Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

fastcompany.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

481–490 of 954 posts

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#481

Post by socalgal2 »

anon_e-moose wrote: post #391
jl6 wrote: post #379

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Every boy racer thinks “look at me, controlling the vehicle easily at 90mph! I’m clearly amongst the high-skilled group!” but the skill that actually matters is reaction time to sudden unexpected hazards (and consequent need for stopping distance) and I don’t think most people get enough practice at that to be materially better than average at it.

> the skill that actually matters is reaction time to sudden unexpected hazards (and consequent need for stopping distance) More important than that is actually learning to predict hazards. Over years of experience, what was unexpected becomes hedging risks. Tight corners in residential areas, parked cars blocking visibility, managing distance not just from the car in front of you but behind you. That obviously requi…

I see those rarely, mostly (SoCal) I see people going much faster than other traffic on a 6 to 12 lane freeway that is packed with cars, cutting people off, swerving across lanes, not signaling, treating driving like a video game except the people they kill don't get to restart the game.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#482

Post by twobitshifter »

smeej wrote: post #472

Why are typical passenger vehicles even sold with the ability to go so fast? Or perhaps more pertinently, why aren't any typical passenger vehicles I've ever heard of sold without the ability to go so fast? I think the overwhelming majority (like 90%+) of people would happily buy a car that couldn't go more than 100mph. Many who only rarely leave their cities and would be happy to use alternate transportation if they…

There is always the autobahn. If systems like that existed endangered there could be incredible time savings. A related question of mine is ‘If cars can go so fast why do we not find ways to raise speed limits while keeping roads safe?’

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#483

Post by worewood »

tonyedgecombe wrote: post #449
ActorNightly wrote: post #430

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem is, at least in Virginia, every single speed limit is set low, and cops randomly pull over cars that are just traveling the same speed as the cars around them, all above the speed limit. So license removal is not really fair. Not that this is any better, but if you at least get to keep driving legally, its generally slightly less worse.

Just because everybody else is doing it doesn't mean you have to as well.

Except that driving at a speed significantly different from the surrounding traffic increases the risk of a crash.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#484

Post by nathan_compton »

solatic wrote: post #453

Cities can replace smooth asphalt with rough brick and cobblestone, and replace traffic lights with traffic circles / roundabouts. If they really want to force cars to slow down, they could, in a way that doesn't take anyone's rights away and doesn't require any vehicle manufacturer to play ball. Freedom isn't free. It's always cheaper to take away people's freedom instead of doing the hard work of building infrastru…

Yes, lets just reorganize and rebuilt the entire city infrastructure to fix bad behavior by a few people. I don't want to actually oppose your suggestions because I think they are all good, but I also think that if a person repeatedly breaks a law then that is precisely the circumstances under which their freedom can be decreased as long as due process is respected.

American's still believe in freedom, in my opinion, its just that the entrenched powers make it increasingly impossible to imagine a world that actually nourishes human freedom and, lacking that, we just sort of flail around in frustration. The single insight which Americans must digest in order to move forward is that both governments and corporations and, indeed, any powerful entity whatsoever, can and often do interfere with human freedom and flourishing and all of them need to be continuously attended to and restrained by law and by the vigilance of the people. The second most important thing is the understanding that negative freedoms mean nothing without the resources to transform them into positive freedoms and if we fail to provide those resources then enormous amounts of human potential will be wasted. The second is a harder pill to swallow given the U.S. mythology, but I would be satisfied with the former for now.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#485

Post by codelikeawolf »

HDThoreaun wrote: post #477
smeej wrote: post #472

Why are typical passenger vehicles even sold with the ability to go so fast? Or perhaps more pertinently, why aren't any typical passenger vehicles I've ever heard of sold without the ability to go so fast? I think the overwhelming majority (like 90%+) of people would happily buy a car that couldn't go more than 100mph. Many who only rarely leave their cities and would be happy to use alternate transportation if they…

Because people dont want to buy cars that cant go over 100 mph. > I think the overwhelming majority (like 90%+) of people would happily buy a car that couldn't go more than 100mph You are empirically wrong I think.

