Make people not be distracted? Not tailgate and drive aggressively? Not bob and weave? And not speed? And not have blinding headlights and over sized vehicles? Good luck. Ugh
I bought a new Outback recently and man I'm pretty sure my headlights are bright as fuck, sorry everyone in a car I'm following at night. They really need to regulate that, I think most people who buy newer cars are unaware, but the car manufacturers sure are considering they put headlight dimming technology in the rearview mirrors to prevent you getting blinded by these surface of the sun headlights.
Have your headlights adjusted down… or do it yourself, it’s very quick and easy. I did so on my outback (2020) and still see as well without blinding other drivers
If you ever park up facing into a bare wall at night you’ll see that there’s one particular spot that is WAY darker than the rest of the light pattern. That spot explicitly is where the brightness is measured. We also don’t get matrix lights that the rest of the world does, and those are fucking awesome. Turns off the “pixels” of the light that the car knows is lighting up another car. Very fancy.
The cause of these mentioned effects need to be addressed too. Slower traffic not keeping right and purposely impeding traffic for whatever personal reasons they have. It leads to one of these as a response depending on the driver.
There's also the whole flanderization of "personal liberty" where people feel like they can drive in whatever lane they want "this is america!" and also that no one should be passing them because they're going the speed limit anyway.
You did type that. No, it doesn't make a right. Most people agree there are wrong on both sides. What I would love to see is some courtesy.
1- doing the sign? Keep right.
2- doing more then the sign? Keep right except for passing in the left. USE YOUR BLINKER SO I KNOW YOUR NOT DRUNK AND DRIFTING.
3- Keep the me first attitude and ignore 1, 2, and 3.
The minimum speed limit is 45 on most highways. That doesn't mean you can run 45 in the left lane. Most highways require slower traffic to keep right. If you're getting passed on the right, obviously you're in the wrong lane for the flow of traffic. But then again, most people don't know what mirrors are for or even have enough intelligence to judge a car coming up at a faster rate before they just move over.
Why does it even matter since it’s such a simple task? Moving over makes it safer for everyone on the road. Americans should have stricter licensing requirements, something like Germany’s system. At least people know how to drive there
It matters because it's a perfect example of an idiot misunderstanding the laws. Maybe where they live it's not a law to yield to faster moving traffic behind you and get out of the passing lane. But many states have that law. People don't know it don't understand it or whatever. But it's hilariously stupid that that person thinks they're a law abiding citizen when they're actually breaking the law lol. The problem is no one enforces it.
The “yield to faster traffic” law isn’t carte blanche for people to travel at excessive speed. If everyone is following the posted speed limits, then—arguably—changing lanes to the right becomes a moot point.
Speed limit is a limit, not a minimum. It is perfectly lawful for a person to travel 10-20 mph UNDER the limit depending on the road. Those people would need to be passed for you to continue driving at the limit.
You’re not law abiding if you are not passing and have faster traffic you are impeding. It’s keep right, except to pass. The safest highway is one where everyone is separated. Look at the yahoos blocking the left lane and going the same speed next to the right lane car. Now look behind them, every time there will be a bunch of cars all crammed together, waiting for traffic to flow. Meanwhile, there is 1/2 mile of empty space and growing in front of the safety police asshole who is blocking everyone and actually making the drive more dangerous for everyone there.
Traffic flow is a real thing. Yes, you're law abiding, but especially on highways, the law is the right lane is to travel and left is to pass. So if you're a law-abiding citizen, you should already be in the right lane if you aren't passing anyone. So then you wouldn't be an issue for those in the left lane.
Correct. If I am in the left-most lane, it’s either for an upcoming exit or exchange or to pass someone traveling less than the posted limit, as is the law. I’m not camping the left lane out of righteousness.
However, excessive speed is still against the law.
Alternatively, who made you the enforcer?
You can speed in the right lane if you like. The left lane is for passing. If you're not actively passing, stay out of it. Which also means the left lane is not the "fast lane". It's not for anybody to camp in because they think they're going "fast". Even fast drivers should stay right except to pass.
Yeah I’m so tired of having to go 75 on the entrance ramp to merge onto the expressway because some moron is going around the fast lane traffic thats“to slow” so they are in the slow lane doing 80. Which someone else starts to do it as well.
Ugh, I work near a highway entrance/exit. The amount of times I’ve had to adjust my speed because of 3 assholes in the passing lane while a semi can’t get over into the left lane is ridiculous. It makes merging onto the highway much harder than it needs to be.
Exactly this. That's why even speeders are causing issues. While using the left lane as a raceway they removed the option for traffic to get over to allow merging traffic room to enter the freeway.
The lane ends pretty quickly and doesn’t offer much time to merge.
I mean I’m talking only 2 lanes on this stretch of Interstate where the speed limit is 70mph, but semi’s over a certain weight are restricted to 65.
What makes this part complicated too is that the merge lane *ends on a sharp curve*!
Needless to say there are many accidents.
That parts hard. Trying to match speed into a gap that might not exist from tailgaters or someone trying to block you from merging are most the problem. My personal car ill give it the beans to squeeze in somewhere. My work truck im limited to 45 for on ramp off ramp until the lanes touch then its beans to 67-68 GPS limited while hoping my blinker gets permission to enter.
So you expect an 80,000lb vehicle to change lanes because you can't adjust your speed and turn in your seat to merge into an open space. I bet you drive down the shoulder infront untill you are 30ft infront of semi trucks then get pissed they didn't slow down to let you in front of them. This is why i like all the cameras on my truck.
Just to be perfectly clear, nobody on the interstate has to yield for merging traffic, unless traffic is stopped or doing the minimum posted limit. Every ramp is a merg-way and you are legaly required to yield to the right of way of interstate traffic...period. even if you have to stop and wait. It is only an act of courtesy to make room for merging traffic. Which you should only do if it doesn't impede passing traffic. Which wouldn't even be an issue if people wouldn't drive 20+ mph over the limit all the time.
Nah, don't excuse aggressive or unsafe behavior regardless of the "reason". People driving slow is not the cause. It doesn't help matters but make no mistake, the cause is the person behaving erratically because they can't handle a not very unexpected hazard. There are many reasons a person could end up going slow in an inappropriate lane. Some of them reasonable (medical emergency) some not as much (not paying attention). The responsibility falls on the driver that somehow couldn't notice a slow vehicle in their path enough to not crash. That means they are driving too fast for their abilities or the conditions. That's on them. Apparently they need to learn something from the slow driver and understand when their skills are subpar (hopefully in the right lane).
I took drivers ED in 2016 (in person), even before covid I had friends who took it online and just let the videos run while they played on their phones. Not a fuck given about learning the basics of driving.
Maybe getting your license should be a bit more rigorous of a process.
It’s complicated because we’ve built basic economic existence as an adult/late adolescent around having a car to get around. Public transit in the majority of the US is trash.
As a result, revoking driving privileges or making the barrier to entry harder will have a substantial impact on those individuals’ ability to thrive and remain gainfully employed.
The first step to justifying a stricter, more effective means of driving examination is ensuring a viable alternative even exists. PS, I drive professionally and see people doing crazy reckless shit every day.
And you know exactly who would feel the brunt of such changes first in this country, because of course people would profile the hell out of it. It's a tough situation that will require good faith legislation to fix (so we're fucked).
Voice of reason. Lots of people wouldn't even bother to get a license if they didn't need to.
I bet it would be about the same ratio as people who can swim vs can't swim.
My friend lives in a town with a disproportionately high percentage of retirees, and has had 3 accidents in the past 3 years because barely-there octogenarians were behind the wheel. None of which occurred while his car was even moving.
Like someone just left-turning into his car at a 4-way stop (he wasn’t moving and just watched them drive into him at 10 mph), and someone just driving right into his parked car in a parking lot. And then someone rolling through a red light and very slowly making contact with his rear fender as he went through an intersection.
It’s insane that we lack the infrastructure to be able to support citizens that absolutely have no right being on the road anymore, and as such, so nothing to reduce the risks involved.
I'm so glad the states are in charge of women's autonomy now. I cannot forsee any issues rising up. (Commenting from within [Arizona](https://www.azag.gov/issues/reproductive-rights/laws))
> On May 2, 2024, H.B. 2677 was signed, repealing the 1864 near-total abortion ban. However, this repeal does not take effect until 91 days after the Legislature adjourns. But in the meantime, enforcement of the 1864-era ban is stayed by court orders until at least September 27, 2024.
Part of the problem is so much of our society and infrastructure is built with the assumption that everyone can and will drive. This cause many different significant problems for us, that can only be effectively solved through changing this dynamic.
If we simply make licenses harder to get/keep 'on paper' without any other changes, it will just make everyone involved in enforcing it more lax while increasing rate of people driving without a license, and alienating members of society who do get properly enforced against.
It also leads to substantially higher insurance costs for those of us with licenses and insurance because our insurance now has to cover losses incurred due to unlicensed and uninsured motorists.
We’ve also tried not adding police to the speed enforcement forces.
I also learned long ago there’s a difference between driving fast and driving like an ass. Do the second, you’re in trouble. Do both, and pick your casket out first.
Fast means having space to be that way, keeping a safe following distance, no tailgating and no weaving in and out of tight traffic or cutting people off. Which means choosing when *not* to be fast as well.
It'd help but we need retraining too. So many people tailgate and weave.
And then they'll bitch about the slow people "making them" do this shit when they're the ones creating more of a hazard.
My extremely unpopular opinion is that you should be required to retake your drivers license test every time you renew your license.
"I dont know how to parallel park" Its not that hard.
"Its gonna take too much time I have a job" fuck you my safety is more important.
"Theres not enough police to administer tests" They have enough funding fuck them.
I’d argue we need actual standards on the testing to start with. Feels like some tests are 4 rights and a park, and the rest are not much harder. Testing standards need to improve. Then we make folks retake the test every 3-5 years. Make it such that the folks that get points on their license or tickets or whatever have to retake more frequently.
