The Nanny State is Coming: Europe to Make GPS-Controlled Speed Limiters Mandatory

[MatskiMonk]

Interestingly (or perhaps not to some), some councils have discovered that introduction of 20mph speed zones has increased the number of collision and deaths compared to when the same zones were 30mph. There is also an argument for removing pedestrian barriers as a number of areas where those have been installed have seen increases in pedestrian deaths.

Part of the reason is perceived safety, drivers will approach a crossing where pedestrians are stood with no barrier more cautiously than where a barrier is present and if a pedestrian steps out the drivers tend to be more alert to the danger. The same perception of safety on the part of both drivers and pedestrians is thought to be responsable for the increase in injuries and deaths in 20mph zones.

Making driving "too safe" is a dangerous move, drivers should be alert, should be in control and should be aware of the risks of thier actions. The more we take away thier control the less people will be aware of the risks of the speed they are doing. They will say "the car let me do 50mph" after skidding off a wet corner into a helpless pedestrian. It's an issue of responsability and training not semi-autonomy.

On the accidents in 20mph zones, I can't help but wonder if traffic calming measures are also responsible for allowing pedestrians to become blasé about their own safety... That along with the rise in smart phone zombies.

I don't disagree that the responsibility is on drivers to a large degree, but mitigating risk through passive training is not as effective as having active controls in place. There are too many irresponsible stupid people on the roads, simple as that. I'm not going to pretend I'm not one of them! 21 points, 1 write off, 1 license revocation, 0 injuries... I know I've been lucky, and fortunately no one other than me has had to pay the price... I hope every other clown here who thinks their skill elevates them above the law is as lucky.

 

[Doomotron]

 

[Eggstor]

Why not? Trains are already allowed much greater speeds than cars. Fully autonomous highway "driving" will very much work like a train. And even those "evil" environmentalists and regulators will be in favour of more efficient and time saving methods of travelling, given safety and environmental issues are solved.

The goal of most of those pushing "autonomous" driving is the wholesale elimination of privately-owned automobiles in favor of those "high-speed" trains. A significant number of those are also fans of China's "social credit score" scheme, which already is denying the "undesirables" access to the trains.

Who would want a car that can go over 70mph (112km/h) when the highest speed limit in the UK is 70mph?

I seem to remember a certain presenter doing a segment on that.

 

[Pigems]

What could possibly go wrong?

Quite soon. The extreme environmentalists in the US are already talking about eliminating cows because of their farts.

Me when that happens...



I have a bridge to sell you if you think that's happening.

Don’t cow farts equate to more pollution per year than all automobiles combined though?


Also, Honda as far as I know has had GPS speed limiters on there versions of the SeaDoo for a few years now. I remember a guy I know mentioning a while back that he was going to try to put lead over the GPS to try and disable it on his.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I seem to remember a certain presenter doing a segment on that.

Clearly it's beyond the comprehension of many that the top speed of a car can actually be limited without affecting any other aspect of it.

Don’t cow farts equate to more pollution per year than all automobiles combined though?

No, because if that was true there might be a good reason to go vegan.

 

[Pigems]

No, because if that was true there might be a good reason to go vegan.

I’m pretty sure it’s at least partially true.

 

[MatskiMonk]

I’m pretty sure it’s at least partially true.

View attachment 802557

Well, I'm sold, tomorrow I'm going to eat more than 50% vegan and cover at least half my journeys by foot or bicycle.

 

[Pigems]

Well, I'm sold, tomorrow I'm going to eat more than 50% vegan and cover at least half my journeys by foot or bicycle.

You could always just plant a couple trees to offset the burgers and rides to work.

 

[Inferno251]

That wouldn't work here, as the primary purpose of our police force is revenue raising

 

[Danoff]

No, because if that was true there might be a good reason to go vegan.

...you mean vegetarian right? Veganism is closer to a religion.

