if you have ever driven on the tollways in and around chicago - you know this is necessary.
In/around Chicago you’re eather going triple digits to keep up or stop and go.
Is anybody else noticing there’s an awful lot of these news articles about technology being set up to take away our ability to make choices?
As someone who doesn’t even look at his speedo, I don’t like it but it’s technically the law. But I do think there are other driving laws that are more important they don’t ever enforce. Like driving in the left lane on the interstate or highway for 46 fucking miles ect.
Then dont speed. Stop crying
I can see why people may be worried about these. But if your choices consist of blatant disregard for other people’s lives, and actively putting them at risk, then… yeah, maybe you shouldn’t have the ability to make them.
Not speaking to you directly. Just in general.
Oh don’t get me wrong I agree with it in principle for that circumstance. The problem is these things never stay in those conditions. Utilization creeps. It starts with let’s protect the children let’s protect the innocent, and pretty soon nobody can do what they want anymore.
Besides, that’s what the laws are for and they should have their license revoked or they go to jail.
Put another way, as Ben Franklin once said, those who would trade freedom for safety deserve neither.
This particular case seems to me like putting a breathalyzer in an impaired driver’s car. These aren’t toys, they’re dangerous machines that we’re doing nothing about being built more dangerous by the year. If someone egregiously breaks the law and gets a limiter as punishment I’m okay with it like I’m okay with a breathalyzer.
Speeding tickets are subjective and the limit within a year is two. Just being in a spot where you drive by police makes you infinitely more likely to become a super speeder, and that doesn’t even get into the ways this could be used maliciously.
What’s subjective? Measured speed? Posted speed? That’s a load of nonsense.
Just limit their cars to 20HP.
I never understood why cars are built to go 170mph or faster… Why? Unless you are a truck to haul heavy stuff, smaller engines with speeds up to even 90mph is more than enough.
It’s physics. Any vehicle capable of comfortable acceleration within the allowed speed zone will also be capable of greatly exceeding the speed limit. If you built a car that could only go 65, it would take forever to climb up to that speed, and it would be redlining the engine to maintain that speed. Any vehicle capable of efficiently and comfortably traveling at the speed limit will be capable of greatly exceeding it. Unless a governor is installed, of course.
Because we can. Because it’s thrilling. Because there’s more to a car than top speed. Because there’s more to the world than US.
People shouldn’t be seeking thrills on public roads, and doing so should justifiably be seen as reckless and come with a punishment.
Fundamentally disagree. Again, there’s more the world than US.
I wish they could come up with something similar for repeat illegal parkers. I know an asshole who gets $1000 worth of parking tickets a month and doesn’t care because he is rich enough.
I forget which country does it but fines are a percent of your annual income or something instead of a flat dollar amount
This is exactly what every city should do. If the penalty for breaking the law is a fine then it’s only a law for the poor.
That headline brought forth an image of Judge Dredd putting a chip in somebody’s head that keeps them from ever jaywalking again.
You will obey the laws, citizen.
Sounds like the same invasion as an IID when someone has been drunk driving. Driving is a privilege, not a right and people who treat driving a dangerous machine like playing with a toy should suffer punishment. It’s pretty basic stuff for breaking the law to be followed by a punishment.
I think I just found where I draw the line…
Yeah… why are people cheering on the loss of their freedom?
Fucking people really got propagandised to shit into believing that driving a car is freedom. It’s a privilege, not a right, and abusing a privilege can come with a punishment, like installing an IID for DUIs.
Why do we make street legal cars that can even go 90? I once went 155 on a Yamaha R6. Why can we buy stuff that can even go that fast? Seems like a huge waste tbh.
Can’t possibly limit the speed of cars.
Ebikes though, fuck your top speed. The government decides
Why not? What if I REALLY have to poop and won’t make it home in time unless I double the speed limit? What if my arborist friend got a life threatening injury from a chainsaw and needed to get to a hospital faster than an ambulance can even get to the scene of the incident? What if we’re over populated and I think we should peel all the warning labels off and let the population issue correct itself?
Honestly sounds like a case of “too stupid and reckless to own a licence” tbh.
and all cars should have alcohol interlocks.
Why limit it? We have plenty of highways where that’s a perfectly acceptable speed. Very long, very straight, and no turning traffic.
I think it’s because car and motor brains are a big voting block. If you try to enforce some common sense rules like mandatory speed limiting devices or noise limits they will flip out. I don’t have another explanation. I don’t think race cars and custom exhausts are big enough business to successfully block this for so long.
Because there are a lot of racetracks in the world, and a few people who take their cars and bikes to them
Very few maybe 0.001%. So GPS restrict speeds.
Salt flats also exist and people driver there over 1000 km/h. Does that mean cars with jet engines should be street legal? How else will they get there?
AK LIKE MAH 0.3 SECOND COMMUTE.
I get that, but my 2006 minivan can do 110…
Absolutely no need for that. Lol
When I bought a Porsche Cayman five years ago I took it to a racing school at a track to take high performance driver education with it. Which was a blast and I recommend everyone who can afford to do so to do so, even if its just renting the school’s cars, it’s useful education to have even for regular defensive driving
But more to the point: here I and my husband were doing all the various exercises in our well equipped sports car, and someone brought their Dodge Caravan and was absolutely tearing it up out there. Going HARD once we got to actual lapping, and keeping a shocking amount of speed compared to all the other sports cars there.