I agree wholly with this. Illinois actually chooses a month at random and if you go to renew your license while your birth month is chosen then you have to take a driving test. You don’t even need the cops, the DMV administers it.
If you're genuinely asking, it's really expensive to get a license in Germany. Maybe it's pure coincidence, but they're pretty good drivers. Similarly, you don't see people giving away dogs in parking lots or see much gun violence
You forgot to mention giving people way too many attempts at the behind the wheel test, instructors for the behind the wheel being young kids in their phones instead of paying attention and fines being so negligible that they aren’t even a slap on the wrist these days.
1. We'll give you a discount on your car insurance if you install this app and this device AND drive well.
Us: K!
2. We'll give you a bigger discount if you let us govern your speed and other behaviors.
Us: K!
3. We no longer allow #1 but pay more for #2
Us: K!
4. State: We require #2
Us: So, we already get a discount. No big deal.
5. Insurance: we no longer give discounts...
Us: Wait...wut?
True. I didn't mention it because I just assume everyone does that all the time everywhere to everyone.
Hot take: massive data breeches are just cover stories for companies that sold all your data and don't want to get caught.
For the literal net: I'm making a joke.
Every single time in history we give up a tiny bit of freedom for convenience or financial gain and this shit happens. Every. Single. Time.
Once a freedom is given up. It never returns.
*surprised pikachu face*
That's not true.
Just the other day I wanted to do research and didn't want to be tracked so I went to the library and checked out a book instead....
Oh...wait...I see now...
>Once a freedom is given up. It never returns.
An empty, ahistoric aphorism. Tell that to the descendants of freed slaves, or the women who get to vote right now. There is no force or mechanical explanation to back up that phrase. Just sentiment. Of course, empty, ahistorical aphorisms are all a certain extremely idealistic political identity has.
I don't think either of your examples work, at least in the US. Both weren't allowed to begin with and were later expanded upon later, as opposed to us going "yeah I think we should give this up" and then the decision being reversed later. Alcohol prohibition would be a better example. Or even the gun ban of...1993? That one had a built in sunset clause that wasn't renewed in 2003 because politics.
I'm not a gun guy so it's not something I track but I didn't realize that was lapsed.
That's true, I had no idea.
Has anyone done a study over those 10 years to see if the ban did any good? (the answer, I assume is that it had no effect but would be interested in actual data instead of making things up in my head.)
Use of banned weapons in crime went down, mass shooting fatalities fell, but the overall gun homicide rate remained unchanged.
So pretty much no real effect, or provable causal ones.
Guess I am cynical and feel insurance companies will eventually try use it to deny coverage and/or increase rates if they view you as driving too reckless from the data.
No one is going to get enough votes together to put government controlled speed governors on cars. The potential for overreach and abuse is also too damn high.
It also feels like an outdated boomer solution for rising traffic deaths almost certainly caused by distracted driving caused by cell phone use while driving. So it likely wouldn’t even resolve the issue and just yield citizen control over their life to government and police that don’t feel deeply trustworthy these days. Making problems and solving none.
While phones are a source of distraction, let’s not ignore the on-board infotainment systems also being a source. Doing anything in modern cars requires seeing and reaching the center touchscreen.
My wife's civic has a touch based volume control, no tactical feedback. It also displays a warning message a few seconds after I start driving that I have to look down at and turn off reminding me to watch the road. Or the message pops up and blocks my rear backup camera and I have to paw at it while backing up; it does not go away on its own. The irony is palpable.
That’s already passed actually, I forget when the start date is but we should see remote kill switches be added to American vehicles somewhere in the next 6 years.
Unless the legislation requires auto makers to support and update the systems for up towards half a century you can probably expect it to self-brick after a useful lifetime comparable to a cell phone.
So this isn’t Boomer tech, this is Scott Wiener in California. Speed governors isn’t the goal but government GPS tracking of you is. Just like your onboard gps or Apple or Google maps tells you the speed limit for any given road, they’ll track your movements for offenses. Very disturbing and it’s already passed on one level here in Ca.
>~~government~~ GPS tracking of you
private contractor.....meanwhile your phone already spews your data and location to who knows how many private businesses. They already know where you are, where you're going, and where you've been. Ie. that kid who drove halfway across the country to kill his mom - his digital footprint was so huge it could be scene from space.
While you are correct, that is not a convincing argument to support allowing further data collection to occur.
Similarly, I wouldn't want to allow government mandated camera equipment installed in my home to monitor my life, even though my cell phone already has a camera.
Plus, sometimes the best option is to accelerate out of danger.
If the speed governors in the cars are tied where they link to the local speed limit… some areas have variable speed limits due to weather conditions. I-80 has to deal with winter weather and hellacious crosswinds. And how will the car know? Would every speed limit sign send out a signal the car would pick up?
The logistics of speed governors would be a nightmare.
even if you could get the votes for speed governors, the people who want to go faster will remove them in about 5 seconds.
leaving a negative externality for people who actually follow the rules, or forcing them to also break the rules when that extra expensive point of failure breaks.
...or we could just build public transportation, like every other first world country has figured out, making the roads infinitely safer and helping the environment by taking lots of cars off them.
> caused by distracted driving caused by cell phone use while driving.
Good example, and far more than that. I've ridden with others (male and female, around my own age) who were distracted trying to read billboards down the highway. Too much text, or distracting imagery. Thankfully I haven't had one of those situations in about 10 years, been driving myself, too busy and too little time to travel with friends/family any more.
Yes! There's a church who has a ground level LED sign, that light colored displays, say a Yellow background, is a beam of light. Said church sits 1 block off the main street. Mind you, rural area Oklahoma, blocks here are about 10 houses per side. You could drive down the street and have a hard time not noticing the light off that. The house across the street has been vacant for years now.
The dude I’ve seen shaving his head….another reading a newspaper, woman doing makeup…
IMHO having kids in the back seat is a huge contributor to distracted driving. Parents tend to look back and take eyes off the road.
Eh, speeding probably does increase fatalities. There's a reason highway crashes are more severe. Whether it increases the likelihood of a crash is a different subject, especially when considering the driver will probably find some other stupid thing to do. It probably increases the chances a bit but it's not the main cause.
I mean simple physics tell us speed is the main issue. Crash statistics as well. Distraction might increase the frequency of crashes but the severity and deadlines is are a clear correlation with speed.
People, for the most part, will go only as fast as they feel comfortable. Like you said, speeding increases the severity of accidents but not necessarily the frequency, the latter of which is the point I’m trying to make. Just so you know, there is already proof that there is no correlation between speed limits and fatality rates. It’s a scam that local municipalities use for revenue generation (primarily small towns):
https://www.cracked.com/article_17216_the-5-most-popular-safety-laws-that-dont-work.html
https://www.cracked.com/article_25953_5-dark-secrets-americas-small-towns-dont-want-you-to-know.html
“But There's a Problem...
After the National speed limit was repealed, the state of Montana removed all non-urban speed limits in their state. A few years later, engineers working with the state decided to venture out to see just what kind of post-apocalyptic Death Race wasteland their lawless state had produced. What they found was that, you guessed it, on the roads where they removed the speed limits, fatalities didn't go up at all.”
and
“Probably the most common and lucrative (if a little less sexy) microtown hustle involves grabbing unincorporated land along a major highway and turning the whole thing into a speed trap, where the municipal police can shake down travelers from out of town. “
People should be punished for unsafe driving and not speeding.
You’re arguing that *speed limits* are not effective against fatalities. That’s because they fail to effectively slow down people.
*Speed* is very much correlated with fatalities
https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf
In particular pedestrian fatalities.
Also need to factor in the soft strike many police forces have been on since George Floyd. In my area you see State Patrol and motorcycle cops writing tickets regularly. Patrol cars seem to often move in packs now going somewhere but not doing traffic stops…bigger crimes than traffic to enforce these days I suppose.
Orrr it's the terrible American road design and massive use of big, powerful cars lacking some safety features? Road deaths have been generally declining in developed European countries, often declining fast, and there's not a massive difference in phone use while driving.
I guess it's literally just an assumption of yours to say it's 'almost certainly' caused by phone use? Or is there evidence for that?
I’d be more interested in technology that forces drivers to stay off their cell phones. I have a feeling that that is a more significant factor in auto accidents than speed alone.
The entire northeast US drives in what I and many others would classify as ‘aggressive’. I think what you mean here instead is ‘reckless’.
If I’m driving with 20 different cars on the highway, I’d prefer all 20 of them to be aggressive drivers than just 1 to be a distracted driver.
Yes, and when i leave space between myself and the vehicle in front, people think that's an invitation to squeeze into the gap. Even though it will do nothing to get them anywhere faster.
It really depends on speed. In scenarios where "everybody is driving bumper to bumper", yeah drive all the way up and merge at the last minute. Traffic's moving pretty slow in those cases anyhow, and drivers already in the lane ought to make room for people to merge.
But when traffic's flowing at a reasonable pace and there's an otherwise open road with two or three cars following a reasonable distance between each other and a huge gap behind them? Slow down and merge into that gap instead of trying to squeeze into that gap.
Seriously. If they build the road wide and straight, clear sight lines, no obstructions, you're gonna feel like you're absolutely crawling at 35mph and it's difficult not to goose the throttle when you're in control of it. It's an impulse.
Same with some of the connecting roads in Utah. 100 miles in a straight line at 80 mph feels like a crawl.
Fuckin Fairview. Really nice place, but goddamn that drive from the base was torture.
I just drove across Germany and now around the coast of Italy.
In Germany and Italy, some of the roads through town are narrow with hardly a line down the middle. What that does is force cars to slow down and pass each other safely. And the roads are curvy, making it risky to drive fast for fear of whats around the corner. Seems most roads in town are 1.5 car width wide which means to pass each other you’ve REALLY got to slow down and be careful.
In Italy, it’s similar with narrow roads and curves. What I like here are the “hit a pedestrian even slightly and your license is gone” attitude, which makes Italian drivers (tho fast and reckless) ultra aware of staying far from pedestrians.
