mandatory speed limiters to be fitted from 2022?
Discussion
bigothunter said:
Toltec said:
I like 'breaking kills', because if you analyse most traffic collisions there is often a breaking event just prior to impact. The correlation is probably higher than that for speeding above the limit.
Is that 'breaking kills' or 'braking kills' ? 
Dingu said:
bigothunter said:
vonhosen said:
We are all expected to drive with due regard to the circumstances prevalent at the time, it's just that there's been a ceiling imposed for the last 55 years, that's nothing new.
What a sad endorsement. Despite all the safety improvements, we are bound by 56 years of outmoded restriction which rightly is held in contempt 
Blakewater said:
I know of someone who campaigned for the 50mph limit past her house to be reduced because someone crashed into her garden doing 80mph in snow in the middle of the night whilst high on drugs. The limit was cut to 40mph and then a few years later to 30mph, which really feels quite slow for the road. All because of an emotive campaign equating a guy high on drugs doing an obviously stupid speed in poor conditions with ordinary people doing a moderate speed that's reasonable for the road. That's often the way speed limit reductions come about. The outliers driving badly with other factors at play besides speed, such as drink, drugs and poorly maintained cars lead to an emotive campaign to have the speed limit reduced with lots of talk about dead children, so if you argue against it you're painted as a monster. Yet the people targeted aren't the ones driving badly and those outlying idiots won't be dissuaded by any enforcement. Even with a speed limiter, someone could drive too fast for the conditions and fail to control his speed on hills and entering lower limits when momentum is working against the limiter.
This 'logic' has always 'amused' me... someone going way over the speed limit crashes so there is a campaign to lower limits. Strange old world NDNDNDND said:
Fermit said:
Also, to the member who has a 1000cc (?) Kawasaki, who is pro all this happening. Do you think there's a place for your bike, or any other superbike in such a speed controlled environment?
This saddens me.
Yeah, I don't understand the hypocrisy of this bloke either. He also rails bitterly against sports exhausts, despite his own bike having one. I can only think he lacks an even basic level of self-awareness.This saddens me.
bsidethecside said:
bigothunter said:
Big Tech is becoming Big Brother: a leviathan out of control
At present the law works as a deterrent. If you commit an offence you risk a punishment. In future, you will not be able to break the law because software code will not allow it. You will not be able to speed on the motorway or park illegally because the code in the vehicle will not allow it. If a law-enforcement officer flags you down, you will not be able to drive away because your car will be programmed to stop. Fines too will automatically be taken from your wallet if you break the law in some way.
https://moneyweek.com/investments/stocks-and-share...
All of which ties in nicely with the Thou Shall Not Tamper proposals...At present the law works as a deterrent. If you commit an offence you risk a punishment. In future, you will not be able to break the law because software code will not allow it. You will not be able to speed on the motorway or park illegally because the code in the vehicle will not allow it. If a law-enforcement officer flags you down, you will not be able to drive away because your car will be programmed to stop. Fines too will automatically be taken from your wallet if you break the law in some way.
https://moneyweek.com/investments/stocks-and-share...
bigothunter said:
DodgyGeezer said:
bsidethecside said:
bigothunter said:
Big Tech is becoming Big Brother: a leviathan out of control
At present the law works as a deterrent. If you commit an offence you risk a punishment. In future, you will not be able to break the law because software code will not allow it. You will not be able to speed on the motorway or park illegally because the code in the vehicle will not allow it. If a law-enforcement officer flags you down, you will not be able to drive away because your car will be programmed to stop. Fines too will automatically be taken from your wallet if you break the law in some way.
https://moneyweek.com/investments/stocks-and-share...
All of which ties in nicely with the Thou Shall Not Tamper proposals...At present the law works as a deterrent. If you commit an offence you risk a punishment. In future, you will not be able to break the law because software code will not allow it. You will not be able to speed on the motorway or park illegally because the code in the vehicle will not allow it. If a law-enforcement officer flags you down, you will not be able to drive away because your car will be programmed to stop. Fines too will automatically be taken from your wallet if you break the law in some way.
https://moneyweek.com/investments/stocks-and-share...
https://thecritic.co.uk/no-one-expects-the-eu-inqu...
Amended to add 'not'
Edited by DodgyGeezer on Thursday 11th November 12:18
easytiger123 said:
People do realise that rather like auto stop/start, the speed limiter can be switched off every time you turn the car on? It's not a hard limiter that it's unlawful to tamper with. We'll all get used to it in 5 minutes. It really isn't that big a deal.
sadly most people won't care - they'll just find it easier that they can drive "pedal to the metal" everywhere and not have to worry about anything.....Megaflow said:
We can. We haven’t but we could. However, let’s for a moment say we decide to do just that. As a car company which would you do:
a) Continue to sell a car which complies with all of the rules the U.K. has but with the addition of a system that the U.K. doesn’t require.
b) Develop a new system, with all of the required legal documentation and certification that it requires at huge expense for a market which is at best 25% of the volume option a.
As an example, the company I work for has 6 major sets of regulations we have to comply with, all are very similar with minor nuances, we therefore combine them into a single set and produce a product we can sell globally. We still have to get approval from all 6 regulators, but only develop a single product.
surely just use US spec software then, so no permanent car-nanny?a) Continue to sell a car which complies with all of the rules the U.K. has but with the addition of a system that the U.K. doesn’t require.
b) Develop a new system, with all of the required legal documentation and certification that it requires at huge expense for a market which is at best 25% of the volume option a.
As an example, the company I work for has 6 major sets of regulations we have to comply with, all are very similar with minor nuances, we therefore combine them into a single set and produce a product we can sell globally. We still have to get approval from all 6 regulators, but only develop a single product.
Edited by Megaflow on Sunday 17th April 10:10
jimPH said:
I think we're at a point in time where road safety has no where else to go.
The people involved in these 'industries' don't stop, they have to keep finding ways to "improve" and justify their existence and to hell with whatever's sensible or required
I've amended that slightly - we used to decry do-gooders and/or busybodies now it's a growth industry The people involved in these 'industries' don't stop, they have to keep finding ways to "improve" and justify their existence and to hell with whatever's sensible or required
NMNeil said:
Not sure about discrediting, but if the big sign says a certain number that's as fast as you are legally allowed to drive. when someone starts saying, but in my opinion it's too low a number so I'll ignore it, what's the next step.
I think my car insurance costs too much so I'll not bother getting it, or my tyres are bald but I think the tread depth limit is too high so I'll ignore that law as well.
You don't just comply with the laws you agree with, well obviously some on PH think they are somehow special and do just that.
and yet when people talk about weed, for example, the authorities are ok to change the rules because too many people ignore said rules....I think my car insurance costs too much so I'll not bother getting it, or my tyres are bald but I think the tread depth limit is too high so I'll ignore that law as well.
You don't just comply with the laws you agree with, well obviously some on PH think they are somehow special and do just that.
NMNeil said:
Finally getting some action here in the US.
https://www.ttnews.com/articles/fmcsa-issues-notic...
the irony - guns kill more young people than cars, let's go for speed limiters https://www.ttnews.com/articles/fmcsa-issues-notic...
bigothunter said:
Some of the comments from unilluminated night time cyclists beggar belief 
I have to admit I didn't know it was against the law - however a sense of self-preservation would have had me lit up like a Christmas-tree!!BBC News said:
Hundreds of cyclists without lights stopped by police
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-tyne-2535...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-england-tyne-2535...
NMNeil said:
Debaser said:
If speed limits were sensible, drivers might stick to them.
The powers that be have researched the speed limits and found they are sensible, but of course, you know better.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff