Virginia will use technology to slow chronic speeders’ cars—and other states are rushing to join in
Virginia will use technology to slow chronic speeders’ cars—and other states are rushing to join in
www.fastcompany.com
fastcompany.com
12 comments
-
-
I recently rented a huge truck (the biggest you can rent with a normal car drivers license) and it had a ton of high tech stuff, lane departure warning, speed warnings, auto braking, and so much more.
The issue was when I was on the highway going 70mph (the max speed of the truck, also artificially restricted) there was a tiny side road with a speed limit of 35mph, and the truck on the highway slammed the brakes with warnings on the dash that I was exceeding the speed limit of 35, but I’m on a highway with a speed limit of 75mph.
Stupid technology. Makes things more dangerous than it should be.
-
I got a loaner last time I had my car worked on that had all that shit on it and all the settings for shit hidden in touch screens. Had to drive 45 minutes home with no AC and the thing freaking out on me every time I had to dodge a pot hole or some shit in the road. When I came back to pick up my car they were like "So are you thinking about trading up now?" No, I'm less likely to do that than ever actually.
-
-
See it regularly here, especially when the overpass is a regular road. Cars slamming on the brakes on the highway at an overpass isn't great.
Also concerned, and honestly expecting, this will be primarily applied to visibly ethnic groups (aka not white guy in a suit)
-
-
Article specifically says the tech does not affect braking
-
-
-
Disagree. There are times when an excess of speed is necessary to get into a safe space. Such as crappy drivers of bigger cars or trucks trying to block others. Or not being safe in other ways.
-
-
There’s gotta be a “subscription fee” for these speed limiters for every month they’re installed foe the offender. Fees to install them. Fees to remove them. Fees for the convenience of the ability to make electronic payments. Then there’s the fine for speeding in the first place, the convenience fees to pay the fine, the fee for the traffic safety course online to avoid higher insurance rates, etc.
The State is being enshittified by privatization. It’s not as if the State isn’t difficult enough to deal with on its own, but now the layers of shitty middle men existing to extract tolls for every interaction is growing.
Edit: after looking around I found this program is called “Intelligent Speed Assistance” (ISA).
12 comments
"Instead of using traffic calming to slow cars or designing cities properly so that people don't need to drive in the first place, let's violate people's privacy and property rights to forcibly install a tracking and speed governor device in their car because even when we've already suspended their license it's still somehow unreasonable to actually stop them from driving! Car-dependency and car-supremacy, fuck yeah!"
Everything about this is comprehensively despicable.
While I agree in principle, this change is a win and I hope more states legalize this method.
We give breathalyzer lockouts to DUI convicted citizens. Why? Because they'll drive anyway. You can pull licenses all you want, but when driving is required to live, the people will drive. And they'll do it even when they're a raging alcoholic.
A speed monitor / limiter is a tool for a judge to use. Judges don't have the power to pull city, state, and federal money and force building better street designs. I don't believe they should have that power as political issues should not be addressed by a single branch of government. That's how we got here after all: cities dictating minimum parking, civil engineers pushing terrible designs and refusing to change them, fire departments mandating minimum lane widths, etc.
However, judges do have the power to remove a person's property and privacy rights. Ergo a good judge will restrict a convicted person's rights in a way that could feasibly prevent societal harm.
Judges can remove a person's right to drive too, as can doctors and other civil servants, but that usually ends in death. Literally.
Frankly, if we're going to be fucking with people's property rights anyway, I think it would actually be better public policy to confiscate the whole car. First of all, it forcibly creates another pedestrian, and therefore increases public support for non-car infrastructure. Second, asserting this right to control parts of people's property and prohibiting them from modifying it without taking it away completely creates this weird "in-between" kind of ownership that leads to creeping expansion of infringement and has bad implications for things like Right to Repair, etc. I mean, you proved my point yourself: (paraphrased) "we already do it for breathalyzer lockouts, so that must mean it's okay." When does it end?
That has never been a right, except on private land that the driver owns. Driving in public has always been a privilege.