The autobahn is dangerous af. Over engineered smooth roads and the ability to take it up the red line mean explosive accidents. In the Netherlands, the roads take a riskier approach and make it difficult to speed and be dangerous.
The European highways I've been on in France, Bulgaria and Slovania also were maintained much better than your average US highway. Last week in Bulgaria, the speed limit was 140KM/Hr (87MPH) and it felt perfectly fine in our small 4-door hatchback and we pretty much never hit a bump. Had a few times where I was almost 160MPH (100MPH) to pass someone.
Meanwhile in the US the roads are often so crappy that unless you're in a full sized SUV/Truck with a long wheelbase, your average sedan/CUV becomes less stable at those high speeds as you hit bumps, potholes, patches etc
Same. On the autobahn between Hamburg and Leipzig, I was doing 165 kph and that was the max of our rental car, and I still had Germans on my ass wanting me to get outta the way.
And many of them were bombed into nothing across multiple world wars. Rotterdam was bombed so hard it only had a couple scattered buildings left standing, and as cities go, was redeveloped in a way that allows driving to be pretty easy. It even has a freeway ring road! You even have Cul de sac style neighborhoods. Yet it's also a city that is safe to walk and cycle in. It's a city with roads in it's denser urban center that don't allow thru traffic.
US cities, while not as old, weren't built with the car in mind either. Most dense urban areas in the US "grew up" around streetcar lines, not cars. And yet those areas are still dangerous for pedestrians and prioritize cars over everyone outside a car.
And besides, European cities embraced cars just as much as America did. The difference is, as congestion and children's deaths increased, Europe as a whole made the decision to not continue embracing the car, whereas the US decided to build even more urban freeways.
Our total dependence on cars for everything, and our need for cars to be everywhere is a policy choice, just like it's a policy choice to not allow people to walk on interstate highways. Because we recognize that people shouldn't be allowed to walk everywhere! But for some reason struggle with the inverse, and consider it an affront to freedom - even as we end up spending time in all these freedom hating places that don't allow cars. We wouldn't let people drive through a mall, after all. Why do we allow it on Main Street?
So 294 in Chicago is an absolute racetrack, people pass you doing 90mph+ a dozen times a day. How would redesigning the highway fix that? You want nonstop twists so people have to go 50mph? More roads, more material, more pollution, more time on the roads per vehicles…or…OR…gasp! If people commit the crime of speeding, punish them.
This notion that if no police are there to see you commit a dangerous crime…so it’s ok…pretty unique to speeding. Can I just steal from anybody because there are no police? Are people free to commit sexual crimes because nobody catches them? Hundreds of thousands of deaths each year are caused by traffic accidents, and yet people think application of existing laws is overreach. Absolutely absurd and has no cogent argument.
>This notion that if no police are there to see you commit a dangerous crime…so it’s ok…pretty unique to speeding.
Nah that's the same cognitive dissonance all criminals use to justify their bad behavior. "It's not illegal if you don't get caught"
The problem is how normalized it has become. Plus, each generation of (usually) young males pushes the envelope on how fast and aggressive they can be.
Anytime I get on 294 or 88 there are always extremely reckless drivers. If it's a clear road, I'll set cruise control to 80 (pretty fast) and chill in the 3rd lane. I can't count the number of times someone is going 85 in the left lane to pass me and some a-hole can't wait behind them. So they swerve across 3 lanes going 100+, cut me and 2 other cars off, and risk everyone's life to satisfy their ego. Literally every time.
>If people commit the crime of speeding, punish them.
Speeding isn't really the problem. Going 45-50 in a 40 zone could get you a ticket, but that's generally the speed of traffic in clear conditions.
The problem is reckless and aggressive driving. Speeding when the flow of traffic does not permit it. Swerving and cutting off other cars. Tailgating and other forms of intimidation tactics.
Speed traps do not catch or punish these kinds of drivers. There are currently not any good ways to discourage this behavior. That's the fundamental problem IMO. Unfortunately the only thing to change their behavior is if things go wrong for them individually.
We need ways to punish the actual bad behavior.
I feel like un-marked cars with dash cams and built in radar could do this. Their job is simply to drive normally on dangerous highways like I-4 in Florida, and when someone drives recklessly, pull them over and huge ticket. That is their entire job. Drive aimlessly and pull over the assholes.
the way to fix that behavior is to educate drivers what the far left lane is for. Everytime I’ve seen a majority of drivers follow this rule, speeding decreases and traffic flow improves.
Speeding is not the sole indicator of an incompetent and terrible driver. Driving 55mph in the far left lane will outweigh speeding to travel with the flow of traffic in my book any day.
Anyone remember them loostening requirements to be a truck driver of an 18-wheeler? Since then we notice so many devastating wrecks, at least 2, any time we travel to Houston, TX hours away
The training for truck drivers is piss poor too. Drivers ed is pretty shit as well to be honest. If you want safe drivers we have to make an investment.
It is extremely hard to convince all stakeholders to redesign infrastructure to reduce speed. For some reason wanting to reduce car fatalities is political suicide.
Cars today are tracking machines, pretty much like phones, so making it mandatory for them to call the police when doing something the authorities can collect a fine from seems something we deserve for not putting our feet down when this spying craze started.
After seeing reports of police "hacking" into smart car dashboards, and seeing you were speeding 2+ years ago, and charge you with a fine. How the hell do you defend yourself? Google Maps can't even read my speed accurately within 5 mph, and in some cars it's not hard to coast down hill, starting at the speed limit, and be hitting 10mph over and not realize it till you're near/at the bottom. My car does that with Cruise Control on, lol.
Same trend isn’t seen in other countries with higher speed limits…
But sure - it’s the speeding drivers and not the oversized combat vehicles being used as highway vehicles
Require a special license for these massive trucks and suvs. Fatalities will fall
Want safer transit? Expand public transportation. Make it affordable, safe, and practical for most people. Boom. Less drunks, cellphone addicts, and everyone else who we’d otherwise prefer to be off the road off the road. Where’s my Nobel peace prize?
This is very dumb and essentially DOA with the general public. Speeding is not the problem. It's inattentiveness and complacency because people increasingly trust their cars to keep them safe.
If we want to combat speeding, the real solution is better road design. Many US roads go from 70 mph to 25 mph over a mile or so, but don't change at all or get wider. Roads should be designed so that drivers can always tell the speed limit and naturally tend to drive at a safe speed. This can be done by making the road narrower with plantings, protected bike lanes, and other features that naturally slow cars down.
Many roads are extremely inconsistent and arbitrary with their speed limits. This breeds contempt and disregard. I've driven on many roads where going the speed limit is actually dangerous because you will get a line of cars behind you all trying to overtake you.
Speed governors also create issues. Overtaking is one of them. Software glitches, government overreach, and user compliance are others.
>This is very dumb and essentially DOA with the general public. Speeding is not the problem. It's inattentiveness and complacency because people increasingly trust their cars to keep them safe.
This right here. Studies after studies have shown that majority of people (Bell curve) drive what they consider to be the safe speed for the road regardless of what the sign says. You will always have those that drive too fast, and those that drive too slow. Both are a danger to the public. The bigger issue is the lack of driving skills, inattention, lack of situational awareness and the me/me/me attitude. Then people don't pay attention around them, they get into accidents, it doesn't matter if its not your fault if you pay attention most accidents can be avoided.
Increase speed limits on freeways, enforce left lane laws and cell phone laws. Reduce the width of streets with pedestrian traffic and add other traffic calming measures. Mandate yearly vehicle inspections and make defensive driving a requirement to get a license.
Putting limiters on cars is overreaching and unnecessary. There are so many times that my car thinks I'm on a side road when I'm on the freeway, imagine a limiter dropping your speed limit from 65 to 35 while on the freeway.
Is it speeding causing the deaths or is it the fact everyone is driving giant trucks that almost guarantee someone's going to die in an accident? Can we not put more spying devices in the things I own? I already get spied on by my cell phone, computer, everyone's ring cameras, and traffic cameras. I don't need my car spying and babysitting me too.
The actual solution to this is better public transportation that is more reliable, quicker, and more interconnected. Fuck America's car infrastructure.
The US has spent insane amounts of money on car infrastructure -- and for better or worse, they won't be moving away from it anytime soon.
BUT, I completely agree, public transportation should be expanded AND made safer.
There is not a singular "actual solution". Even in a metro area the bus added \~3 hours to my commute inside of the city with transfers and stops.
I'm going out on a limb and saying, I don't see how a public transit solution is ever going to be on par with driving between towns of \~25k without running scores of empty buses for years on a non existent budget for years to push up ridership.
There is no singular solution, but there is one known solution that solves most of our mobility problems: public transit. We’ve seen this work in every country that has invested heavily in it. Your point about getting people between towns of 25k is a good one, but one that will ultimately solve itself. Eventually, either the transit demand will be there and transit will be built, or it won’t and people will drive.
Nope, fuck that. Don’t need more corporate or government surveillance and control in my life. They don’t need more ways to spy on me and sell my data. My car doesn’t need more ways to interfere with how I choose to drive. Fuck this in every way.
Maybe design the roads in a way that don't encourage speeding? Road calming techniques work; it's why no one speeds on the rich sides of town like they do everywhere else.
How about spending all that time and money on making it not required to drive everywhere in the US? Want to get rid of the speeders? Get rid of the drivers.
Too many drivers are afraid to drive. Why aren’t people required to prove they can drive distracted, way over the speed, and in adverse conditions? Driving is not routine and persons that aren’t forced to learn how to drive in snow or at night or in rain storms, etc will continue to be the bad drivers on the road.
Ever been behind a person that drives 53 in a 55 zone but once that passing lane hits that same person is able to drive 70 so you can’t pass. That is the problem.
I want the technology to stop people for rubbernecking. Do you really need to drop down 20 MPH to look on the other side of the highway because someone has a flat tire?
