my house can burn down before the firefighters can get there. And when that causes me to have a stroke from the stress, my ambulance will take longer getting to the hospital, allowing more opportunity for a catastrophic outcome.
You’re thinking about this wrong. Cops can’t pull you over for speeding if they’re stuck going 45 mph.
“Land of the free” california does not deserve to be part of thw US
I’m not saying I support the measure but I also don’t understand your statement? We curtail some freedoms to create some safety for the public. Limiting driving speed is one of them and has a massive impact on traffic fatalities in busy areas. There are other people on the road.
Oof. I generally am a supporter of Scott Wiener but this is not a winning issue. Mass transit, drugs, and lgbtq issues are his wheelhouse