Most people driving on I-294 in Illinois would agree. Just "keeping up with traffic" normally requires you to go about 80mph. If my car topped out at 50 or 60mph, I'd be frustrated as hell.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#486

Post by ysavir »

bayindirh wrote: post #438
mschuster91 wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, if everyone is speeding, would it not make sense to raise the speed limit?

Nope, because people are overestimating themselves. I know a couple of people who can do 2x the speed limit relatively safely , but this is because they were race drivers in a previous life. However, not everyone (incl. me) has that reflexes and situational awareness all the time. Recently I got into an accident. A car changed into my lane completely unannounced, and I was blinded by a car in my front diagonal. The c…

> Nope, because people are overestimating themselves. I know a couple of people who can do 2x the speed limit relatively safely, but this is because they were race drivers in a previous life. However, not everyone (incl. me) has that reflexes and situational awareness all the time.

And even then, although the ex-race drivers can drive safely at high speeds, it doesn't mean other people can drive safely while other people are moving a racetrack speeds. The key to safety on the road is predictability. Any form of driving that reduces predictability, even if the unpredictable driver has the necessary skill for that form of driving, creates a dangerous situation because other drivers will react to that unpredictability in unpredictable ways, and likely lacking the skill to pull it off.

What matters isn't the driving skill of the most skilled driver on the road, it's the skill level of the least skilled driver on the road.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#487

Post by whywhywhywhy »

timeon wrote: post #475
bluecalm wrote: post #328

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Speeding kills much more people than guns. It also kills much more innocent outsiders (a lot of gun death are suicides or gang infightings). It also introduces atmosphere of terror on public roads making walking or cycling dangerous. It's a way bigger problem than guns.

> or gang infightings Gangs have easy access to guns when everyone does.

They also do when everyone doesn’t.

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#488

Post by ysavir »

lupusreal wrote: post #451
mschuster91 wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The question is, if everyone is speeding, would it not make sense to raise the speed limit?

This is correct. Laws should reflect the values of the democratic consensus, speed limits included. If almost everybody is traveling at a speed other than the posted speed limit, whether that's faster or slower, that is a strong signal that the speed limit needs to be adjusted. Speed limits should be set such that most people naturally think the limit is a sensible speed to drive anyway. As it is, speed limits are ra…

So if most people keep speeding past the elementary school and kindergarten, we should raise the speed limit on that street?

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#489

Post by mschuster91 »

ysavir wrote: post #488
lupusreal wrote: post #451

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is correct. Laws should reflect the values of the democratic consensus, speed limits included. If almost everybody is traveling at a speed other than the posted speed limit, whether that's faster or slower, that is a strong signal that the speed limit needs to be adjusted. Speed limits should be set such that most people naturally think the limit is a sensible speed to drive anyway. As it is, speed limits are ra…

So if most people keep speeding past the elementary school and kindergarten, we should raise the speed limit on that street?

These are objectively endangered places. A highway in the middle of nowhere, with reasonably well maintained roads and even terrain however?

Re: Virginia passes law to enforce maximum vehicle speeds for repeat speeders

#490

Post by dwighttk »

tfourb wrote: post #419
peepeepoopoo114 wrote: post #408

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as mutually assured destruction brought lasting peace on the international scale, widespread civilian ownership of military weapons has also been a remarkably effective deterrent and safeguard against would-be tyrants across history. If both Karl Marx and the US founding fathers agreed that a well-armed public is important for a lasting civil peace, it's probably a good idea to listen.

[citation needed] Would-be tyrants get power (and stay in power) by gaining the support of people capable of projecting force and power onto the populace. From the perspective of tyranny, it is irrelevant if their supporters are i.e. the military or a bunch of militia guys who have acquired their guns privately. Source: Many, many civil wars across history. Trying to guard against tyranny by increasing private gun ow…

>Trying to guard against tyranny by increasing private gun ownership is dumb

Worked once

Post reply on HN