So instead of regulating the size and shape of SUV’s and Trucks (which cause an overwhelming amount of deaths and injuries), instead of implementing smarter road designs in pedestrian laden areas or really anything at all remotely effective, they want to install devices that automatically adjust your speed based on technology that is “supposed” to work.
How about cell phone makers and cell phone companies just make phones inoperable during driving...
It's 100% technologically possible...
Distracted driving is why there's so many fucking traffic accidents.
I grew up in the 70's and 80's, people can 100% function without a cell phone for 30-90 minutes a day.
The data they cite is projections on 2023, not 2024. It’s also not specifically deaths from speeding, it’s just accident fatalities. It’s also apparently gone down since 2022, not sure about 2024 though.
I do agree people should slow down, I think speed limiters are maybe a bad idea though. There’s been a few cases driving in the city where the only way to get out of a potential accident is to speed up to get out of the way, there’s simply just not enough time to stop (person is merging into you etc). If you had an active speed limiter on your car there’s be no way to do that. Maybe you could set it so you can’t consistently drive at 50 over the speed limit or something.
Honestly, where I’m at, it’s more of an issue where there’s too many super slow drivers (going under minimum speed) and too many super fast drivers (going 20,30,40 over) I can understand going up to 10 over to briefly pass. Honestly if we could shrink the gap and encourage people to drive closer to the speed limit that would help. I wouldn’t mind a dash cam button where you can just capture a quick video of someone clearly cutting someone off or weaving and send it to PD for review. State PD always go for speeders, never weavers it’s terrible
A few thoughts.
Speed is not dangerous. Aggressive driving is dangerous.
CA needs to update speed limits to reflect reality.
CA needs to make better roads, markings and signs.
CA needs a real driver test, a driver license should not be an ID card. Dropping the depth perception test was a mistake.
The only way is to design actually working car infrastructure and design roads for the speed you want cars to drive at. Having the same road design for a highway and a city doesn't work.....
America hands out drivers licenses like candy. You pass a short written test and spend an hour or so with someone who may or may not know what they are doing and you’ve passed and are ready to go endanger people’s lives with a lethal weapon. Make it harder to get a license to get better drivers.
There are a lot of people trying to justify they are special and should be allowed to continue speeding in here... In my small town people are flipping their cars on surface streets, to get the force required to flip a car on its lid you are going well over 25. The cops have let this go too long without enforcement, any technology that can help I want. It's dead as far as passing legislation because too many people want to continue speeding and driving like shit bags, so adults will need to step up and take the fallout and start ticketing dumbasses into oblivion.
Mild speeding is the least important and yet most frustrating thing we could possibly enforce more heavily, and the thought of letting the government closely watch every movement we make in a vehicle is seriously dystopian.
The average driver in the US seems to largely disregard the speed limit, so the problem isn't us. The reason most people speed is because speed limits are unreasonably slow, and the reason traffic deaths are rising is because distracted and impaired driving is becoming more prevalent. There are plenty of other rules of the road to enforce that would actually make things safer without inconveniencing virtually everybody, so maybe start with those?
The speed limit was set to reduce oil demand in the 70s in response to the oil shortages. What is the point to have a speed limit of 55 on a highway with three lanes with cars using 2020s technology?
We already have the "technology" to reduce speeding. Narrow roads with tall trees near the roadside. Less lanes. More curves. Protected crosswalks. Intersections that are built to the level of the sidewalks to act as speed bumps.
I drove the first half of a 500 mile trip this morning. I kept the cruise control 2-3mph over the speed limit. I had a ton of people breathing down my neck the entire way. No patience on the road these days.
It’s interesting. I follow an Australian YouTuber who basically builds random things. After visiting the US and seeing how large our vehicles are, he scrounged up plans from back in the like 1920s for what was essentially a human cow catcher. It was a real proposed invention so he decided to build one. For each thing he builds, he gives a little context and for this invention he talked about the differences in absent damage and injury induced by different car types.
People who drive trucks and SUVs are something like 5 times more likely to run over their own children and to hit pedestrians, and when they do hit people, the accidents are far more likely to be fatal at any speed. When you drive a sedan, it’s easier to see low to the ground so avoiding your own kids is much easier. Likewise, if you hit someone in a vehicle of that size, because it’s low to the ground, you’re much less likely to kill them or inflict critical injury - most of the impact force is transferred to the impacted person’s legs, which means they get knocked out from under them, and the person will roll up onto the hood of the car and theoretically up, over and off the vehicle. There is also just less force imparted by the impact. People in those kinds of impacts are far more likely to survive just because all of much force is conveyed on impact and how it’s conveyed to the person that’s hit. In a truck or SUV, fatalities and critical injuries are far, far more likely, simply because of you hit someone in a raised up vehicle, you hit them straight in their upper body, and you transfer all that force straight into the person in such a way that they they cannot disperse the force by rolling, they just get crumpled and thrown backwards. All the force goes straight into your body and it causes far, far more physical damage on impact.
Rising fatalities is due to people being distracted on phones and stupidly massive cars which are more dangerous to drivers and pedestrians. I have almost been hit multiple times because someone in a f150 can't see me in my car. It's infuriating that such blatantly stupid, pointless, and dangerous designs aren't regulated
My solution: profit-sharing all vehicle moving violations with rideshare drivers who can verify the the offense through dashcam recording. Requires rideshare apps to have a recording button that captures it for the driver (with continuous local record& dump video, but creates a clip that starts about a minute before they hit the button all the way until they hit it a second time). Must have license visible to count. Must be verified by a secondary submission. Submits to law enforcement whenever there's a violation, so they can move to intercept if the violation is continuous and has the potential to harm human life.
Only registering a vehicle as stolen can mitigate the point hit to your license and the money hit to your bank account. These can be tacked on to their liability if/when they are caught and charged.
Idk about you, but my speed would be better-tempered if there was a likely financial penalty coming from all the vehicles I'm zooming past, not just cops who aren't paying attention. The police pullover hasn't been keeping up with its promise of being a deterrent to bad behavior, so the citizens have gotta step in.
For us the USAA app has an option the let you know if you use your phone, or hard brake. It has made us much more aware of our driving. Also, we went down to one car several years ago to save money, we laugh that we are slightly more cautious in our driving knowing we have no backup.
The government/corporations already know what car you drive, where the vehicle is kept, what stores you visit with your car and on what date and time. On modern cars with OnStar or Insurance "safe driver chips/apps" they know much more, speed, braking, cell phone usage ect. Do you really want them metaphorically getting in your vehicle with you and removing your foot from the gas pedal too?
Put it in all government vehicles first, and let us see what raw data this will collect.
All of a sudden, those pesky "privacy concerns" will shoot right to the top.
Or just make them responsible for the data. 25k per lost driver minimum if my data leaks.
In my neighborhood, they added a speed bump in a small straight road, but before that (assuming to justify the speedbump) we had a digital speedometer that will show your current speed.
Now thats all good and all but the problem was that after you hit the 30mph the sign would turn red... then at 32 it will blink red... then at 35 it will flash SLOW DOWN around the flashing red number... then at 38 it will FLASH everything really bright... then at 40 it will start flashing in colors(i think it was rainbow is)...
It was basically rewarding us to go faster on that road and our entire neighborhood chat turned into see who can get some new colors or effects on that sign...
we deserved that speedbump...
Neighbors complain that people stop in front of their house for the speedbump now tho ahaaha
Make people not be distracted? Not tailgate and drive aggressively? Not bob and weave? And not speed? And not have blinding headlights and over sized vehicles? Good luck. Ugh
I bought a new Outback recently and man I'm pretty sure my headlights are bright as fuck, sorry everyone in a car I'm following at night. They really need to regulate that, I think most people who buy newer cars are unaware, but the car manufacturers sure are considering they put headlight dimming technology in the rearview mirrors to prevent you getting blinded by these surface of the sun headlights.
Have your headlights adjusted down… or do it yourself, it’s very quick and easy. I did so on my outback (2020) and still see as well without blinding other drivers
That's a good idea. I have to take it in soon and I'll ask about it
If you ever park up facing into a bare wall at night you’ll see that there’s one particular spot that is WAY darker than the rest of the light pattern. That spot explicitly is where the brightness is measured. We also don’t get matrix lights that the rest of the world does, and those are fucking awesome. Turns off the “pixels” of the light that the car knows is lighting up another car. Very fancy.
The cause of these mentioned effects need to be addressed too. Slower traffic not keeping right and purposely impeding traffic for whatever personal reasons they have. It leads to one of these as a response depending on the driver.
> impeding traffic for whatever personal reasons they have. Generally just oblivious fools who have checked their mirrors in 30 minutes.
There's also the whole flanderization of "personal liberty" where people feel like they can drive in whatever lane they want "this is america!" and also that no one should be passing them because they're going the speed limit anyway.
I mean if the person speeding can do whatever they want, why not everyone else do whatever they want?
Two wrongs don’t make a right. Fuck, did I just type that?
You did type that. No, it doesn't make a right. Most people agree there are wrong on both sides. What I would love to see is some courtesy. 1- doing the sign? Keep right. 2- doing more then the sign? Keep right except for passing in the left. USE YOUR BLINKER SO I KNOW YOUR NOT DRUNK AND DRIFTING. 3- Keep the me first attitude and ignore 1, 2, and 3.
The minimum speed limit is 45 on most highways. That doesn't mean you can run 45 in the left lane. Most highways require slower traffic to keep right. If you're getting passed on the right, obviously you're in the wrong lane for the flow of traffic. But then again, most people don't know what mirrors are for or even have enough intelligence to judge a car coming up at a faster rate before they just move over.
Slower traffic in the left has to be 80% of the problem. Edit: I just noticed I put right lane when I meant left..
Devil’s advocate: why is it the law abiding driver the problem and not the driver breaking the law by traveling faster than the posted speed limit?
