A number of years back I had a rental car (in Arizona possibly) that had a speed limiter that was at the speed limit--or just above--as I recall and it was incredibly annoying.
* Very few people drive the speed limit, so you're now stuck at being the slowest car on the road. (This will still be a problem under this law because new vehicles are the only ones affected.)
* Inaccurate/out of date speed limits.
* Impossible to pass anyone on a two lane road.
* Having the car take over control is very disorienting for a skilled driver who expects the machine to function as an extension of their body. See the number of people who prefer manual transmission and who eschew cruise control.
> Very few people drive the speed limit, so you're now stuck at being the slowest car on the road. (This will still be a problem under this law because new vehicles are the only ones affected.)
This is by far the most dangerous part. When you're on a freeway where everyone is driving 80-85MPH and you are driving the speed limit of 65MPH, you are the danger to the road. Speed may make accidents deadlier, but the speed differential (whether positive or negative) is what causes accidents. I would not be willing to drive on any of the major Bay Area interstate highways with a car limited to the speed limit. It would absolutely cause an accident eventually.
Do you have any evidence this is the case? All the research I’ve ever read has said that speed is the major contributing factor to injury and death.
Also, if this gets mandated then you would very soon not be the only car limited.
These kinds of arguments are annoying because they don’t address the detail of what is proposed here (mostly warnings in car) or the likely dynamics of future changes.
The first doesn't really win any sympathy from me lol. People should drive the speed limit, and I have no sympathy for people who tell me about getting pulled over by cops
In a fantasy world where everyone does, I agree. In our reality if you’re the only one going the speed limit in what’s often not the right most lane then you’re a road hazard.
No, OTHER people, not the driver. He's saying OTHER PEOPLE drive over the limit, and OTHER PEOPLE are NOT in your control, so "haveing no sympathy" is irrelevant here. You have no sympathy for me when i find myself driving amongst others who drive above the limit? Their speeds are not in my control. Only mine is. And if the limiter prevents me from going the same speeds as everyone around me, I will be constantly passed and in greater danger of wrecking.
Do you even have a drivers' license? You evince very little familiarity with practical every day driving. If you are a driver, how many years experience in which countries? It would help us gauge the relevance of your comments -- different countries have different driving cultures.
> You have no sympathy for me when i find myself driving amongst others who drive above the limit?
I also often find myself driving among other people who speed. I stay to the right with the OTHER drivers who are following the law. I always drive the speed limit and it's never a problem for me. Many states' laws require this, anyway (faster traffic to the left, slower traffic to the right).
Yes, I stay to the right too unless passing or exiting to the left, etc, for the reasons you said and others too (the right lane has a shoulder next to it, increasing options in an emergency) Still gets you passed a lot if you're unnecessarily slow though. If the prevailing speed is a speed I feel unsafe going, then sure, I'll accept the passing.
But if the prevailing speed feels safe -- it might just be 5 MPH over the limit, or the limit might be unnecessarily low -- of course I will just go the prevailing speed, to maximize safety. What kind of a fool would do otherwise, just to satisfy an imaginary policeman in his head?
Well 5mph isn't really speeding; as far I know they set the speed limits 5mph lower than they really are (e.g: 55mph means 60mph).
But trust me, the imaginary police are very much not imaginary. I got a couple speeding tickets before I decided I wasn't going to deal with the courts ever again. Now, I do the speed limit. I see cops everywhere on the highways in my state and they definitely will pull you over going 10-ish over. Until recently, anything over 80mph (even if the highway was posted 70mph) was reckless driving (now It's 85 I think)
Hold on now, that's just an opinion. And while it happens to kind of match mine, everyone's opinion on how much speeding is "really speeding" is kind of different, up to a point. Kind of proves my point-- I don't want something stopping me from doing 5MPH or 10MPH or even 15MPH over the limit if circumstances outside of my control indicate I should (NYC is a good example of an area where EVERYONE going 15mph over the limit is not unusual)
My personal rule of thumb is to make sure at any given time, considering yourself and the drivers near you in view on the highway, that you are either under the speed limit or at or below the average speed everyone else is going.
If everyone else is going 10 MPH above, go 8 MPH above. As long as most drivers near you are faster, a cop will pull one of them over first. Never go above the speed limit without a "Speeding Buddy" (a driver who is going even faster who is a few car lengths in front of you). If you have no Speeding Buddy, you don't need to speed, you can just go the speed limit.
If the entire country had speed limiters and they increased the speed limits by 5mph to make 55 match 60, I'd be happy. I just have no sympathy for people who think it's their god given right to go as fast as they think they need to go.
> Well 5mph isn't really speeding; as far I know they set the speed limits 5mph lower than they really are
See, and I was taught 10 mph lower, and that has been my experience driving in many states—8 mph over and you're fine, but much higher than that and you'll get pulled over.
Because k = .5mv^2. Even 5mph makes a big difference. Most people don’t have a good intuition for this, but it’s especially relevant when on streets with pedestrians.
