We have the technology to make the roads safer, why don't we use it?

Question

e.g. speed limit signs can have small transmitters which transmits sginals to receivers installed in the car's cpu, which in turn will limit the car's maximum speed to the posted limit.

we'll have to revise the current speed limits though. they're remnants of antiquated speed limits formulated in a time when cars were unsafe and unreliable. what do you think?

to: mad & fire,
so you guys are saying that people today aren't ready to have saftey as a primary concern. they just want to have fast cars and drive it. right? why don't we rip down all the speed limit signs then? it seems like a very small segment of the population abide by them anyway.

to bikernoj : to quote Bernard Shaw "Liberty (freedom to you) means responsibility. That is why most men dread it."

To fire & CS: the point that I was trying to serve was that there is the availability of technology but the deficiency of its use in safety and enforcement of road rules. I am by no means an expert in neither law nor electronics; I will not be fully able to defend said limiter or any imagined device against questions of legality, technical operation or cost.
The consensus, at least from the 4 gentlemen that took the time to answer this question, is that overall and total control of the vehicle should only be given to the driver. I respect that. Thanks for your answers.

To pooey: like I said I’m not an electronics expert – but I did some research on retail prices, and the transmitters would cost $42 (solar power panels $80/ sqft) the receivers are $18 limiters will be a simple “if/ then” program which can be integrated to the cpu. Cost installed would approx. be around $300 they could probably still make this cheaper by streamlining the production.
I am not aware of any study or tests on this; I don’t think there will be any because I just came up with it a couple of days ago while driving up I-95 I was doing 65mph (speed limit) and everybody else were passing me by doing 85-90 mph by my estimates.
If you want it you got it, by this statement, I hereby authorize you to patent this concept.

to A IM: can you give me the specific volume/ webpage for the RISK study. there's a ton of them and I don't have the time nor the patience to hunt thru them all. thanks for your answer.

to Adacadus: that is a great idea, instead of limiting the car's performance, the cpu of the car just records the speed and if it goes over the speed limit, it transmits it to the next speed sign! brillant! that way, the peoples' right to drive their cars fast will not be hindered, they'll have to pay the fines but they can still drive fast. ty

Answer 1

As a Brit, I am firmly opposed to this. This is because there is a debate as to whether cars should have another tax put on them based on the miles they travel. The little GPS and transmitter would almost certainly be in the same little box the speed regulator would be.

What this bubbles down to, is that the houses of parliment would say "bravo, what a good idea" and pass the bill; And then the financial side of the government would say "wait, it would be cheaper to fit the device AND gain us revenue if we just automatically issued speeding tickets instead".

There is an ad on UK telly at the mo, too.
If you hit a 10yr old at 30mph, they have a 90% chance of survival, if you hit them at 40mph, they have a 90% chance of dying. This is why speed limits have got slower as came to the present.

Answer 2

Few people would want a system like that in their vehicles, and they would either not buy cars with it, or find a way to disable it. Anything done with a computer can also be undone by someone with the knowledge and equipment. The demand for removal would be high, so there would be people who fill that demand.

EDIT: Few people want governmental controls on every portion of their lives. They want to control what they are doing themselves, rather than having a control that keeps them from doing something, even if it is under the guise of "safety".

I will give you a perfect example of where this would be a problem. You are driving down a dual lane highway, at the speed limit, passing a truck going 2 MPH under the speed limit. An Emergency Vehicle (ambulance, fire truck, police car) comes up behind you with their lights and siren on. You can and should speed up, faster than the speed limit, to get past the truck and clear a way for the emergency responders. With your system, the car overrides the driver, no matter what the reason!!!

Answer 3

Short answer ... everything costs money. There are competing interests for limited government funds.

Longer answer ... your theorizing as to what might be good solution, it is your opinion. Other people have other opinions.

You are talking about smart car technology, some of which has already been implemented, and some of it is causing accidents and even deaths, because the smart car designers and the people using them, lack perfection.

We are also seeing plane crashes due to similar technology thinking, and other kidns of vehicle crashes.

For more info on what I talking about, check out the RISKS Digest http://catless.ncl.ac.uk/risks

Example of another person opinion: if there were harsher penalties for people doing highway crimes, perhaps that would have a chilling effect on people who do the highway crimes.

I believe you are mistaken about speed limits.
Risk of accident and reasons for speed limits are many factors ... road design, road conditions, vehicles on the highways, human reaction time, congestion, weather conditions, visibility. The various Dept of Transportation people regularly check highways, accident statistics, adjust speed limits according to what the local conditions indicate seems reasonable.

This gets modified at the legislative level thanks to various lobbying interests.

I have also seen on the highways a gadget sign that says
YOUR SPEED CLOCKED AT ... then however fast I was going
then a statement about whether or not this is legal
then if I was speedign, what the fine would be if I was caught doing this

There are also places where there are cameras
They photo cars that are in excess of speed limit
Registered owner of car gets ticket in the mail with the photo ... how fast your car was doing, where, the speed limit there, deadline to pay the fine or contest it

end result is that locals know where that speed trp is and avoid being a repeat offender

In central US staates where I am, if you caught speeding through a construction zone, the fine is in excesso f $ 1,000.00 and if you become a repeat offender you lose your license permanently. This law getting passed in more and more states because there are far too many road workers killed in accidents.

Answer 4

As with anything like this, it comes down to acceptance and money.

Who would pay for this? This system would not be cheap.

What would you do about the older cars without this system? Would you force the owners to retrofit their cars, which would be at considerable expense.

If people don't accept this system, they simply wouldn't buy the cars with the new system. They would keep their limiter free cars as long as they can. The manufacturers would not support this. How would you entice people to spend the extra money for a speed limited car? Or would you force it down their throats.

How would you propose stopping people from cheating this system? It wouldn't be too difficult to bypass a system like this. A signal like this could be jammed as easily as radar is jammed today. The car's computer could be fooled or bypassed using the same methods as the performance programmers use today.

Hot Rodders have been around since the beginning of cars. In a way, Henry Ford was a Hot Rodder. He used his race car to help start his company.

Hot Rodders will bypass this system.

Answer 5

limiters are a terrible idea...people who drive fast are not to blame for accidents on the highways...it is the alcoholics at 2:30 in the after noon, the women who put on makeup during rush hour traffic (30 mph on I95 in CT), older drivers who drive 55 in a 65 when traffic speed is 75-80, rice burners who weave in and out of traffic, and caravans of family reunion goers snacking as they travel down the road at a cruise control 65. The speeder who travels in the right lane and merges into the left only to pass are responsible and if they want to exceed the speed limit by 10-15 mph they should. The funding for this transmitter you talk about would be coming out of the tax payers pockets...that means me, and I don't want to waste my money, instead, use that money to straighten the highways and make them thicker so we can eliminate speed limits and follow the autobahn system.

Answer 6

Well, lets think of it this way. Are you ready to spend another $10,000 dollars on a car for the new design on top of the already poopy prices everywhere? also, are you ready to pay more taxes to both local, state and federal governments to pay for this technology to be installed? are you ready for more police officers to loose their jobs because we dont need traffic enforcers anymore? if so, then i say lets do it. Considering the cost of this project i say we are not ready for it, and besides, how many tests have been done for something like this? Do you know if they are testing it now? if not i would suggest patenting the idea because it is a good one, im not saying it isnt, but if you look at it economically, it makes no sense at all.

Answer 7

I think that idea sucks for the same sucky reason my name is now on a list for buying Sudafed when I had a sinus infection. The Big Brother, er "Patriot Act" is only a means to keep people under control, and your idea is the same thing.

So much for "freedom" when you're around, pal!