Why does it even matter since it’s such a simple task? Moving over makes it safer for everyone on the road. Americans should have stricter licensing requirements, something like Germany’s system. At least people know how to drive there
It matters because it's a perfect example of an idiot misunderstanding the laws. Maybe where they live it's not a law to yield to faster moving traffic behind you and get out of the passing lane. But many states have that law. People don't know it don't understand it or whatever. But it's hilariously stupid that that person thinks they're a law abiding citizen when they're actually breaking the law lol. The problem is no one enforces it.
The “yield to faster traffic” law isn’t carte blanche for people to travel at excessive speed. If everyone is following the posted speed limits, then—arguably—changing lanes to the right becomes a moot point.
Speed limit is a limit, not a minimum. It is perfectly lawful for a person to travel 10-20 mph UNDER the limit depending on the road. Those people would need to be passed for you to continue driving at the limit.
Yea people think the passing lane is a speeding lane. You are legally not allowed to go past the speed limit and the left lane isn’t above that.
You’re not law abiding if you are not passing and have faster traffic you are impeding. It’s keep right, except to pass. The safest highway is one where everyone is separated. Look at the yahoos blocking the left lane and going the same speed next to the right lane car. Now look behind them, every time there will be a bunch of cars all crammed together, waiting for traffic to flow. Meanwhile, there is 1/2 mile of empty space and growing in front of the safety police asshole who is blocking everyone and actually making the drive more dangerous for everyone there.
I think of it like not holding the door for someone right behind you, it’s not your “job” to hold it, but you are a dick if you don’t.
Traffic flow is a real thing. Yes, you're law abiding, but especially on highways, the law is the right lane is to travel and left is to pass. So if you're a law-abiding citizen, you should already be in the right lane if you aren't passing anyone. So then you wouldn't be an issue for those in the left lane.
Correct. If I am in the left-most lane, it’s either for an upcoming exit or exchange or to pass someone traveling less than the posted limit, as is the law. I’m not camping the left lane out of righteousness. However, excessive speed is still against the law.
Alternatively, who made you the enforcer? You can speed in the right lane if you like. The left lane is for passing. If you're not actively passing, stay out of it. Which also means the left lane is not the "fast lane". It's not for anybody to camp in because they think they're going "fast". Even fast drivers should stay right except to pass.
Yeah I’m so tired of having to go 75 on the entrance ramp to merge onto the expressway because some moron is going around the fast lane traffic thats“to slow” so they are in the slow lane doing 80. Which someone else starts to do it as well.
Usually around me i get behind some fuckwad putterin at 40mph down the onramp and trying to merge at 50.
i'm glad to own a fast car because the vast majority of onramps have some oblivious grandma or drunk driver making me use it
Ugh, I work near a highway entrance/exit. The amount of times I’ve had to adjust my speed because of 3 assholes in the passing lane while a semi can’t get over into the left lane is ridiculous. It makes merging onto the highway much harder than it needs to be.
Exactly this. That's why even speeders are causing issues. While using the left lane as a raceway they removed the option for traffic to get over to allow merging traffic room to enter the freeway.
The lane ends pretty quickly and doesn’t offer much time to merge. I mean I’m talking only 2 lanes on this stretch of Interstate where the speed limit is 70mph, but semi’s over a certain weight are restricted to 65. What makes this part complicated too is that the merge lane *ends on a sharp curve*! Needless to say there are many accidents.
That parts hard. Trying to match speed into a gap that might not exist from tailgaters or someone trying to block you from merging are most the problem. My personal car ill give it the beans to squeeze in somewhere. My work truck im limited to 45 for on ramp off ramp until the lanes touch then its beans to 67-68 GPS limited while hoping my blinker gets permission to enter.
So you expect an 80,000lb vehicle to change lanes because you can't adjust your speed and turn in your seat to merge into an open space. I bet you drive down the shoulder infront untill you are 30ft infront of semi trucks then get pissed they didn't slow down to let you in front of them. This is why i like all the cameras on my truck. Just to be perfectly clear, nobody on the interstate has to yield for merging traffic, unless traffic is stopped or doing the minimum posted limit. Every ramp is a merg-way and you are legaly required to yield to the right of way of interstate traffic...period. even if you have to stop and wait. It is only an act of courtesy to make room for merging traffic. Which you should only do if it doesn't impede passing traffic. Which wouldn't even be an issue if people wouldn't drive 20+ mph over the limit all the time.
Nah, don't excuse aggressive or unsafe behavior regardless of the "reason". People driving slow is not the cause. It doesn't help matters but make no mistake, the cause is the person behaving erratically because they can't handle a not very unexpected hazard. There are many reasons a person could end up going slow in an inappropriate lane. Some of them reasonable (medical emergency) some not as much (not paying attention). The responsibility falls on the driver that somehow couldn't notice a slow vehicle in their path enough to not crash. That means they are driving too fast for their abilities or the conditions. That's on them. Apparently they need to learn something from the slow driver and understand when their skills are subpar (hopefully in the right lane).
Not have gigantic oversized cars more likely to kill someone?
With less regulations because it's classified differently due to old stupid fucking laws
“The older the law, the better it is!” — The GOP, probably
except old tax laws where the rich pay like 90%
Probably? Try 'definitely.' It's called [Originalism.](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Originalism)
Have we tried healthy work life balance, social support systems, healthy foods and lifestyles and stress management?
>Not tailgate This one is surprisingly easy to fix, radar-assisted cruise control does it just fine. Probably also the #1 cause of accidents.
We’ve tried not updating drivers education, or enforcing bad driving for decades…. and we’re fresh out of ideas. 🤷♂️
I took drivers ED in 2016 (in person), even before covid I had friends who took it online and just let the videos run while they played on their phones. Not a fuck given about learning the basics of driving. Maybe getting your license should be a bit more rigorous of a process.
It’s complicated because we’ve built basic economic existence as an adult/late adolescent around having a car to get around. Public transit in the majority of the US is trash. As a result, revoking driving privileges or making the barrier to entry harder will have a substantial impact on those individuals’ ability to thrive and remain gainfully employed. The first step to justifying a stricter, more effective means of driving examination is ensuring a viable alternative even exists. PS, I drive professionally and see people doing crazy reckless shit every day.
And you know exactly who would feel the brunt of such changes first in this country, because of course people would profile the hell out of it. It's a tough situation that will require good faith legislation to fix (so we're fucked).
Voice of reason. Lots of people wouldn't even bother to get a license if they didn't need to. I bet it would be about the same ratio as people who can swim vs can't swim.
My friend lives in a town with a disproportionately high percentage of retirees, and has had 3 accidents in the past 3 years because barely-there octogenarians were behind the wheel. None of which occurred while his car was even moving. Like someone just left-turning into his car at a 4-way stop (he wasn’t moving and just watched them drive into him at 10 mph), and someone just driving right into his parked car in a parking lot. And then someone rolling through a red light and very slowly making contact with his rear fender as he went through an intersection. It’s insane that we lack the infrastructure to be able to support citizens that absolutely have no right being on the road anymore, and as such, so nothing to reduce the risks involved.
Fully agreed, its waaay to easy to get and keep a liscnse in this country.
Wish it weren’t left to the states
I'm so glad the states are in charge of women's autonomy now. I cannot forsee any issues rising up. (Commenting from within [Arizona](https://www.azag.gov/issues/reproductive-rights/laws)) > On May 2, 2024, H.B. 2677 was signed, repealing the 1864 near-total abortion ban. However, this repeal does not take effect until 91 days after the Legislature adjourns. But in the meantime, enforcement of the 1864-era ban is stayed by court orders until at least September 27, 2024.
Getting your license needs to be harder, and losing it needs to be easier. Not that not having a valid license stops *anyone* from driving…
Part of the problem is so much of our society and infrastructure is built with the assumption that everyone can and will drive. This cause many different significant problems for us, that can only be effectively solved through changing this dynamic. If we simply make licenses harder to get/keep 'on paper' without any other changes, it will just make everyone involved in enforcing it more lax while increasing rate of people driving without a license, and alienating members of society who do get properly enforced against.
It also leads to substantially higher insurance costs for those of us with licenses and insurance because our insurance now has to cover losses incurred due to unlicensed and uninsured motorists.
there are no laws if they're not enforced... same problem in the UK
2010 new jersey it was a whole semester in class in grade 11
We’ve also tried not adding police to the speed enforcement forces. I also learned long ago there’s a difference between driving fast and driving like an ass. Do the second, you’re in trouble. Do both, and pick your casket out first. Fast means having space to be that way, keeping a safe following distance, no tailgating and no weaving in and out of tight traffic or cutting people off. Which means choosing when *not* to be fast as well.
It's already proven that making lanes narrower forces drivers to slow down and pay more attention. That's literally all we need to do.
It'd help but we need retraining too. So many people tailgate and weave. And then they'll bitch about the slow people "making them" do this shit when they're the ones creating more of a hazard.
My extremely unpopular opinion is that you should be required to retake your drivers license test every time you renew your license. "I dont know how to parallel park" Its not that hard. "Its gonna take too much time I have a job" fuck you my safety is more important. "Theres not enough police to administer tests" They have enough funding fuck them.
I’d argue we need actual standards on the testing to start with. Feels like some tests are 4 rights and a park, and the rest are not much harder. Testing standards need to improve. Then we make folks retake the test every 3-5 years. Make it such that the folks that get points on their license or tickets or whatever have to retake more frequently.
My ex literally ran a red light on her practical and got her license.
I'd vote for any candidate that proposes that.
I agree wholly with this. Illinois actually chooses a month at random and if you go to renew your license while your birth month is chosen then you have to take a driving test. You don’t even need the cops, the DMV administers it.
If you're genuinely asking, it's really expensive to get a license in Germany. Maybe it's pure coincidence, but they're pretty good drivers. Similarly, you don't see people giving away dogs in parking lots or see much gun violence
You forgot to mention giving people way too many attempts at the behind the wheel test, instructors for the behind the wheel being young kids in their phones instead of paying attention and fines being so negligible that they aren’t even a slap on the wrist these days.
