Limits... Self Control... The Law

[Sava]

So I'm listing to sports radio, and the host had on a guest that makes regular appearances. The guest is a lawyer who makes picks during the NFL season, but he also gives his perspective on certain issues, with regards to the law and such.

He said something that got me thinking.

They were talking about the whole Barry Bonds thing, but that's not what this is about.

He mentioned that in the US, there really aren't any speed limits above 75 miles per hour... obviously excluding Montana, which I don't think has speed limits on the highways there (is it still that way there?). Anyways, he made the point about the speed limits, but said, the auto manufacturers still make cars that can go faster than 75 MPH. And people can still put superchargers and turbos and all sorts of things on cars to make them go faster.

But yet, when you get a ticket, you can't go to court and blame the auto manufacturers for your speeding infraction because you were the one who put your foot on the gas and broke the speed limit.

And I fully agree with this interpretation.

However...

This got me thinking...

Instead of having speed limits on the highways and such, and having law enforcement use up valuable manpower and other resources enforce these limits, not to mention cleaning up the mess from accidents... including the deaths caused from accidents where speed was a factor...

Why don't we just require the auto manufacturers to place speed limits on cars?

With the amount of computer technology in cars, this could be done easily... I'm sure.

And not just a limit on the top speed, but a limit on acceleration too. Someone can be driving just as dangerously by accelerating too fast.




I know some people are going to read this and totally object to this idea. But think for a moment.



We are banning smoking in restaurants in the name of "saving lives". We are forcing people to buckle up in the name of "saving lives".

But in reality, what would save more lives?

And what would be easier to do? Auto manufacturers could just put a chip in cars that would do this... easily. And it would save lives.

Now, I am not happy with this idea at all. You guys don't know how I drive, but I can say right now, I admit that I am a fast driver. I don't get a lot of tickets, but I'm always passing people in the highway. I hate getting stuck behind slow people. I don't speed down streets or anything or drive dangerously... and I would hate the idea of the government "emasculating" me like that... but if you look at the statistics of how many people die on the roads. You can't really argue with a proposal like this.

Honestly... anyone who is for a smoking ban... has to be for a proposal like this.

Anyone who supports seatbelt laws, has to be for a proposal like this.

Anyone who claims to be "pro-life"... has to be for a proposal like this.

It might seem a little unorthodox, but think about it. It probably is the right thing to do.

People like having the control, the feel of the acceleration, the speed, but giving up that control is going to save lives.

And it's not just about saving lives... think about the savings in gas. How much more efficient would our usage be if people would not be able to drive and accelerate fast? It will save money, pollute less, use less, save lives... free up law enforcement resources.

It might even make traffic flow better because there will be less accidents. Maybe people will be less stressed because things will flow better.

Something like this has the possibility to affect a lot of positive change.

The only real negatives I see are people whining about not being able to drive fast. And that will pass when people see the positives.

Anyways, just a thought I had.

I know some people will think selfishly and not like this idea, but please try to keep an open mind. I'm only trying to think of something that will have a positive effect on things. If someone has a better suggestion, I'm all ears.

[Wezil]

Truck speeds will be regulated in Ontario in the not too distant future. All carriers in ON will be required to have their trucks governed at a maximum of 105 kph.

Cars are still exempt.

[Jon Miller]

You need faster cars because you need acceleration at 75 mph. I agree that doesn't go into their thinking... but it is true.

Also, you need to be able to go a bit above 75 mph for certain situations (like passing?)

JM

[Kontiki]

Many cars already have electronic limiters on their top end speeds (obviously well above the speed limit), so you're right about it being technically feasible.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
You need faster cars because you need acceleration at 75 mph. I agree that doesn't go into their thinking... but it is true.

Also, you need to be able to go a bit above 75 mph for certain situations (like passing?)

JM

well, I don't know what the limits should be

I'm just proposing the general idea

I think there are limiters already

but they are set high, like 120 MPH

and perhaps there can be some sort of program where "smart cars" can be made where the road can tell the car what the limit is, so the car won't go past a certain speed, depending on what road you are driving on...

this would help law enforcement too because a fleeing suspect wouldn't be able to lead police on high speed pursuits

[DaShi]

No way!

[Japher]

speed regulators; they're called govenors

I heard that in Aussie land they were putting bar codes on the road that would read something on your car when you ran over it. They would put these a certain intervals and that if you crossed two at too short a time you'd get a speeding ticket... HAHAHA!

I say we get rid of speed limits, make really fast cars, and forbid old people, women, and asians from driving.

[Sava]

Originally posted by Japher

I say we make really fast cars and get rid of speed limits, old people, women, and asians

zomfg nazi




either that or you secretly want to turn our society into a MAD MAX movie

[Wezil]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
Also, you need to be able to go a bit above 75 mph for certain situations (like passing?)

JM

Not a legal defence to speeding.

[alva]

Also, you need to be able to go a bit above 75 mph for certain situations (like passing?)

Exactly why would you try to pass a car that's already at the speed limit?

They start this discussion here about every year, I'm sure it will become law at some point.

[Donegeal]

Two things:

1) Speed doesn't cause traffic accidents, traffic causes traffic accidents.
I say this as someone who regularlly speeds. No, I don't feel like a hypocrite as I don't think I have written a speeding ticket in years. Warnings, maybe; tickets, no. If there is no one around, I'm not going to get into an accident unless a deer comes a long and I smash it. And the entire argument about "if you were driving slower you could avoid it" is crap because "if I was driving faster, it would have crossed behind me".

2) Even if there was some sort of speed governor, there would still be traffic cops monitoring traffic flow. There are a number of moving violations other than speed that require this. Additionally, one of the main reasons for even doing traffic stops is to check for warrants. I'm not sure of the numbers, but I think that a vast majority of people arrested on warrants are from traffic stops. So speed limits is actually a valuable police resource for catching criminals for minor offenses (sorta like getting Capone for tax evasion).

There are also road rage issues, but those are mearly speculative.

[germanos]

With current technology they should be able to limit the amount of fuel used.
So lets say anything under 1:15 would screw you.

No more scary accalerations, no more crazy speeding, no more 2.5 ton SUV's.

[SlowwHand]

Just what we need, more government involvement and control amd less control by individuals.

[germanos]

Originally posted by Donegeal
Two things:

1) And the entire argument about "if you were driving slower you could avoid it" is crap because "if I was driving faster, it would have crossed behind me".

[Whoha]

If it were a scaled limit that would be slightly less objectionable, because there are some times where you can safely do 80 mph, but in general, you'd be turning your life over to a computer, not a good situation. and what were to happen should some unscrupulous individual alter his car's governor. suppose a prankster were spoofing conditions in the aforementioned "roads tell you how fast is ok" plan.

also, you're ignoring the primary reason for speed limits: the hefty chunk of change they sting you for when you break them.