[beardicus]

lots of "freedom"-loving pushback on this law here. sorry y'all, we live in a society and your actions affect others. you choosing to endanger my life on the road does not make me more free.

i think these speeders should just lose their license to drive forever, so maybe choose to view this law as a compassionate compromise.

[gregoriol]

A lot of things are more dangerous than going over speed limits, and it will not be possible to prevent everything with technical gadgets.

[op00to]

So let’s just do nothing! Why bother doing anything!

[const_cast]

Yes, this is exactly my problem with this type of reasoning.

You can make these arguments for anything. If we can't even get the most obvious low-hanging fruit because "aww it's slightly inconvenient" then we can't even DREAM of solving complex problems.

This new "we've tried nothing and we're all out of ideas" mentality towards policy is so toxic. That's the only guaranteed way to not solve a problem! It's an anti-solution!

[gregoriol]

Sometimes not solving a problem could actually be better. We have to try new things, I do agree, all the time. But every time you change something, you also create ways for new problems.

[const_cast]

I agree with this, too. But institutions and systems need constant maintenance and tweaking. Like code, they rot in the face of an ever-changing society.

[op00to]

I do not believe the US or VA constitutions guarantee a right to exceed speed limits. No idea what freedom they’re talking about!

They should go further than license removal. Owning a car that can drive on public roads should be illegal for habitual, feloniously dangerous speeders. Selling or renting a car to someone who is not allowed to own a car any longer should also be punishable.

[JasserInicide]

This is 100% a political issue. Instead of introducing privacy-violating software, we could instead institute massive policing campaigns to curb speeding. But that would require actual effort by police, something they don't want to do.

[wpm]

Policing in a country filled to the brim with private firearms and a lot of people desperate to avoid serious consequences makes "massive policing campaigns" often lead to high-profile deaths.

Chicago tried to put cops in the CTA stations/trains and within weeks a man accused of "walking between CTA cars", techically a forbidden thing but commonplace and relatiely victimless, was shot in the back fleeing.

It's a political issue but really a design issue. Unfair speed limits do color our perception of speed limits in general, because they are often not set correctly for the design speed of the road, but are set correctly for the present danger certain speeds in that context exhibit. It is a warranted, justfied emotional reaction to the speed limit; we feel fine driving the design speed, yet are punished for making the road "unsafe". It's entirely reasonable to doubt it. The design speed should match, and even be slightly lower, than the intended speed limit of the road.

Also in Chicago, recently a 25mph speed limit failed to pass in the city council. I was all for it, but saddened the ordinance did nothing to demand local, county, and state DOTs to redesign roads. I live next to a very wide, four lane road with middle turn lane. The blanket speed limit in Chicago is 30mph. The road I live next too feels downright comical at 30mph. Everyone does 40 because it feels natural to do that. But at 30mph, I might die if I get hit crossing that road. At 40, it is all but guaranteed.

[shlant]

yea there are some wild hypotheticals being thrown around in the comments with one of my favorites being "what if you're drinking and you have to speed to escape a wildfire but have a breathalyzer in your car?". Jeeze I guess we really should just do nothing instead.

[Lammy]

> y'all