[Boosted_ST]

Originally Posted by Bad Anvil Garage

Elections have consequences folks! See what's happening in Europe and wake up. Y'all best be careful not to elect more of the crazy Democrat (socialists are taking over the party) in the USA or we'll be done for good. Seriously. Vote for freedom, not more government!!

Stepping down off my soapbox.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by JamesNoBrakes

Well, it's either that or imposing real license testing, recurrent testing, making old people take tests and those that fail lose their license. The problem with cracking down on driving is "but my personal freedumbs!". Groups like the AARP would never let congress pass laws to increase the testing requirements for old people...because they're all old people, so unfortunately we get into this stalemate, because all people, old and young, want to play with their phones and the internet rather than drive. You see it at every stoplight. Again, congress won't pass a bill mandating the cell phone companies turn off the phones while driving (except for perhaps 911 function), because again, "but mah personal freedumbs!". So again, stalemate, all the while, pedestrian deaths reach a new high while drivers get worse and worse as a whole.

Put the blame where it belongs, on the people. Lawmakers are given a shitty situation where people don't want to curtail the activities causing the problem, won't relinquish any of their "freedom" to drive without serious testing and recurrent testing, and what choice do you have besides to let people die, or use technology to fix the issue with self driving cars, automatic limits, etc.?

As technology increases and gives people more power (cell phones), we find that people as a whole are unable to utilize that technology responsibly.

You shouldn't increase the test for requirements for old people. There should simply be a test that you must pass to get and maintain a license to drive. I can assure you there are many young people that couldn't pass whatever test you are imagining older people should take that is different from everyone else. And to be clear, replace the words "old people" with either sex, any race or religion you choose. See how that sounds to you?

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by Number 3

You shouldn't increase the test for requirements for old people. There should simply be a test that you must pass to get and maintain a license to drive. I can assure you there are many young people that couldn't pass whatever test you are imagining older people should take that is different from everyone else. And to be clear, replace the words "old people" with either sex, any race or religion you choose. See how that sounds to you?

I didn't take it as make the test harder for older people. I took it as increase in how often they get tested to make sure they are still safe to be driving on the road.



Just last night was following a person who going straight was fine( hence why I am ruling out drunk driver), but moment the road curved, would slow down to 15 MPH and yet still could not maintain their lane and swerve into turning lanes, etc( this was at night) suggesting they probably couldn't see the paint well. Never got a look at the driver so I can't confirm it to be a person probably in their late 70's into 80's, but the behavior suggests it and certainly shows no matter age despite suspicion of it being an older person this driver has no right to be behind the wheel of a car as they can't operate it safely.

[Number 3]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

I didn't take it as make the test harder for older people. I took it as increase in how often they get tested to make sure they are still safe to be driving on the road.



Just last night was following a person who going straight was fine( hence why I am ruling out drunk driver), but moment the road curved, would slow down to 15 MPH and yet still could not maintain their lane and swerve into turning lanes, etc( this was at night) suggesting they probably couldn't see the paint well. Never got a look at the driver so I can't confirm it to be a person probably in their late 70's into 80's, but the behavior suggests it and certainly shows no matter age despite suspicion of it being an older person this driver has no right to be behind the wheel of a car as they can't operate it safely.

If you are impaired in any way, you shouldn't be behind the wheel. And your impairment may simply be your inability to master the simple art of using your turn signal.

A lot of poor drivers around. At least most of the elderly I see are simply rolling chicanes. It's the idiots running lights and stop signs and people that would run you off the road rather than properly merge that worry me. And those are simply people with bad skills and poor judgement. Their impairment is between their ears.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

Just last night was following a person who going straight was fine( hence why I am ruling out drunk driver), but moment the road curved, would slow down to 15 MPH and yet still could not maintain their lane and swerve into turning lanes, etc( this was at night) suggesting they probably couldn't see the paint well. Never got a look at the driver so I can't confirm it to be a person probably in their late 70's into 80's, but the behavior suggests it and certainly shows no matter age despite suspicion of it being an older person this driver has no right to be behind the wheel of a car as they can't operate it safely.

At 71, I certainly agree that that driver should not have been on the road at that particular moment in their life.

But since you didn't see the driver it could have just as easily been a 20-something or a 30-something more interested in whatever was on his/her phone than on driving. There's more than one possible stereotype that fits here.


Norm

[ChevyRules]

Originally Posted by Norm Peterson

At 71, I certainly agree that that driver should not have been on the road at that particular moment in their life.

But since you didn't see the driver it could have just as easily been a 20-something or a 30-something more interested in whatever was on his/her phone than on driving. There's more than one possible stereotype that fits here.


Norm

I agree could have been that too. Drivers suck period. Could throw countless more examples from my commute home Friday night about the idiots I saw. Drivers Ed in general needs vast improvement and testing requirements need to become stricter for all. As someone else put it, as it is today it's like you get your drivers license out of a cereal box. All I had to do for my drivers test on a closed course was parallel park, k turn, back up straight, and stop at a stop sign. That was it.



On another forum, there was some talk about no speed limit areas on highways like the Autobahn. Accidents here in the US would sky rocket if that happened. Partly due to the poor conditions of the roads here, but also due to the horrible skill of the drivers and their lack of lane discipline, selfishness of each driver, inability to drive the car vs looking at their phones, and their lack of situational awareness. Works in Germany because they know the left lane is for passing, they know it is the slower traffic responsibility to move over to the right lane, etc.