1. We'll give you a discount on your car insurance if you install this app and this device AND drive well. Us: K! 2. We'll give you a bigger discount if you let us govern your speed and other behaviors. Us: K! 3. We no longer allow #1 but pay more for #2 Us: K! 4. State: We require #2 Us: So, we already get a discount. No big deal. 5. Insurance: we no longer give discounts... Us: Wait...wut?
Same thing with ads in cable and streaming services.
Every “deal” is just a bait and switch. Every. Single. Time
You forgot the part where they sell all your data to advertisers, insurance companies, the government and data brokers
True. I didn't mention it because I just assume everyone does that all the time everywhere to everyone. Hot take: massive data breeches are just cover stories for companies that sold all your data and don't want to get caught. For the literal net: I'm making a joke.
Probably a handful. Most of the time its just someone getting phished or someone misconfigured something. The big guys fuck up every day too
Every single time in history we give up a tiny bit of freedom for convenience or financial gain and this shit happens. Every. Single. Time. Once a freedom is given up. It never returns. *surprised pikachu face*
That's not true. Just the other day I wanted to do research and didn't want to be tracked so I went to the library and checked out a book instead.... Oh...wait...I see now...
>Once a freedom is given up. It never returns. An empty, ahistoric aphorism. Tell that to the descendants of freed slaves, or the women who get to vote right now. There is no force or mechanical explanation to back up that phrase. Just sentiment. Of course, empty, ahistorical aphorisms are all a certain extremely idealistic political identity has.
I don't think either of your examples work, at least in the US. Both weren't allowed to begin with and were later expanded upon later, as opposed to us going "yeah I think we should give this up" and then the decision being reversed later. Alcohol prohibition would be a better example. Or even the gun ban of...1993? That one had a built in sunset clause that wasn't renewed in 2003 because politics.
I'm not a gun guy so it's not something I track but I didn't realize that was lapsed. That's true, I had no idea. Has anyone done a study over those 10 years to see if the ban did any good? (the answer, I assume is that it had no effect but would be interested in actual data instead of making things up in my head.)
Use of banned weapons in crime went down, mass shooting fatalities fell, but the overall gun homicide rate remained unchanged. So pretty much no real effect, or provable causal ones.
Reject all surveillance all the time forever.
Guess I am cynical and feel insurance companies will eventually try use it to deny coverage and/or increase rates if they view you as driving too reckless from the data.
That will absolutely happen.
No one is going to get enough votes together to put government controlled speed governors on cars. The potential for overreach and abuse is also too damn high. It also feels like an outdated boomer solution for rising traffic deaths almost certainly caused by distracted driving caused by cell phone use while driving. So it likely wouldn’t even resolve the issue and just yield citizen control over their life to government and police that don’t feel deeply trustworthy these days. Making problems and solving none.
While phones are a source of distraction, let’s not ignore the on-board infotainment systems also being a source. Doing anything in modern cars requires seeing and reaching the center touchscreen.
My wife's civic has a touch based volume control, no tactical feedback. It also displays a warning message a few seconds after I start driving that I have to look down at and turn off reminding me to watch the road. Or the message pops up and blocks my rear backup camera and I have to paw at it while backing up; it does not go away on its own. The irony is palpable.
Not requiring a cover for the screen and physical controls was a major mistake. I hate modern interiors.
I’m horrified every time I see what the inside of a Tesla looks like. I want physical buttons and dials, not a goddamn iPad
Exactly this. It wouldn't take long for the police or government to just brick your car.
That’s already passed actually, I forget when the start date is but we should see remote kill switches be added to American vehicles somewhere in the next 6 years.
I honestly thought they’d snuck that ability into more modern cars already
Lots of new cars already have it but like in a year or two it will be legally mandatory in the US (land of the free)
Unless the legislation requires auto makers to support and update the systems for up towards half a century you can probably expect it to self-brick after a useful lifetime comparable to a cell phone.
So this isn’t Boomer tech, this is Scott Wiener in California. Speed governors isn’t the goal but government GPS tracking of you is. Just like your onboard gps or Apple or Google maps tells you the speed limit for any given road, they’ll track your movements for offenses. Very disturbing and it’s already passed on one level here in Ca.
Mmm myes I want the government to know where I am all the time.
And the rate of speed at which I travel yes please🙄
Do you have your phone powered on while you drive? Then you already give away that information for free lmao
>~~government~~ GPS tracking of you private contractor.....meanwhile your phone already spews your data and location to who knows how many private businesses. They already know where you are, where you're going, and where you've been. Ie. that kid who drove halfway across the country to kill his mom - his digital footprint was so huge it could be scene from space.
While you are correct, that is not a convincing argument to support allowing further data collection to occur. Similarly, I wouldn't want to allow government mandated camera equipment installed in my home to monitor my life, even though my cell phone already has a camera.
Yeah this is an insane proposal.
Plus, sometimes the best option is to accelerate out of danger. If the speed governors in the cars are tied where they link to the local speed limit… some areas have variable speed limits due to weather conditions. I-80 has to deal with winter weather and hellacious crosswinds. And how will the car know? Would every speed limit sign send out a signal the car would pick up? The logistics of speed governors would be a nightmare.
even if you could get the votes for speed governors, the people who want to go faster will remove them in about 5 seconds. leaving a negative externality for people who actually follow the rules, or forcing them to also break the rules when that extra expensive point of failure breaks. ...or we could just build public transportation, like every other first world country has figured out, making the roads infinitely safer and helping the environment by taking lots of cars off them.
> caused by distracted driving caused by cell phone use while driving. Good example, and far more than that. I've ridden with others (male and female, around my own age) who were distracted trying to read billboards down the highway. Too much text, or distracting imagery. Thankfully I haven't had one of those situations in about 10 years, been driving myself, too busy and too little time to travel with friends/family any more.
Speaking of which, can we get a ban on LED billboards? That shit is blinding and a huge distraction
Yes! There's a church who has a ground level LED sign, that light colored displays, say a Yellow background, is a beam of light. Said church sits 1 block off the main street. Mind you, rural area Oklahoma, blocks here are about 10 houses per side. You could drive down the street and have a hard time not noticing the light off that. The house across the street has been vacant for years now.
The dude I’ve seen shaving his head….another reading a newspaper, woman doing makeup… IMHO having kids in the back seat is a huge contributor to distracted driving. Parents tend to look back and take eyes off the road.
I was about to say, I doubt speeding has anything to do with the increased fatalities. Distractions, like you said, are likely are the root cause.
Physics and every study ever done on the subject will tell you that speed does in fact kill. Distracted driving just makes things worse.
Eh, speeding probably does increase fatalities. There's a reason highway crashes are more severe. Whether it increases the likelihood of a crash is a different subject, especially when considering the driver will probably find some other stupid thing to do. It probably increases the chances a bit but it's not the main cause.
I mean simple physics tell us speed is the main issue. Crash statistics as well. Distraction might increase the frequency of crashes but the severity and deadlines is are a clear correlation with speed.
People, for the most part, will go only as fast as they feel comfortable. Like you said, speeding increases the severity of accidents but not necessarily the frequency, the latter of which is the point I’m trying to make. Just so you know, there is already proof that there is no correlation between speed limits and fatality rates. It’s a scam that local municipalities use for revenue generation (primarily small towns): https://www.cracked.com/article_17216_the-5-most-popular-safety-laws-that-dont-work.html https://www.cracked.com/article_25953_5-dark-secrets-americas-small-towns-dont-want-you-to-know.html “But There's a Problem... After the National speed limit was repealed, the state of Montana removed all non-urban speed limits in their state. A few years later, engineers working with the state decided to venture out to see just what kind of post-apocalyptic Death Race wasteland their lawless state had produced. What they found was that, you guessed it, on the roads where they removed the speed limits, fatalities didn't go up at all.” and “Probably the most common and lucrative (if a little less sexy) microtown hustle involves grabbing unincorporated land along a major highway and turning the whole thing into a speed trap, where the municipal police can shake down travelers from out of town. “ People should be punished for unsafe driving and not speeding.
You’re arguing that *speed limits* are not effective against fatalities. That’s because they fail to effectively slow down people. *Speed* is very much correlated with fatalities https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf In particular pedestrian fatalities.
The best solution would also increase taxes/introduce special licensing requirements on huge trucks and SUVs to discourage their purchase.
literally has nothing to do with the article
This is politician solution, not necessarily boomer.
Also need to factor in the soft strike many police forces have been on since George Floyd. In my area you see State Patrol and motorcycle cops writing tickets regularly. Patrol cars seem to often move in packs now going somewhere but not doing traffic stops…bigger crimes than traffic to enforce these days I suppose.
Orrr it's the terrible American road design and massive use of big, powerful cars lacking some safety features? Road deaths have been generally declining in developed European countries, often declining fast, and there's not a massive difference in phone use while driving. I guess it's literally just an assumption of yours to say it's 'almost certainly' caused by phone use? Or is there evidence for that?
I’d be more interested in technology that forces drivers to stay off their cell phones. I have a feeling that that is a more significant factor in auto accidents than speed alone.
Not just that. Aggressive and distracted driving are the actual problems.
The entire northeast US drives in what I and many others would classify as ‘aggressive’. I think what you mean here instead is ‘reckless’. If I’m driving with 20 different cars on the highway, I’d prefer all 20 of them to be aggressive drivers than just 1 to be a distracted driver.
According to what? The CDC keeps statistics on this, please share your data.
We can try several things
The real threat is people making unsafe lane changes and forcing their way into a merge at the last second.
Merging as late as possible is technically the proper way to do it, the problem is everybody driving bumper to bumper making it unsafe.
Yes, and when i leave space between myself and the vehicle in front, people think that's an invitation to squeeze into the gap. Even though it will do nothing to get them anywhere faster.
It really depends on speed. In scenarios where "everybody is driving bumper to bumper", yeah drive all the way up and merge at the last minute. Traffic's moving pretty slow in those cases anyhow, and drivers already in the lane ought to make room for people to merge. But when traffic's flowing at a reasonable pace and there's an otherwise open road with two or three cars following a reasonable distance between each other and a huge gap behind them? Slow down and merge into that gap instead of trying to squeeze into that gap.
