this post was submitted on 27 Apr 2025
97 points (92.2% liked)

Fuck Cars

11666 readers
655 users here now

A place to discuss problems of car centric infrastructure or how it hurts us all. Let's explore the bad world of Cars!

Rules

1. Be CivilYou may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.

2. No hate speechDon't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.

3. Don't harass peopleDon't follow people you disagree with into multiple threads or into PMs to insult, disparage, or otherwise attack them. And certainly don't doxx any non-public figures.

4. Stay on topicThis community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.

5. No repostsDo not repost content that has already been posted in this community.

Moderator discretion will be used to judge reports with regard to the above rules.

Posting Guidelines

In the absence of a flair system on lemmy yet, let’s try to make it easier to scan through posts by type in here by using tags:

Recommended communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
97
Virginia will use technology to slow chronic speeders’ cars—and other states are rushing to join in (www.fastcompany.com)
submitted 3 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
23 comments fedilink hide all child comments
all 28 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] [email protected] 66 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

"Instead of using traffic calming to slow cars or designing cities properly so that people don't need to drive in the first place, let's violate people's privacy and property rights to forcibly install a tracking and speed governor device in their car because even when we've already suspended their license it's still somehow unreasonable to actually stop them from driving! Car-dependency and car-supremacy, fuck yeah!"

Everything about this is comprehensively despicable.

[–] pc486 7 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

While I agree in principle, this change is a win and I hope more states legalize this method.

We give breathalyzer lockouts to DUI convicted citizens. Why? Because they'll drive anyway. You can pull licenses all you want, but when driving is required to live, the people will drive. And they'll do it even when they're a raging alcoholic.

A speed monitor / limiter is a tool for a judge to use. Judges don't have the power to pull city, state, and federal money and force building better street designs. I don't believe they should have that power as political issues should not be addressed by a single branch of government. That's how we got here after all: cities dictating minimum parking, civil engineers pushing terrible designs and refusing to change them, fire departments mandating minimum lane widths, etc.

However, judges do have the power to remove a person's property and privacy rights. Ergo a good judge will restrict a convicted person's rights in a way that could feasibly prevent societal harm.

Judges can remove a person's right to drive too, as can doctors and other civil servants, but that usually ends in death. Literally.

[–] [email protected] 20 points 3 weeks ago (2 children)

We give breathalyzer lockouts to DUI convicted citizens. Why? Because they’ll drive anyway. You can pull licenses all you want, but when driving is required to live, the people will drive. And they’ll do it even when they’re a raging alcoholic.

Frankly, if we're going to be fucking with people's property rights anyway, I think it would actually be better public policy to confiscate the whole car. First of all, it forcibly creates another pedestrian, and therefore increases public support for non-car infrastructure. Second, asserting this right to control parts of people's property and prohibiting them from modifying it without taking it away completely creates this weird "in-between" kind of ownership that leads to creeping expansion of infringement and has bad implications for things like Right to Repair, etc. I mean, you proved my point yourself: (paraphrased) "we already do it for breathalyzer lockouts, so that must mean it's okay." When does it end?

Judges can remove a person’s right to drive too

That has never been a right, except on private land that the driver owns. Driving in public has always been a privilege.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 weeks ago

I think it would actually be better public policy to confiscate the whole car.

This is what Denmark does for egregious speeding. Doesn't matter if it isn't your car or it's registered in another country. That car was driving way too fast? State property now.

[–] pc486 1 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago)

Frankly, if we’re going to be fucking with people’s property rights anyway, I think it would actually be better public policy to confiscate the whole car.

I agree and would happily vote yes for any measure adding such language to our state and federal laws.

Property seizure, especially with cars, is already a big part of many (all?) state's law for unpaid taxes and debts. All we would need to do is tack on speeding ticket/points/whatever to allow the state to quickly and easily seize cars.

When does it end?

When we can get our act together to pass and enforce such laws. Until then I'll take any legislative actions that restrict car drivers.

We can be angry about proposed laws not going far enough, but trying to stop good progress in the name of perfection will allow drivers to continue terrorizing the streets. This is especially true in purple and red states, but it'll be a fight everywhere (California is desperately in love with cars).

That has never been a right, except on private land that the driver owns. Driving in public has always been a privilege.

That's why I pointed out a doctor and other civil servants have the same power. We can argue about semantics, but the answer remains the same: a judge can revoke your driver's license and is empowered for much more, like confiscating your property, sending you to jail, and removing your ability to vote.

I highly recommend reading the link I left in my earlier comment. It seems you haven't read it. Although perhaps I should include a trigger warning: traffic violence by a driver in a brand new truck who had their license revoked multiple times by a doctor and a judge.

When does it end?

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago

Absolutely but....

We do need some cars, for sure. And with that roads and rules. When those rules say that they highest speed in the country is, say, 120pkh, then why the hell is even the shitties car able to somewhat easily reach 200 or better cars even up to the high 200s?we don't need cars that can reach those speeds, because nobody is allowed to drive at those speeds, so why the hell can just about all cars reach those speeds?

Just make it forbidden for any car to exceed 130kph to begin with.

Then also indeed design your damned roads correctly

If you do want to drive over 120, go drive on a race tracking cars that are now allowed on the streets

[–] [email protected] 19 points 3 weeks ago (4 children)

I recently rented a huge truck (the biggest you can rent with a normal car drivers license) and it had a ton of high tech stuff, lane departure warning, speed warnings, auto braking, and so much more.

The issue was when I was on the highway going 70mph (the max speed of the truck, also artificially restricted) there was a tiny side road with a speed limit of 35mph, and the truck on the highway slammed the brakes with warnings on the dash that I was exceeding the speed limit of 35, but I’m on a highway with a speed limit of 75mph.

Stupid technology. Makes things more dangerous than it should be.

[–] [email protected] 5 points 3 weeks ago

I got a loaner last time I had my car worked on that had all that shit on it and all the settings for shit hidden in touch screens. Had to drive 45 minutes home with no AC and the thing freaking out on me every time I had to dodge a pot hole or some shit in the road. When I came back to pick up my car they were like "So are you thinking about trading up now?" No, I'm less likely to do that than ever actually.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 weeks ago (1 children)

See it regularly here, especially when the overpass is a regular road. Cars slamming on the brakes on the highway at an overpass isn't great.

Also concerned, and honestly expecting, this will be primarily applied to visibly ethnic groups (aka not white guy in a suit)

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 weeks ago

Article specifically says the tech does not affect braking

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 weeks ago* (last edited 3 weeks ago) (1 children)

There’s gotta be a “subscription fee” for these speed limiters for every month they’re installed foe the offender. Fees to install them. Fees to remove them. Fees for the convenience of the ability to make electronic payments. Then there’s the fine for speeding in the first place, the convenience fees to pay the fine, the fee for the traffic safety course online to avoid higher insurance rates, etc.

The State is being enshittified by privatization. It’s not as if the State isn’t difficult enough to deal with on its own, but now the layers of shitty middle men existing to extract tolls for every interaction is growing.

Edit: after looking around I found this program is called “Intelligent Speed Assistance” (ISA).

Looks like it’s far more widespread than anyone thinks.