Edit:

Actually I think you just mean getting rid of beef. Chicken doesn't seem like it's off limits based on that graphic. I ran the numbers, I think my entire family might consume 1 cow per year, and we eat quite a lot of beef and drink a lot of milk. Cows are big.

 

[kjeldsen]

*EDIT*

 

[Lord Protector]

How often do you drive on the autobahn? I hope you are not basing your knowledge on youtu.be.

And tell me about running out of power when you are overtaking cars that cannot go faster than you? Speed kills, it's a fact like 5 is bigger than 4, climate change, the moon landing.

I spend to much time in a car, people drive like idiots, they simply cannot be trusted with something so dangerous as a car.

EDIT: When i wrote this i didn't notice the many posts of stupidity, it just proves that something like this is needed. Seatbelts? **** THEM AND GIVE ME FREEDOM! ABS? HAHAH I AM BETTER THAN A COMPUTER!!! Speed limits are there for a reason, if everyone did as told everything would be so much better, but **** the nanny state, i want the freedom to drive like an ass because i am better than most other drivers, just like 90% of drivers think.

Speed kills, if you drive like an ass, and someone you love gets killed by someone else that drives like an ass you are an accomplish. Drive like you want others to treat your family in the traffic.

Wow calm down dude. I don’t think anyone claims that speeding isn’t harmful. All I’m saying is if people kept their distance, there would be fewer accidents. I drive on a highway every day to get to work here in Slovakia. People are kind of getting better in keeping the safe distance but there’s still a lot of guys just willing to die because they’re stupid. And if by autobahn you mean highways in Germany, I’ve driven there plenty of times, why do you ask?

And if someone decides to overtake someone, even though he might be speeding, guess what’s safer? Finish the overtake manouver in 5 seconds, calmly, or finish it in 7 seconds because speed-limiter engaged? Even if it can be overriden, I can imagine it being very disturbing and stressful.

 

[Pedalen]

You spelt commie wrong in the title.

 

[kjeldsen]

*EDIT*

 

[Dave A]

How often do you drive on the autobahn? I hope you are not basing your knowledge on youtu.be.

And tell me about running out of power when you are overtaking cars that cannot go faster than you? Speed kills, it's a fact like 5 is bigger than 4, climate change, the moon landing.

I spend to much time in a car, people drive like idiots, they simply cannot be trusted with something so dangerous as a car.

EDIT: When i wrote this i didn't notice the many posts of stupidity, it just proves that something like this is needed. Seatbelts? **** THEM AND GIVE ME FREEDOM! ABS? HAHAH I AM BETTER THAN A COMPUTER!!! Speed limits are there for a reason, if everyone did as told everything would be so much better, but **** the nanny state, i want the freedom to drive like an ass because i am better than most other drivers, just like 90% of drivers think.

Speed kills, if you drive like an ass, and someone you love gets killed by someone else that drives like an ass you are an accomplish. Drive like you want others to treat your family in the traffic.

Speed alone doesn't kill, you said it yourself "people drive like idiots" that may involve speed but it isn't the speed that kills. If you were driving on a motorway at 100mph and everyone else was traveling at 100mph it would be pretty safe. But when some people are doing 60mph, some 70mph, some 80mph, some 90mph, some 100mph, etc, then it becomes significantly more dangerous.

I'm not saying more isn't needed to takle speeding, as speeding on public roads is certainly be a contributing factor but limiting speeds by GPS won't stop people driving like idiots and I personally don't think it's the right solution.

 

[Tornado]

EDIT: When i wrote this i didn't notice the many posts of stupidity, it just proves that something like this is needed. Seatbelts? **** THEM AND GIVE ME FREEDOM! ABS? HAHAH I AM BETTER THAN A COMPUTER!!! Speed limits are there for a reason, if everyone did as told everything would be so much better, but **** the nanny state, i want the freedom to drive like an ass because i am better than most other drivers, just like 90% of drivers think.