Dude was the coolest, most badass mofo there in my opinion. And he genuinely learned a LOT about where his minivan’s limits were, most certainly leaving a more skilled driver than when he arrived that morning
That is amazing actually.
On old friend I haven’t been in touch with for years used to race a slightly souped-up Jetta. The air intake was a crucial upgrade. Anyway she did some serious ice lake racing in Massachusetts back in the day. Any reasonably well built vehicle can do some amazing stuff in the right hands with simple upgrades.
Okay, have fun climbing the Rocky Mountains on your road trip vacation. Oh wait.
Are you implying that you need to get a 150mph running start to make it to the top?
I am Implying that you need a certain amount of power to be able to climb a mountain like that. And You may not have that much power if the engine Is limited that much. I remember going up those mountains in a Datsun 210. Brutal.
Nobody said anything about power limiters. You know that power and speed aren’t the same thing right?
I see you are intent on either making me appear or feel stupid. I see your troll, and raise it with “don’t give a fuck”.
Have a nice day.
Physics major?
That’s not how speed limiters work.
I do not understand how those limiters work, but if It works on limiting power and torque, then You may have some difficulty getting up a very steep hill like one found in the rockies.
My ego is perfectly capable of surviving being wrong.
They cut out fuel when you reach max speed. They don’t limit power or acceleration below top speed. They only limit top speed. They of course don’t shut down the engine. Just make it stop accelerating. Probably has more to do with fuel mixture, not literally cutting whole fuel off.
Good to know. Still don’t like it. Another step in taking away freedom of individuals and mentally neutering an entire population.
And how do you know that?
To be fair a lot of non-performance cars were limited to 110 through the 90s and 2000s. Not sure when they changed it, but I had a 91 miata, limited at 110. Ford probe, 110. Nissan sentra, yeah 110.
None of those cars were terribly fun to drive at that speed. Floaty, white kunckle ride. Any bump and it would have ended in blood.
There really isn’t much of a reason for anything more. As an adult who speeds all the time at 25+ I would not find any reason to crack 100. 90-95 is at the far end for me. Usually 80-85 on open roads.
Over 100 and even in a good car with good tires, brakes and suspension, if something happens, you have so little time to react and you’re already at the limits of what your car can do. Do that in a crapheap with worn tires, brakes, suspension and you’re fucked if you hit a rough section of road.
Secrets.
The problem I have with this is that many speed limits on Illinois highways as set artificially low at 55. This makes for the “super speeder” even easier to apply to people. The only ones that are going to with with this law are the companies that install and monitor these devices
I’m ok with this. I would also love to see breathalyzer interlock devices installed in every car, the same way seatbelts are. You can’t drink and drive if your car won’t start.
Good in theory, except the entire breathalyzer industry is terrible hardware. Intentionally. No one gives a shit about DUI drivers. So the companies have no reason to make good products.
I would assume making it a legal requirement would certainly incentivize some quality control.
I mean, it’s a legal requirement for DUI drivers to be able to still drive now… doesn’t stop them from making terrible hardware. Granted, that’s a very tiny market so no real incentive for competition to drive quality either.
Sounds like it’s an alternative to license suspending so that you don’t cripple lower income people by revoking transportation.
As one of those “lower income” people… I’ve never really been a speedster on the road…
Excess speed eats into fuel efficiency - big time.
Who’s blowing gas money like a sailor on shore leave with fuel as expensive as it is right now? Morons, that’s who.
Fuck that.
No, it is an entertainment expense to me and therefore not moronic. Just because you cannot afford it, does not mean others cannot.
Speeding isnt entertainment, if you find it so then you have had brain developmental issues, pretty simple.
“Entertainment” that can get your right to drive removed is pretty fucking lame dude.
Will it be “fun” that day you lose control of the car and hit someone else and possibly kill them or yourself? Never say never, sunshine. Fate’s a cunt like that.
One of my high school classmates who like to drive fast, lost control through the center of town. Buddy in the back seat, whom I worked with a few years later, said the EMTs pulled him out of the car in two pieces… top and bottom half.
Go for it kid.
The speeding for entertainment moron is what the license suspending vs hardware restriction is for
Morons, that’s who.
There are a loooooooooot of morons out there.
The common clay of the New West
What’s to stop them renting cars? (I haven’t read the article—maybe that’s addressed. Sounds like these people need to just plain lose their licenses.)
Renting a car is very expensive, and I think they can check your driving record?
There’s no money in that, this the government gets $30/month from everyone they hit with it, not to mention kickbacks politicians get, campaign donations and actual bribes.
Seems like a 5th amendment violation.
You don’t have a right to a driver’s license, even more so if you’ve shown a track record of being irresponsible with one.
What does that have to do with anything?
Think of it like an ankle monitor for a car
5th amendment covers testimonial evidence. This would be more of a 4th amendment thing, though because a judge would order it due to prior convictions, you’d probably have an uphill battle. A state can revoke a person’s license. Allowing them continued access with stipulations seems like a compromise that some would accept.
… and the article doesn’t even say what speed over a speed limit qualifies as a “super speeder” event.
30 over speed limit.
I believe it’s if you get enough points to lose your license.
You can get points for non-speeding violations, so that might not be it since the focus is on “super speeders”.
Let’s guess, over 90 MPH in a 45!
Alternatively, you were going 55 in a 54…
Got a ticket for 56 in a 55 once. Small town, like a tiny ass-town in BFE with a circuit judge, no options but to pay or spend 3 days in jail.
I guess that’s fine.