[AKI.SILES]

Originally Posted by ChevyRules

I agree could have been that too. Drivers suck period. Could throw countless more examples from my commute home Friday night about the idiots I saw. Drivers Ed in general needs vast improvement and testing requirements need to become stricter for all. As someone else put it, as it is today it's like you get your drivers license out of a cereal box. All I had to do for my drivers test on a closed course was parallel park, k turn, back up straight, and stop at a stop sign. That was it.



On another forum, there was some talk about no speed limit areas on highways like the Autobahn. Accidents here in the US would sky rocket if that happened. Partly due to the poor conditions of the roads here, but also due to the horrible skill of the drivers and their lack of lane discipline, selfishness of each driver, inability to drive the car vs looking at their phones, and their lack of situational awareness. Works in Germany because they know the left lane is for passing, they know it is the slower traffic responsibility to move over to the right lane, etc.

I have my doubts. Lately I travel around the center of Europe and I have seen in the Autobahn many crazy things like overtaking on the roadside, vehicles over 200km / h with works and especially highways collapsed by the huge traffic, accidents that could have been avoided with good maintenance of the road, etc, etc, In this globalized world, as a rule, who is disciplined tends not to be.

[AKI.SILES]

In Spain, as a rule there are no tolls on the highways, we have more of 15,000km of highways with two or more lanes in each direction, is the third country in the world with more km in this type of roads, behind USA and China, apart from other almost 110,000 km on conventional roads, some almost deserted and others collapsed, the limit is 120km/h un higways, and 90km/k in the other.
There is a great debate because there are elections and the current government wants to charge tolls in all, having been built with public money, given that those built with a private sector are bankrupt and have had to be rescue by the administration. It has been proposed by various motorist associations that private toll prices rise and there is no speed limit, the liberal/progressive parties have put the cry in the sky, as if something like this was not happening.
In general, I have not seen crazy things like GERMANY, but it is not known what would happen, however, there is one that I usually travel and everyone exceeds 200km/h and nothing serious has ever happened. So I think that when the speed limit was established in the decade of the 80s and now the same, the only purpose that was pursued is the collection by fines.

[cellsafemode]

A 150 mph speed limiter isn't going to impact basically anyone. Most cars are already limited to close to that because almost no tire is rated for close to 200mph and pretty much all production cars are limited to the stock tire rating.

So all the outcry over this possible law is kind of over reacting. I'd be far more concerned with the use of transponders, and cameras, and wasting police manpower in enforcing the arbitrarily slow road speed limits in more and more places since that is usually applied to the public unfairly and not as a safety measure, but as a poor person tax. That actually impacts real people as apposed to traveling over 160mph

[Biscuit.fr]

My guess
Not really a safety device or the way they think about that,
They just want to make money that’s it!
Every year you have this F... technical control!!!!
Now they increased the price of this one,
They increased the number of points they have to check
(To make sure there is more failure...)
They increase the price of the counter visit after you fixed what’s wrong
....
So this forced limited control speed device ?
Another stuff you have to pay in order to be conform to the law
More money...

[DevilsReject97]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

A 150 mph speed limiter isn't going to impact basically anyone. Most cars are already limited to close to that because almost no tire is rated for close to 200mph and pretty much all production cars are limited to the stock tire rating.

First, this isn't a 150 mph speed limiter. This would be a limiter that actually prevents you from traveling 60 mph in a 55 mph zone... which is dangerous in its own right. More to the point, if you truly need these kinds of systems, you've done a piss poor job of training people to drive/operate vehicles.

Secondly, there are several tires that are rated for close to 200 mph. Just because companies electronically limit them doesn't mean the tires don't exist. Most companies are simply limiting them based on the old premise of 149 mph being the top rated speed on tires. However, tires do exist that exceed that speed rating considerably.

[Jeb114]

Originally Posted by cellsafemode

A 150 mph speed limiter isn't going to impact basically anyone. Most cars are already limited to close to that because almost no tire is rated for close to 200mph and pretty much all production cars are limited to the stock tire rating.

So all the outcry over this possible law is kind of over reacting. I'd be far more concerned with the use of transponders, and cameras, and wasting police manpower in enforcing the arbitrarily slow road speed limits in more and more places since that is usually applied to the public unfairly and not as a safety measure, but as a poor person tax. That actually impacts real people as apposed to traveling over 160mph

No your missing the point what Europe wants is when the GPS indicates you are speeding the engine fuel will be restricted to slow you down. Not just a Bell or Buzzer and this to be programmed in the ECU no fuse. It seems the auto builders are trying to fight it. The governments of the world are trying to remove Freedom from the Dictionary.

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by DevilsReject97

Secondly, there are several tires that are rated for close to 200 mph. Just because companies electronically limit them doesn't mean the tires don't exist. Most companies are simply limiting them based on the old premise of 149 mph being the top rated speed on tires. However, tires do exist that exceed that speed rating considerably.

People have become so afraid of risk (in any amount) these days that I'm sure there are cases where a car's speed capability is intentionally held further below its tires' rated capability than absolutely necessary just to provide that little extra margin of safety.


Norm

[Norm Peterson]

Originally Posted by Jeb114

The governments of the world are trying to remove Freedom from the Dictionary.

"Governments" are still people. Who bring agendas with them that may or may not match yours/ours as car enthusiasts.


Norm