No need to be this much of a try-hard.

 

[Lord Protector]

Because people drive like **** on the Autobahn as well, but maybe by some miracle you have never experienced that. "Germany’s fatality rate (1.6) is twice as high as that in the UK (0.8)", ooops. Since everyone would top out at 130 km/h you would not have Super Duper Driver John up your ass when you are doing the overtaking, there would be no stress, and plenty of time. And those that bypass the device would be so easy to report to the police since they would be going faster than everyone else, write down the plate, call the cops.

From what I have seen, driver can override the system by pressing the pedal more. And what fatality rate would be in UK if there were no speed limits?

 

[kjeldsen]

*EDIT*

 

[MatskiMonk]

...you mean vegetarian right? Veganism is closer to a religion.

If we strictly just talking about cows then it's not even vegetarianism is it?

FWIW generally speaking I don't really have time for vegetarians. I'm not a big fan of veganism either but at least they make a reasonable effort to be less-hypocritical about it.

 

[Famine]

Personally I find the most dangerous drivers to be those who aren't looking. They don't look left when turning left at a junction (LHD equivalent would be looking right when turning right), they don't look down the road, they don't look in their mirrors, they don't look for reflections in windows, they don't look for hazards like the car about to pull out or the kid about to cross the road - they just don't look. But then we've got no way of legislating and fining them, just driving without due care if one of the rare police cars we've cut back on in favour of speed cameras happens to see them...

When it comes to speed, speed doesn't kill and it doesn't cause accidents. Inappropriate speed causes accidents, and, when an accident occurs, more speed (and more weight, but less so) makes the impact energy higher so the structures designed to dissipate impact energy have to work harder to make the impact survivable.

And a GPS-linked speed limiter will not fix inappropriate speed. If anything it will actually compound the problem by giving people false security that they're in a safe car so it's just fine to drive at 60mph on this single-carriageway road with five feet of visibility due to fog and the road surface at -2 degrees. If it was dangerous, the car would slow them down, right?

 

[WheelmanSteve]

Just as long as the system nags the driver JUST AS LOUDLY for going BELOW the posted limit, too! "BEEEP. BEEEP.BEEEP. YOU ARE OBSTRUCING TRAFFC! PLEASE ACCELERATE TO THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT!"

 

[baldgye]

And a GPS-linked speed limiter will not fix inappropriate speed. If anything it will actually compound the problem by giving people false security that they're in a safe car so it's just fine to drive at 60mph on this single-carriageway road with five feet of visibility due to fog and the road surface at -2 degrees. If it was dangerous, the car would slow them down, right?

If only... we had the technology to monitor weather...

*screams in dail mail rhetoric*

 

[Famine]

If only... we had the technology to monitor weather...

*screams in dail mail rhetoric*

Right now, autonomous and semi-autonomous systems get confused by wet roads, and snow defeats them. You can monitor and predict it all you like, but the technology in cars is simply not suited to the task.

These systems can judge what speed is the limit. Judging what speed is appropriate for now seems to be a uniquely human ability...

... which a lot of us already get quite badly wrong. Almost every driver assist technology to date has been concerned with rescuing the situation by applying and limiting driver inputs once it already has gone wrong.

 

[baldgye]

Right now, autonomous and semi-autonomous systems get confused by wet roads, and snow defeats them. You can monitor and predict it all you like, but the technology in cars is simply not suited to the task.

These systems can judge what speed is the limit. Judging what speed is appropriate for now seems to be a uniquely human ability...

... which a lot of us already get quite badly wrong. Almost every driver assist technology to date has been concerned with rescuing the situation by applying and limiting driver inputs once it already has gone wrong.

Good thing "Europe" hasn't made it mandatory then...

 

[Shaun]

They don't look left when turning left at a junction (LHD equivalent would be looking right when turning right), they don't look down the road, they don't look in their mirrors, they don't look for reflections in windows, they don't look for hazards like the car about to pull out or the kid about to cross the road - they just don't look.