Nobody follows the speed limit that closely, in the US at least. If my car was hard-capped at the posted limit I'd have a mile-long line of honking tailgaters behind me in no time
Which are often few, far between, and quite short. If there's any kind of traffic coming the opposite way you can miss your chance over and over again.
Basically it kept cutting out right around the speed limit (may have been 5mph over) on the highway. It wasn't "smart" just an absolute limit. (I think wherever I was had a relatively high speed limit for the time--maybe 70--so it was probably some standard governor setting which was sort of unreasonable for where I was, but a long time ago.)
My experience of learning to drive in Europe is that there are roads where the speed limit is 90kph but any non-local sane person will drive 60kph (most mountain roads) and there are roads where the limit is 130kph but regular traffic flows at 140kph and many people cruise (safely) at 150kph. The people actually doing 130kph on the left lane (trucks go 90 on the right) can be a safety hazard.
And like others have said, the laws actually say "speed limit unless passing". Because passing is dangerous and should be done as quickly as possible.
I would have to guess you can't speed up to pass another vehicle (think bus or truck, or maybe a dangerous situation) and then you will piss off anyone in the fast lane who does not have these limiters.
Cant speak to europe, but in the US you're not supposed to speed up past the speed limit to pass someone, that's illegal. We also don't have "fast lanes" (ie like how the autobahn has sections with no speed limit), we only have passing lanes, but the speed limit still applies in the passing lane. You're not supposed to stay in the left lane for very long
Fast lane probably meant left/passing lane, not unrestricted roads. That you're not supposed to stay in them long is part of why people speed up to pass, otherwise it takes a minute seconds to gain 60 feet on that semi going just under.
Speaking to the US as a whole on traffic law is hard to do. E.g. in Washington it is absolutely legal to exceed the speed limit to pass someone on the highway, in California it isn't. In California it's illegal to sit in the fast lane, in Minnesota it's not. In Minnesota you can turn right on certain reds, in DC you can't.
In my state, it's illegal to go over the speed limit at any point, for any reason. If you want to pass someone, you do so in the left lane, at the speed limit, and then move back over to the middle/right lane. And you best believe you'll get pulled over
In my particular state things tend to be a lot more nuanced. E.g. at the surrounding highway of a major city the typical traffic speed will be 10-15 over the posted and it's 20-25 that gets people pulled over. Go about an hour out from that city and you may be on a stretch of highway where going 5 over is a ticket. Very rarely is anywhere going e.g. 2 mph going to get you pulled over but it does happen some places. We do have turn on red though!
Regardless of where I've travelled in the US I've yet to see someone get pulled over for travelling in the passing lane (though I know it to obviously be a thing just not lucky enough to witness it). I thought for sure I was finally going to see it in Texas with this person doing 10 under in the left lane but the trooper just passed on by to their right.
And what state is that? I do know that some states are over zealous about this but two vehicles driving next to each other slowing gaining on another to overtake is also creating a dangerous road situation. This is taught when you take your written test in CA. Trucks don’t really have a choice which is why it’s normal for them to do so even on a two lane highway.
> two vehicles driving next to each other slowing gaining on another to overtake is also creating a dangerous road situation
Then perhaps you shouldn't pass if it's not safe to do so. My problem with everyone in this thread and who is against speed limiters is: the subtext is that they want to go faster than the speed limit so they can arrive faster. It's simply the fact that people are willing to engage is an extremely dangerous activity multiple times a day so that they can save a few minutes a day. The idea that people should have the right to go dangerously fast because it's simply more convenient for them is a psychotic proposition to me
FWIW, Virginia is infamous for strict enforcement of traffic laws—I've never even driven there but have been warned to pay extra close attention when crossing its borders.
Most US states aren't anything like Virginia. I just did a road trip across ~20 states and in none of them did people in cars (as opposed to semis) actually follow the speed limit on the highway. Most states had ~8 over as the normal speed, none were less than 5 over.
> The idea that people should have the right to go dangerously fast because it's simply more convenient
No one is saying anything about dangerously fast driving. In most US states speed limits are set with the understanding that a significant portion of drivers will drive 5 to 10 mph faster than the speed limit and not get pulled over even if a cop sees them. In those states driving at or below the speed limit is actually more dangerous because you're creating an obstruction that other drivers who are following the expected driving patterns have to adapt to.
(Again, from what I understand that doesn't apply to Virginia, which would be why your experience differs from most here.)
I think it's more the idea that the speed limit should be reasonably close to what'd be unsafe for long periods, not pressed to the absolute border between what a safe speed and a psychotic speed would be. From that perspective it makes sense that, while you'd ideally like to just go 65 the whole way without obstruction, if you have to pass it's still reasonably to go 67 and do it in a third of the time than clamp to specifically 65 out of ideological principles. If going 67 is just unfathomable from a safety perspective then the problem is probably the speed limit being 65 not what people do to pass at a reasonable rate.
In most places in the US I doubt that's true re speeding. Speeding us usually defined as exceeding the posted limit for at least some set time and/or distance, to enable overtaking or other temporary need to go a bit faster without it being an offense.
