21–30 of 954 posts
I know part of this is related to sociopathic behavior, but the bigger part of it is probably that we really need better public transit and should design walkable cities instead of cities based around cars.
People still have to get to work, to the doctor, pick up their kids from practice, etc.
Kinda begs the question why cars can go over 100mph in the first place. Also what the heck is with Newsom vetoing the passive ISA bill?
I think a general speed limit for all vehicles would be a good idea. If you want it removed then your vehicle can't travel public roads, any kind of modification of it in secret would be a crime. Not sure about the US but in Europe (at least the EU) 150km/h max would be fine, at least it would make life harder for some sociopaths that treat public roads as a racing track.
This would be incredibly annoying. You what, have to tow your car to a track if you want to race? So now you need two vehicles? Given that outright street racing is common amongst blue-collar or inner-city demographics, this is an unrealistic expectation that will just push more people away from legal venues. It's a policy that says "you can't enjoy your hobby" in disguise that shows disregard for others' preferences…
https://komonews.com/news/local/teen-to-be-sentenced-for-hig...
Would you be willing to say the same for firearms and their availability? It meets much of your criteria, sans perhaps the portability part and location of many enthusiasts.
Seems like an over engineered solution. Revoking drivers license and seizing the car would be cheaper and easier to implement. We don't tolerate repeat offenders in most other circumstances. So why is it that you can keep breaking traffic laws without ever really being stopped from driving?
Also, since we live in a card dependent world, you can argue that taking away someones car is destroying their ability to make a living (as much as I think this excuse is horseshit when dealing with dangerous driving)
Seems like an over engineered solution. Revoking drivers license and seizing the car would be cheaper and easier to implement. We don't tolerate repeat offenders in most other circumstances. So why is it that you can keep breaking traffic laws without ever really being stopped from driving?
Does anyone know why Virginia has always been so notoriously draconian about speeding? Is it DC-adjacent policy wonks outsized faith in the effectiveness of top-down prescriptions, lots of DC politicians flagrantly violating the law, culture clash between stuffy suburbanites and yokels (Virginia was the first place I ever saw a trans truck), or what?
The yankees' roads are all really bad. Old, narrow, sharp turns, and often crowded. I hate driving up there. By comparison, Texas we have long open stretches and up to eight lanes each way, so obviously it's less of an issue. I'd actually assume it's due to proximity to DC, which would tend to massively increase the population of "but the data say"-type technocrats.
Seems like an over engineered solution. Revoking drivers license and seizing the car would be cheaper and easier to implement. We don't tolerate repeat offenders in most other circumstances. So why is it that you can keep breaking traffic laws without ever really being stopped from driving?
Because revoking a license doesn't stop someone from driving, and seizing the car doesn't stop a person from driving someone elses car. Also, since we live in a card dependent world, you can argue that taking away someones car is destroying their ability to make a living (as much as I think this excuse is horseshit when dealing with dangerous driving)
same, with this law :)
I wonder if insurance would be a partial solution? Allow/encourage providers of liability insurance to raise rates on people with tickets, unless they are to the electronic limit.
Without better mechanisms to actually meaningfully enforce insurance requirements, changes to those requirements are unlikely to be effective.
The elephant in the room in the US is that although driving is a (very dangerous and extremely socially-costly) privilege, any attempts to hold drivers accountable and take away that privilege from repeat offenders is treated as a rights violation, so instead we just accept many deaths of innocent people from repeat DUI and speeders.