891–900 of 954 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Multiply by everyone else and their pet issues and the whole damn thing gets paved. Slippery slope fallacy. Why don't you refute the central point of what I suggested?
You don't have to have civil asset forfeiture to impound the car.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is this a California or Texas thing or something? The hyperbole in this thread is wild to see.
Texas checking in here - yes, it's Texas, and no, it's not hyperbole. Don't know what rinky dink town you're from, but here most roads are 6-8 lanes across. Yes, that includes in our small cities. They're essentially highways but with signal lights. Go to Arlington, Grand Prairie, Richardson, Fort Worth, Roanoke, Southlake, you name it, and it's just roads after roads like this. Trying to cross them is extremely dang…
Repeat offenders should not be allowed to drive. In the UK we have 12 points, and lose them for various offences. You get a fine, usually with the alternative of a course the first time. Speed again within 12 months and you get a fine and a minimum of three points (more if you are well above the limit). Speed again within four years and you will lose more points, and AFAIK pretty much guaranteed to be more than the m…
> You get a fine, usually with the alternative of a course the first time.
Note that the course isn’t currently an option in Scotland: https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/speed-awareness-courses/
We need to discourage dangerous drivers. I am hoping we get personal in-car police cameras. I see dangerous driving regularly, and yet there is no easy way to report drivers. Today a truck cut back in from a turning lane and cut off the car in front of me causing an emergency braking situation for everyone driving behind. Perhaps there could also be AI auto-detect of thoughtless driving that auto-sends a simple video…
> I am hoping we get personal in-car police cameras. What are you actually imagining this would look like?
Perhaps cameras are somewhat networked to capture multiple cameras when an incident is flagged?
Dangerous incidents should lead to consequences (financial, licensing, insurance etcetera).
My assumption is that that a majority of serious accidents are caused by a few reckless drivers. Remove those reckless drivers from the roads and we can reduce harm.
The difficulty is to design a system that is fair and that isn't abused by authorities (Extremely difficult to avoid - and perception of abuse cannot be avoided). My assumption could easily be wrong: perhaps most accidents are good drivers on a bad day?
I wish tailgaters could be automatically ticketed (easily detected by camera in car going opposite direction on two way roads).
With cameras, we could also start to scientifically detect the right signals to detect people before they cause accidents. Lane wandering? Emergency brakers? People who cut off cyclists?
I know old drivers that would never speed, but who are dangerously poor driving due to other causes.
In New Zealand we have many fatalities every year from tourists who are used to driving on the right, who collide head-on with other innocent drivers because the tourist drives on the wrong side of the road on rural roads. This is detectable and fixable.
I absolutely loath the idea of state surveillance, and there's a slippery slope that starts with "won't you think of the children", but sometimes thinking of the children is the right thing to do. Avoiding misuse and abuse by authorities is hard, but society has the responsibility to design systems to avoid that.
Here is an article on reckless drivers: https://transalt.org/reports-list/yn29thckywv9n0qpsv4jb1ab07...
I think the article indicates
(1) speeding is correlated with dangerous driving (e.g. running red lights), and
(2) that adding speed limiters won't fix the problem. If hundreds of tickets didn't fix them, limiting speed won't either.
(3) that people love to fix correlations but that we need to fix causations.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
All it takes is a simple law stating that if you circumvent the speed limiter you face far more serious penalties. Done and done. Literally no different than how we handle suspended licenses.
> Literally no different than how we handle suspended licenses. The article points out that 75% of people with suspended licenses continue to drive.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's the killer of public transit everywhere . The ability to avoid such people is a huge benefit of individual transportation. Nobody sane wants to be subjected to stuff like that. Anyone saying otherwise is virtue signalling.
In many places it's just not a big enough problem. And, either way, it's a perception issue usually. I mean yeah, subway homeless people make you feel unsafe. But you're not actually unsafe. Just by taking the subway you're a few orders of magnitude less likely to die during your journey.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> how long until having a 500 HP muscle car is a demonstration of willful intent to speed? Acceleration != speed. Muscle cars accelerate fast. Disabling a speed governor ordered to be installed by a judge is as black and white as it gets.
Then why is a radar detector also verboten in VA? Radar != speeding
You think a radar return cannot be used to calculate the speed of a constant-velocity object?
If a judge ordering you to install a speed governor because you keep getting tickets for excessive speeding is a proximate concern, maybe the problem isn’t the radar detector.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wait -- I have to pay for a breathalizer in my new vehicle because other people can't follow the law? That's BS. I don't drink alcohol and I hate everything about this.
> I have to pay for a breathalizer in my new vehicle because other people can't follow the law? That's BS. Not to be too pedantic, but this is the nature of most taxes and regulation. It's part of living in a society.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am fully in support of making cars or mopeds or all travel safer. The US government and state governments are openly hostile to our residents and currently implementing massive mechanisms to track and control our population including our immigrant communities, women who need access to birth control, LGBTQ communities . The government wanting a system that requires GPS and speed information to allow law enforcement…
Cars are the leading cause of death of children in the US. More than cancer. Maybe you're right, I don't know, but it's not the "obvious goal".