Speed limit -limiters on cars

[tlionhart]

Just found this interesting article on BBC news;
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7803997.stm

Fitting a device to the car on a voluntary bases. When you reach a zone, the car automatically reduces the speed, and keeps the car within the posted speed limit. I guess we won't be needing speed cameras then?

This sounds like a great idea, something i guess a lot of people have always thought about, but never put into action.

However, would this penalize drivers who wouldn't mind the device fitted, however use their cars at race tracks? (the sensible road racers) Unless you could de-activate it somehow?

I guess this is a good idea, considering the government want to introduce tougher penalties for drivers twice over the speed limit.
In my opinion its a great idea, but the excuse isn't good enough. 'cuts c02 emissions'. It's a load of rubbish, look at the US. Funny what Lee Evans says on his new DVD; 'here they want us to push that small red dot, the standby button. We could save the world. But look at Las vegas! Its lit up like a christmas tree!'

[ini]

Sounds good, but maybe a little dangerous.

In reality it would never be implemented, as 'fines' would not be generated.

Maybe more likely in the current climate would be GPS in every car, allowing automatic fines to be issued to 'lawbreakers'.

Shoot me now.

(can you tell i am hung-over, lol.)

[RickT]

Stupid idea in my eyes....

Reasons...



There would also be a positive impact on emissions and fuel consumption, he added.


NO it wont... Its driving styles which give better MPG... ie... Drive in 1st gear @ 30 mph or in 4th... Its driving style...


The government's transport advisers claim the technology would cut road accidents with injuries by 29%.

for example... The next thing which will happen is that wel will have more head on crashes due to drivers overtaking and not having enough power to get past or another factor of limited speed..


t campaign group Safe Speed warns against its use, saying it encourages drivers to enter a "zombie mode".

Very true... take the effort away from driving and people will "swtich off"


The speed-limiting devices will then use satellite positioning to check a vehicle's location and when its speed exceeds the limit, power will be reduced and the brakes applied if necessary.

Brakes applied..... what next!!!
Thats an accident waiting to happen in its self... many reasons.......




"But we believe that the system should be a voluntary system, that the drivers decide if they have fitted to their car or not, and that they decide if they want to over-ride the speed limit - that should be their choice," he said.


Very True... its a bit like fitting reversing sensors to your car...... People fit them becasue they cant drive....





Derek Charters, from the Motor Industry Research Association, believes limiting speed automatically could cause accidents. "The last thing you need is one car to be overtaking and then pull back in, in front of the cars in front, because that braking event will then cause everybody to start to slow down, which will then compress the traffic, which then causes an incident."

Say no more...




Motoring journalist Quentin Wilson said he also believed taking away driver control was a "really, really bad thing". "Remotely policing the roads from satellites in the sky - I would worry about it an awful lot."


Another thing would be that you are been tracked 24/7... and we know the goverment are unable to keep anything a secert...

In my eyes.... its the Big Brother state of the UK at it again.... if its not save the world, save this... stop this... tax this.. increase tax again... then fines.. its something new...

Rant over..:biglaugh: :beerchug:

I have set up a VOTE -- Will be intresting to see the results...


Rick

[tlionhart]

I don't think speed is always a major problem on our roads. A lot of it is lack of concentration...motorways for instance. Your going along at 70mph...senior drivers (not all, but some who are in their 70+) go along at 45mph in the middle lane. Their reactions are just as slow as a new drivers.

I don't always think young drivers should be blamed in all circumstances. Some drivers, who have been driving for 15+ years, no points on their license get stuck in their own stubborn way.

i think education is the better form. However, how many drink drive campaigns a year are there? People still go and do it. All i say is they have been told, i have no sympathy for how they feel after they kill someone. Same with people who use mobile phones.

They can offer a solution, but will never tackle this even near 75%

How about re-testing every 20yrs? Most jobs that require a health and safety aspect get refresher courses and exams in their employment relevant to their field of work. Why not driving? Also during this re-test you have another medical. The only problem is cost...some people can't afford their car let alone re-testing.