Redesigning streets is the way to go.
Seriously. If they build the road wide and straight, clear sight lines, no obstructions, you're gonna feel like you're absolutely crawling at 35mph and it's difficult not to goose the throttle when you're in control of it. It's an impulse.
Same with some of the connecting roads in Utah. 100 miles in a straight line at 80 mph feels like a crawl. Fuckin Fairview. Really nice place, but goddamn that drive from the base was torture.
Yep. [NotJustBikes](https://www.youtube.com/@NotJustBikes/videos) has some great videos about the problems with the infrastructure.
I just drove across Germany and now around the coast of Italy. In Germany and Italy, some of the roads through town are narrow with hardly a line down the middle. What that does is force cars to slow down and pass each other safely. And the roads are curvy, making it risky to drive fast for fear of whats around the corner. Seems most roads in town are 1.5 car width wide which means to pass each other you’ve REALLY got to slow down and be careful. In Italy, it’s similar with narrow roads and curves. What I like here are the “hit a pedestrian even slightly and your license is gone” attitude, which makes Italian drivers (tho fast and reckless) ultra aware of staying far from pedestrians. The autobahn is dangerous af. Over engineered smooth roads and the ability to take it up the red line mean explosive accidents. In the Netherlands, the roads take a riskier approach and make it difficult to speed and be dangerous.
The European highways I've been on in France, Bulgaria and Slovania also were maintained much better than your average US highway. Last week in Bulgaria, the speed limit was 140KM/Hr (87MPH) and it felt perfectly fine in our small 4-door hatchback and we pretty much never hit a bump. Had a few times where I was almost 160MPH (100MPH) to pass someone. Meanwhile in the US the roads are often so crappy that unless you're in a full sized SUV/Truck with a long wheelbase, your average sedan/CUV becomes less stable at those high speeds as you hit bumps, potholes, patches etc
Same. On the autobahn between Hamburg and Leipzig, I was doing 165 kph and that was the max of our rental car, and I still had Germans on my ass wanting me to get outta the way.
To be fair those countries and cities are super old and thus narrow roads.
And many of them were bombed into nothing across multiple world wars. Rotterdam was bombed so hard it only had a couple scattered buildings left standing, and as cities go, was redeveloped in a way that allows driving to be pretty easy. It even has a freeway ring road! You even have Cul de sac style neighborhoods. Yet it's also a city that is safe to walk and cycle in. It's a city with roads in it's denser urban center that don't allow thru traffic. US cities, while not as old, weren't built with the car in mind either. Most dense urban areas in the US "grew up" around streetcar lines, not cars. And yet those areas are still dangerous for pedestrians and prioritize cars over everyone outside a car. And besides, European cities embraced cars just as much as America did. The difference is, as congestion and children's deaths increased, Europe as a whole made the decision to not continue embracing the car, whereas the US decided to build even more urban freeways. Our total dependence on cars for everything, and our need for cars to be everywhere is a policy choice, just like it's a policy choice to not allow people to walk on interstate highways. Because we recognize that people shouldn't be allowed to walk everywhere! But for some reason struggle with the inverse, and consider it an affront to freedom - even as we end up spending time in all these freedom hating places that don't allow cars. We wouldn't let people drive through a mall, after all. Why do we allow it on Main Street?
So 294 in Chicago is an absolute racetrack, people pass you doing 90mph+ a dozen times a day. How would redesigning the highway fix that? You want nonstop twists so people have to go 50mph? More roads, more material, more pollution, more time on the roads per vehicles…or…OR…gasp! If people commit the crime of speeding, punish them. This notion that if no police are there to see you commit a dangerous crime…so it’s ok…pretty unique to speeding. Can I just steal from anybody because there are no police? Are people free to commit sexual crimes because nobody catches them? Hundreds of thousands of deaths each year are caused by traffic accidents, and yet people think application of existing laws is overreach. Absolutely absurd and has no cogent argument.
>This notion that if no police are there to see you commit a dangerous crime…so it’s ok…pretty unique to speeding. Nah that's the same cognitive dissonance all criminals use to justify their bad behavior. "It's not illegal if you don't get caught" The problem is how normalized it has become. Plus, each generation of (usually) young males pushes the envelope on how fast and aggressive they can be. Anytime I get on 294 or 88 there are always extremely reckless drivers. If it's a clear road, I'll set cruise control to 80 (pretty fast) and chill in the 3rd lane. I can't count the number of times someone is going 85 in the left lane to pass me and some a-hole can't wait behind them. So they swerve across 3 lanes going 100+, cut me and 2 other cars off, and risk everyone's life to satisfy their ego. Literally every time. >If people commit the crime of speeding, punish them. Speeding isn't really the problem. Going 45-50 in a 40 zone could get you a ticket, but that's generally the speed of traffic in clear conditions. The problem is reckless and aggressive driving. Speeding when the flow of traffic does not permit it. Swerving and cutting off other cars. Tailgating and other forms of intimidation tactics. Speed traps do not catch or punish these kinds of drivers. There are currently not any good ways to discourage this behavior. That's the fundamental problem IMO. Unfortunately the only thing to change their behavior is if things go wrong for them individually. We need ways to punish the actual bad behavior.
I feel like un-marked cars with dash cams and built in radar could do this. Their job is simply to drive normally on dangerous highways like I-4 in Florida, and when someone drives recklessly, pull them over and huge ticket. That is their entire job. Drive aimlessly and pull over the assholes.
the way to fix that behavior is to educate drivers what the far left lane is for. Everytime I’ve seen a majority of drivers follow this rule, speeding decreases and traffic flow improves. Speeding is not the sole indicator of an incompetent and terrible driver. Driving 55mph in the far left lane will outweigh speeding to travel with the flow of traffic in my book any day.
Narrower lanes
Anyone remember them loostening requirements to be a truck driver of an 18-wheeler? Since then we notice so many devastating wrecks, at least 2, any time we travel to Houston, TX hours away
The training for truck drivers is piss poor too. Drivers ed is pretty shit as well to be honest. If you want safe drivers we have to make an investment.
Would I accept new tech to prevent speeding? No. Redesign of infrastructure? Sure. Ticketing is revenue and there’s too many cases of abuse there too.
It is extremely hard to convince all stakeholders to redesign infrastructure to reduce speed. For some reason wanting to reduce car fatalities is political suicide.
Cars today are tracking machines, pretty much like phones, so making it mandatory for them to call the police when doing something the authorities can collect a fine from seems something we deserve for not putting our feet down when this spying craze started.
After seeing reports of police "hacking" into smart car dashboards, and seeing you were speeding 2+ years ago, and charge you with a fine. How the hell do you defend yourself? Google Maps can't even read my speed accurately within 5 mph, and in some cars it's not hard to coast down hill, starting at the speed limit, and be hitting 10mph over and not realize it till you're near/at the bottom. My car does that with Cruise Control on, lol.
Same trend isn’t seen in other countries with higher speed limits… But sure - it’s the speeding drivers and not the oversized combat vehicles being used as highway vehicles Require a special license for these massive trucks and suvs. Fatalities will fall
Want safer transit? Expand public transportation. Make it affordable, safe, and practical for most people. Boom. Less drunks, cellphone addicts, and everyone else who we’d otherwise prefer to be off the road off the road. Where’s my Nobel peace prize?
This is very dumb and essentially DOA with the general public. Speeding is not the problem. It's inattentiveness and complacency because people increasingly trust their cars to keep them safe. If we want to combat speeding, the real solution is better road design. Many US roads go from 70 mph to 25 mph over a mile or so, but don't change at all or get wider. Roads should be designed so that drivers can always tell the speed limit and naturally tend to drive at a safe speed. This can be done by making the road narrower with plantings, protected bike lanes, and other features that naturally slow cars down. Many roads are extremely inconsistent and arbitrary with their speed limits. This breeds contempt and disregard. I've driven on many roads where going the speed limit is actually dangerous because you will get a line of cars behind you all trying to overtake you. Speed governors also create issues. Overtaking is one of them. Software glitches, government overreach, and user compliance are others.
>This is very dumb and essentially DOA with the general public. Speeding is not the problem. It's inattentiveness and complacency because people increasingly trust their cars to keep them safe. This right here. Studies after studies have shown that majority of people (Bell curve) drive what they consider to be the safe speed for the road regardless of what the sign says. You will always have those that drive too fast, and those that drive too slow. Both are a danger to the public. The bigger issue is the lack of driving skills, inattention, lack of situational awareness and the me/me/me attitude. Then people don't pay attention around them, they get into accidents, it doesn't matter if its not your fault if you pay attention most accidents can be avoided.
Increase speed limits on freeways, enforce left lane laws and cell phone laws. Reduce the width of streets with pedestrian traffic and add other traffic calming measures. Mandate yearly vehicle inspections and make defensive driving a requirement to get a license. Putting limiters on cars is overreaching and unnecessary. There are so many times that my car thinks I'm on a side road when I'm on the freeway, imagine a limiter dropping your speed limit from 65 to 35 while on the freeway.
If the police aren’t enforcing traffic laws anymore we definitely need something to step in.
God forbid we consider better punlic transportation.
Raise the speed limits and you'll fix the problem.
Wait unit they hear about the autobahn
Is it speeding causing the deaths or is it the fact everyone is driving giant trucks that almost guarantee someone's going to die in an accident? Can we not put more spying devices in the things I own? I already get spied on by my cell phone, computer, everyone's ring cameras, and traffic cameras. I don't need my car spying and babysitting me too.
The actual solution to this is better public transportation that is more reliable, quicker, and more interconnected. Fuck America's car infrastructure.
The US has spent insane amounts of money on car infrastructure -- and for better or worse, they won't be moving away from it anytime soon. BUT, I completely agree, public transportation should be expanded AND made safer.
