A new Illinois law will target so-called “super-speeders,” requiring them to install speed-limiting devices in their vehicles if they commit multiple road violations.
As someone who doesn’t even look at his speedo, I don’t like it but it’s technically the law. But I do think there are other driving laws that are more important they don’t ever enforce. Like driving in the left lane on the interstate or highway for 46 fucking miles ect.
Some years back I read a short article about looking for a reason for “pop up traffic jams” - you know, the ones that don’t seem to have a cause and just disappear when you get to a certain spot.
He seemed genuinely surprised when he learned that most jams are caused by drivers going the speed limit in the left lane(s). He thought this was “okay” and “following the law”, but discovered it’s supposed to be used for passing, not “hanging out”!
The good thing is he learned his lesson and encouraged the readers to actually follow the law about passing lanes. The bad news is that this was a revelation at all. When I see comments like yours I involuntarily relive that rage I had when I read that “who’da known?” article.
Seems I was the only one reading that day.
For my part, I tend to be in the left lanes because I’m constantly pulling out to pass (people can’t seem to maintain consistent speed or find the cruise button), so when I’m there, I just keep an eye on the rear-view mirror and pull over if someone is gaining on me.
I can see why people may be worried about these. But if your choices consist of blatant disregard for other people’s lives, and actively putting them at risk, then… yeah, maybe you shouldn’t have the ability to make them.
Oh don’t get me wrong I agree with it in principle for that circumstance. The problem is these things never stay in those conditions. Utilization creeps. It starts with let’s protect the children let’s protect the innocent, and pretty soon nobody can do what they want anymore.
Besides, that’s what the laws are for and they should have their license revoked or they go to jail.
Put another way, as Ben Franklin once said, those who would trade freedom for safety deserve neither.
This particular case seems to me like putting a breathalyzer in an impaired driver’s car. These aren’t toys, they’re dangerous machines that we’re doing nothing about being built more dangerous by the year. If someone egregiously breaks the law and gets a limiter as punishment I’m okay with it like I’m okay with a breathalyzer.
My point is that in a few years, all of a sudden, limiters will be mandated in every car (but not actively used). Some years after that, a law will pass that forces all cars to be limited to the posted speed limit.
This is the “You have nothing to worry about if you have nothing to hide” fallacy.
It’s not an issue of whether, under certain circumstances, it is justifiable for certain individuals. The issue is the erosion of personal freedom and privacy that it enables and will eventually occur.
For example, EZ-Pass was marketed as an optional choice to speed up your travel on toll roads. The tracking and use of that information was a side effect never discussed, but periodically showed up when someone who did something wrong was tracked, found, and arrested because of it.
Now on most of those roads, EZ-Pass is effectively mandatory as there are no payment lanes and thus your license is photographed and a bill is sent in the mail.
Total surveillance. No avoidance. Now Flock cameras are going up everywhere, so you can’t even avoid tracking by staying off those highways.
Do you see what I’m describing? Cars have GPS and Cell radios and now car companies are selling your telemetry to insurance companies, who use it to raise your expenses whether or not you actually cost them anything.
They’re peddling “safety” through us giving up privacy (and by extension, freedom).
Is anybody else noticing there’s an awful lot of these news articles about technology being set up to take away our ability to make choices?
As someone who doesn’t even look at his speedo, I don’t like it but it’s technically the law. But I do think there are other driving laws that are more important they don’t ever enforce. Like driving in the left lane on the interstate or highway for 46 fucking miles ect.
Some years back I read a short article about looking for a reason for “pop up traffic jams” - you know, the ones that don’t seem to have a cause and just disappear when you get to a certain spot.
He seemed genuinely surprised when he learned that most jams are caused by drivers going the speed limit in the left lane(s). He thought this was “okay” and “following the law”, but discovered it’s supposed to be used for passing, not “hanging out”!
The good thing is he learned his lesson and encouraged the readers to actually follow the law about passing lanes. The bad news is that this was a revelation at all. When I see comments like yours I involuntarily relive that rage I had when I read that “who’da known?” article.
Seems I was the only one reading that day.
For my part, I tend to be in the left lanes because I’m constantly pulling out to pass (people can’t seem to maintain consistent speed or find the cruise button), so when I’m there, I just keep an eye on the rear-view mirror and pull over if someone is gaining on me.
I can see why people may be worried about these. But if your choices consist of blatant disregard for other people’s lives, and actively putting them at risk, then… yeah, maybe you shouldn’t have the ability to make them.
Not speaking to you directly. Just in general.
Oh don’t get me wrong I agree with it in principle for that circumstance. The problem is these things never stay in those conditions. Utilization creeps. It starts with let’s protect the children let’s protect the innocent, and pretty soon nobody can do what they want anymore.
Besides, that’s what the laws are for and they should have their license revoked or they go to jail.
Put another way, as Ben Franklin once said, those who would trade freedom for safety deserve neither.
This particular case seems to me like putting a breathalyzer in an impaired driver’s car. These aren’t toys, they’re dangerous machines that we’re doing nothing about being built more dangerous by the year. If someone egregiously breaks the law and gets a limiter as punishment I’m okay with it like I’m okay with a breathalyzer.
My point is that in a few years, all of a sudden, limiters will be mandated in every car (but not actively used). Some years after that, a law will pass that forces all cars to be limited to the posted speed limit.
This is the “You have nothing to worry about if you have nothing to hide” fallacy.
It’s not an issue of whether, under certain circumstances, it is justifiable for certain individuals. The issue is the erosion of personal freedom and privacy that it enables and will eventually occur.
For example, EZ-Pass was marketed as an optional choice to speed up your travel on toll roads. The tracking and use of that information was a side effect never discussed, but periodically showed up when someone who did something wrong was tracked, found, and arrested because of it.
Now on most of those roads, EZ-Pass is effectively mandatory as there are no payment lanes and thus your license is photographed and a bill is sent in the mail.
Total surveillance. No avoidance. Now Flock cameras are going up everywhere, so you can’t even avoid tracking by staying off those highways.
Do you see what I’m describing? Cars have GPS and Cell radios and now car companies are selling your telemetry to insurance companies, who use it to raise your expenses whether or not you actually cost them anything.
They’re peddling “safety” through us giving up privacy (and by extension, freedom).