It all comes to one thing at the end of the day.... statistics. Im sure RTA's caused by un-insured drivers, provisional holders, cars that are nicked make some of that percentage?

But like a post mentions...speeding is one of the UK's biggest tax stealths. With this in place the government would be screwed.

[kite]

is it not just an updated cruise control ?

[tlionhart]

yes...

[Eshrules]

part of this is the time old debate of speed causing accidents, we all have our ideas on that one...

the main reason for speeding fines and implementation of the billion and one speed cameras within the UK has already been identified in this thread, the gov't would not want to elminiate the need for speed cameras, I shudder to think where they'd re-source their lost revenue from. (of course, we all know it's 're-invested' into the UK road system ;) )

I personally think this is both a non starter and a poor idea. It is necessary, under some circumstances, to increase your speed, sometimes beyond the speed limit. We're all guilty of going about our journey a little more briskley on ocassion.

IMHO, if the gov't want to reduce accidents, or rather, their causes, the age limit for obtaining a license needs to be increased, the length of time required before being able to take the test increased and a 12 month 'curfew' placed upon new drivers, that's just for starters :p

[Col]

Great idea if they RAISED the speed limits, otherwise NOPE !

Not talking about urban 30mph limits, for the most part t30 can be to fast.

[audipersempre]

Oh yes! Having an 18 year old daughter, 17 year old step daughter and experience of their friends driving accidents I absolutely agree. Raise the age limit for driving, increase the time before taking a test, make the test more difficult.

The curfew one is difficult. My daughter works as a waitress at a hotel where she quite often finishes at 11pm or even midnight. Not sure a curfew is very practical.

Many may complain about the extra costs of more lessons, a longer test etc etc. From personal experience I can tell you the post test accident costs are significantly more expensive :(

[zollaf]

i find it remarkably easy to stick to the speed limit. its that old speedo in front of me that does the trick. i am quite capable of looking at it and this helps me to stick to the limit. i do not need anything electronic or satellite controlled to assist me.
over the xmas break i had to leave my peaceful pembrokeshire and head to wolverhampton to visit the other halfs family. this is one of the worst places to drive. cameras every hundred yards, making me feel very uneasy at being watched. but very few signs to tell you how fast you can go, and road markings that really could do with a fresh lick of paint so that you can see them. i find it difficult to approach a major roundabout, unable to make out the arrows and not knowing which lane i should be in. this is far more dangerous than going over the speed limit a little bit. if only the local council would spend a few bob filling in potholes, painting road markings and putting up speed limit signs. but no, put all the dosh into more speed cameras.
thing is, even if your car is limited to 30 in a 30, it will not stop the idot driving along, on the phone, reading the paper, doing his makeup <not sexist !!!>. it just means they wont have to look at the speedo. just drive flat out everywhere without a care in the world, leading to more accidents.

[paul b]

Why can't I vote for...

DON'T BE FLAMING STUPID!!!

?

As many have pointed out in this thread, being restricted to 70mph on a motorway is dangerous. This would put some drivers into what I can only describe as a 'lull', and they would lose concentration.

And as Rick says, imagine you're going round a bend, maybe you hit 41mph or 51mph instead of 40 or 50... and the car hits the brakes! Jesus, that could put people in trees!

On the age thing as Mr Audipersempre mentioned, about increasing the minimum age for drivers, I don't think this is necessary. I do think it is necessary to make driving tests more difficult, there are so many liabilities on the road. For instance I've just bought my son the Octavia, he will be 17 in late March, I've high hopes he will be a good driver, and he needs a car to get to and from college, a 35 minute drive in todays traffic. We worked out it would cost me in excess of £1k (!) in bus fares over the course of a year (which is less than buying, maintaining and insuring a car I admit) but he will obviously want to drive in future, and if he doesn't start now then it will be detrimental in future. Experience is what he and many young drivers need. This can't be said for the 80 odd year old OAPs who drive at 40mph on a motorway... no offence intended its just a stereotype.

Rant over... the idea is ludicrous!

Paul

[Ben]

its bad enough being limited in my truck.

speed doesn't kill, its the impact.