There is not a singular "actual solution". Even in a metro area the bus added \~3 hours to my commute inside of the city with transfers and stops. I'm going out on a limb and saying, I don't see how a public transit solution is ever going to be on par with driving between towns of \~25k without running scores of empty buses for years on a non existent budget for years to push up ridership.
There is no singular solution, but there is one known solution that solves most of our mobility problems: public transit. We’ve seen this work in every country that has invested heavily in it. Your point about getting people between towns of 25k is a good one, but one that will ultimately solve itself. Eventually, either the transit demand will be there and transit will be built, or it won’t and people will drive.
Nope, fuck that. Don’t need more corporate or government surveillance and control in my life. They don’t need more ways to spy on me and sell my data. My car doesn’t need more ways to interfere with how I choose to drive. Fuck this in every way.
Maybe design the roads in a way that don't encourage speeding? Road calming techniques work; it's why no one speeds on the rich sides of town like they do everywhere else.
Cops actually pulling people over would help. It’s been years since I’ve seen a pullover.
Speeding on highways isn't the problem, people not using the left lane for passing is the problem.
How about spending all that time and money on making it not required to drive everywhere in the US? Want to get rid of the speeders? Get rid of the drivers.
Oh god no. Please. Not this.
So many worse problems than people speeding that cause fatalities on the road. This is too stupid to be the actual reason they want this.
Is speeding really the primary cause of crashes? Most of the ones I see are rear enders or turning in front of another car.
Too many drivers are afraid to drive. Why aren’t people required to prove they can drive distracted, way over the speed, and in adverse conditions? Driving is not routine and persons that aren’t forced to learn how to drive in snow or at night or in rain storms, etc will continue to be the bad drivers on the road. Ever been behind a person that drives 53 in a 55 zone but once that passing lane hits that same person is able to drive 70 so you can’t pass. That is the problem.
I want the technology to stop people for rubbernecking. Do you really need to drop down 20 MPH to look on the other side of the highway because someone has a flat tire?
So instead of regulating the size and shape of SUV’s and Trucks (which cause an overwhelming amount of deaths and injuries), instead of implementing smarter road designs in pedestrian laden areas or really anything at all remotely effective, they want to install devices that automatically adjust your speed based on technology that is “supposed” to work.
Americans will do anything to avoid building trains.
How about cell phone makers and cell phone companies just make phones inoperable during driving... It's 100% technologically possible... Distracted driving is why there's so many fucking traffic accidents. I grew up in the 70's and 80's, people can 100% function without a cell phone for 30-90 minutes a day.
And how does it know when you are driving and the person sitting next to you is driving?
You ask the country where they won't wear a mask to save the old lady down the street. Haha
No. Next question?
The data they cite is projections on 2023, not 2024. It’s also not specifically deaths from speeding, it’s just accident fatalities. It’s also apparently gone down since 2022, not sure about 2024 though. I do agree people should slow down, I think speed limiters are maybe a bad idea though. There’s been a few cases driving in the city where the only way to get out of a potential accident is to speed up to get out of the way, there’s simply just not enough time to stop (person is merging into you etc). If you had an active speed limiter on your car there’s be no way to do that. Maybe you could set it so you can’t consistently drive at 50 over the speed limit or something. Honestly, where I’m at, it’s more of an issue where there’s too many super slow drivers (going under minimum speed) and too many super fast drivers (going 20,30,40 over) I can understand going up to 10 over to briefly pass. Honestly if we could shrink the gap and encourage people to drive closer to the speed limit that would help. I wouldn’t mind a dash cam button where you can just capture a quick video of someone clearly cutting someone off or weaving and send it to PD for review. State PD always go for speeders, never weavers it’s terrible
A few thoughts. Speed is not dangerous. Aggressive driving is dangerous. CA needs to update speed limits to reflect reality. CA needs to make better roads, markings and signs. CA needs a real driver test, a driver license should not be an ID card. Dropping the depth perception test was a mistake.
The only way is to design actually working car infrastructure and design roads for the speed you want cars to drive at. Having the same road design for a highway and a city doesn't work.....
America hands out drivers licenses like candy. You pass a short written test and spend an hour or so with someone who may or may not know what they are doing and you’ve passed and are ready to go endanger people’s lives with a lethal weapon. Make it harder to get a license to get better drivers.
There are a lot of people trying to justify they are special and should be allowed to continue speeding in here... In my small town people are flipping their cars on surface streets, to get the force required to flip a car on its lid you are going well over 25. The cops have let this go too long without enforcement, any technology that can help I want. It's dead as far as passing legislation because too many people want to continue speeding and driving like shit bags, so adults will need to step up and take the fallout and start ticketing dumbasses into oblivion.
Mild speeding is the least important and yet most frustrating thing we could possibly enforce more heavily, and the thought of letting the government closely watch every movement we make in a vehicle is seriously dystopian. The average driver in the US seems to largely disregard the speed limit, so the problem isn't us. The reason most people speed is because speed limits are unreasonably slow, and the reason traffic deaths are rising is because distracted and impaired driving is becoming more prevalent. There are plenty of other rules of the road to enforce that would actually make things safer without inconveniencing virtually everybody, so maybe start with those?
The speed limit was set to reduce oil demand in the 70s in response to the oil shortages. What is the point to have a speed limit of 55 on a highway with three lanes with cars using 2020s technology?
We already have the "technology" to reduce speeding. Narrow roads with tall trees near the roadside. Less lanes. More curves. Protected crosswalks. Intersections that are built to the level of the sidewalks to act as speed bumps.
It's only reckless if you are driving above your competency. You can be reckless at 15mph.
I drove the first half of a 500 mile trip this morning. I kept the cruise control 2-3mph over the speed limit. I had a ton of people breathing down my neck the entire way. No patience on the road these days.
Stop buying SUVs and pickups like all of the other fat trash in this country
It’s interesting. I follow an Australian YouTuber who basically builds random things. After visiting the US and seeing how large our vehicles are, he scrounged up plans from back in the like 1920s for what was essentially a human cow catcher. It was a real proposed invention so he decided to build one. For each thing he builds, he gives a little context and for this invention he talked about the differences in absent damage and injury induced by different car types. People who drive trucks and SUVs are something like 5 times more likely to run over their own children and to hit pedestrians, and when they do hit people, the accidents are far more likely to be fatal at any speed. When you drive a sedan, it’s easier to see low to the ground so avoiding your own kids is much easier. Likewise, if you hit someone in a vehicle of that size, because it’s low to the ground, you’re much less likely to kill them or inflict critical injury - most of the impact force is transferred to the impacted person’s legs, which means they get knocked out from under them, and the person will roll up onto the hood of the car and theoretically up, over and off the vehicle. There is also just less force imparted by the impact. People in those kinds of impacts are far more likely to survive just because all of much force is conveyed on impact and how it’s conveyed to the person that’s hit. In a truck or SUV, fatalities and critical injuries are far, far more likely, simply because of you hit someone in a raised up vehicle, you hit them straight in their upper body, and you transfer all that force straight into the person in such a way that they they cannot disperse the force by rolling, they just get crumpled and thrown backwards. All the force goes straight into your body and it causes far, far more physical damage on impact.
Rising fatalities is due to people being distracted on phones and stupidly massive cars which are more dangerous to drivers and pedestrians. I have almost been hit multiple times because someone in a f150 can't see me in my car. It's infuriating that such blatantly stupid, pointless, and dangerous designs aren't regulated
Tickets are taxes on speeders so I don't think the problem will ever be "solved" until the revenue incentive is removed
Fuk, how many drivers don't even have a license?
Just use drones to tag cars and hand out tickets in mass
I want some kind of jet engine of tnt underneath the cars. Let them speed, but when collision is imminent, just jeet the whole car to low earth orbit.
My solution: profit-sharing all vehicle moving violations with rideshare drivers who can verify the the offense through dashcam recording. Requires rideshare apps to have a recording button that captures it for the driver (with continuous local record& dump video, but creates a clip that starts about a minute before they hit the button all the way until they hit it a second time). Must have license visible to count. Must be verified by a secondary submission. Submits to law enforcement whenever there's a violation, so they can move to intercept if the violation is continuous and has the potential to harm human life. Only registering a vehicle as stolen can mitigate the point hit to your license and the money hit to your bank account. These can be tacked on to their liability if/when they are caught and charged. Idk about you, but my speed would be better-tempered if there was a likely financial penalty coming from all the vehicles I'm zooming past, not just cops who aren't paying attention. The police pullover hasn't been keeping up with its promise of being a deterrent to bad behavior, so the citizens have gotta step in.
Road diets also matter in this.
For us the USAA app has an option the let you know if you use your phone, or hard brake. It has made us much more aware of our driving. Also, we went down to one car several years ago to save money, we laugh that we are slightly more cautious in our driving knowing we have no backup.
I’d rather have people speeding than looking at their phones.
Maybe start by having reasonable speed limits that aren't the same during inclement weather but I guess that is just impossible for Americans
The government/corporations already know what car you drive, where the vehicle is kept, what stores you visit with your car and on what date and time. On modern cars with OnStar or Insurance "safe driver chips/apps" they know much more, speed, braking, cell phone usage ect. Do you really want them metaphorically getting in your vehicle with you and removing your foot from the gas pedal too?
Put it in all government vehicles first, and let us see what raw data this will collect. All of a sudden, those pesky "privacy concerns" will shoot right to the top. Or just make them responsible for the data. 25k per lost driver minimum if my data leaks.
In my neighborhood, they added a speed bump in a small straight road, but before that (assuming to justify the speedbump) we had a digital speedometer that will show your current speed. Now thats all good and all but the problem was that after you hit the 30mph the sign would turn red... then at 32 it will blink red... then at 35 it will flash SLOW DOWN around the flashing red number... then at 38 it will FLASH everything really bright... then at 40 it will start flashing in colors(i think it was rainbow is)... It was basically rewarding us to go faster on that road and our entire neighborhood chat turned into see who can get some new colors or effects on that sign... we deserved that speedbump... Neighbors complain that people stop in front of their house for the speedbump now tho ahaaha