How are they supposed to look at any of that while looking at their phone......

 

[Famine]

Good thing "Europe" hasn't made it mandatory then...

That depends which "it" you're referring to - because some of the aids I note in my post are indeed now mandatory.

There is no technology that I'm aware of in cars that reduces its road speed in response to reduced visibility, diminished sight lines, potential low grip conditions, or even indicative road markings, so making that mandatory would be tricky...

 

[Dave A]

The solution is a black box in every car so that everyone follows the rules, at least until we don't have to drive the cars anymore. And yes, speed kills

I couldn't dissagree with this more, I have driven over 100mph on many an occasion and been perfectly safe, not put anyone else at risk and not broken any laws and I didn't do those speeds on a motorway where the road is nice and wide and generally quite straight either. The speed was not dangerous or lethal in the slightest. However:

the speed is the most important factor when it comes to the severity of an accident. The speed limits of today is politics coupled with "acceptable losses". But i totally agree with you, without idiots the traffic would be so much safer, but for some reason being a complete idiot in car and risking other people's lives is not punished like it should be.

I completely agree with you on this. I think we are just referring to speed in different capacities here, from what I can gather (and correct me if I'm wrong), I'm referring to speed in a far more literal sense than you and you're refering more to what @Famine mentioned which was "innapropriate speed" and that is very dangerous. However 3040mph can be an innapropriate speed whereas 100mph can be perfectly appropriate. It all depends on circumstances.

The speed limit for example can say that you can drive at 50mph on a certain road but that doesn't necessarily make 50mph a safe speed to travel on that same road in heavy rain. A 30mph road where traffic is heavy and creeping along at 15mph could make 30mph an innapropriate speed. On the other hand 70mph might be safe on some roads where the speed limit says 50mph. Either way, it's not for us to decide that a higher speed is more appropriate but drivers should be alert to when the speed limit is not safe in the current circumstances. A GPS speed limiting device will not solve accidents. I've seen someone killed getting hit at 30mph on a 30mph road, it's not pleasant but I don't see these devices as solving the core problem which is educating drivers better.

Taking more thought away from drivers is a very, very bad idea IMO. At the moment drivers have to think about how fast they are going, if they speed, they do so wilfully. With these devices they can simply forget about controling how fast they are going and put thier foot right down and that could and probably would increase the number of accidents involving innapropriate speed which is not exceeding the speed limit. Too much safety creates danger, and that is something which has been established by authorities in and out of the UK.

For the record, I have driven over 100mph at Oulten Park many times .

 

[superwally]

That this is being considered by the regulatory body is not surprising. The discussion I'm reading here is.

Many of you assume each driver is the same. They are not. I feel safer around speeding, focused drivers than i do around slow, unfocused ones. That's why I frequently, safely exceed the speed limit on 2 lane back roads. It's not about getting there quicker. It's about getting ahead of someone I consider to be unsafe or unpredictable behind the wheel, or who is traveling so far below the posted limit that they are an impediment-and therefore a safety hazard.

Some of you are locked onto rules in a way that scares the crap out of me. Some of you sound like kids who have never driven or are scared of driving, and have been fed some sort of mantra about speed and risk. Every driver is not the same, every car is not the same. Nothing is done about distracted driving, and in the USA we have zero driver training. Insurance companies rule, and they don't care about your safety unless it's making them money.

This type of regulation treats speed as if it's the ONLY factor. It's not, and the residual misery that this type of thoughtless intrusion will cause is massive. You will be controlled in your travels at all times. Do you even think about what that means?

 

[Deadheadbill]

Make Orwell Fiction Again?

 

[MatskiMonk]

A GPS speed limiting device will not solve accidents

the core problem which is educating drivers better.

Educating drivers better will not solve accidents. We already do it (for example) via speed awareness courses and the benefits appear very much limited.