Poll of the Day > People who are at fault in accidents that back up the freeway

(+) Yeah! (+)

adjl posted...

While true, that's a pretty useless statement. If you want to decrease accidents, you need more specifically-targeted measures than "you should all stop making mistakes," and that means identifying specific risk factors. Speeding is one of the varieties of human error that contributes to accident rates. Designing cars to be unable to exceed local speed limits is one way to address that, thereby reducing accident rates.

Man, the goalposts sure have shifted since the beginning of this topic. Mostly due to sunny derailing it like he often does with his ignorance. We were proposing ideas earlier in the topic that address human error. Fines, stricter testing and revoking licenses were a few of those. I think deterrents like this would decrease the overall level of negligence and human error. I dont think anyone in the topic are against other ideas for reducing the amount of accidents though. Accidents on the interstate are incredibly dangerous. If you cause one, the status of your license should absolutely come into question

SunWuKung420 posted...

Speeding is being negligent. Clearly, many people can't control themselves from treating the roadways like a NASCAR race, so stop making cars that can speed. Oh wait, less accidents and less speeding tickets means less profits.

Accidents aren't profitable, ya dingus.

Speed in a straight line on a clear stretch of road on a dry, sunny day is going to hurt nobody, speed is not the issue. The issue is idiots who think they can blast through a blind corner or floor it in a thunderstorm. Speed accidents are from drivers not knowing how to handle speed so this can be negated much easier by limiting quick cars to those who have experience with advanced road handling (say, those who complete a National B race event cleanly.

adjl posted...

It does, however, make them less likely and less severe when they do happen.

Because accidents are totally unavoidable and people never have loooooong ass no-claims.

adjl posted...

So limit their speed some other way. Every new car on the road has a computer in it, and that computer can very easily do that.

Not everyone drives a new car, particularly not those careless enough to crash one.

adjl posted...

If you want to decrease accidents, you need more specifically-targeted measures than "you should all stop making mistakes," and that means identifying specific risk factors.

Ban those with low IQ from driving.

adjl posted...

Speeding is one of the varieties of human error that contributes to accident rates.

Speed is not an error.
---

Well since I'm still at work now staying over because of the morons that wrecked this morning causing me to come in late...I just thought I'd mention I'm still all for them dying...painfully.
---

OhhhJa posted...

Accidents on the interstate are incredibly dangerous.

Slower speeds would help that.

OhhhJa posted...

sunny derailing

I totally changed the subject and started attacking people.

OhhhJa posted...

Fines, stricter testing and revoking licenses were a few of those. I think deterrents like this would decrease the overall level of negligence and human error.

Current levels of possible bodily harm, car damage, and criminal penalties for "being caught while driving negligent" haven't done a thing to curtail aggressive, unsafe driving.

I'm a safe driver. I wish everyone else maintain a safe distance and speed, stop completely, watched constantly for pedestrians and generally paid much more attention to what the fuck they are doing. But they don't. So limit the available speeds of cars. Most commuters/travelers/semis don't even need to be doing 80mph at all, ever.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Most commuters/travelers/semis don't even need to be doing 80mph at all, ever.

lol k bro
---

Execution should only be for those who commit homicide or torture.

But yeah, some of the willfully dangerous people that cause major accidents and backups should get a decent jail term and massive fines.

streamofthesky posted...

Execution should only be for those who commit homicide or torture.

A several hour tailback is mass torture.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Most commuters/travelers/semis don't even need to be doing 80mph at all, ever.

lol k bro

75 and above should be reserved for emergency vehicles and police.
---

DrYuya posted...

...They seriously need to be arrested or executed.

Yeah yeah I know there's going to be the whiney virtue signalers here who say otherwise and talk about the importance of life and all that dumb crap...but these people are literally making thousands late for work and costing everyone hours of thier life, just so they can be inept worthless drivers. They dont deserve human rights.

Why are you trying to get young SJW women executed.

The last 4 accidents I had with them as they rear ended me while live streaming, was very kind of them to provide the proof it was their fault while they screamed curse words at me and acted like I almost killed them.

SunWuKung420 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Most commuters/travelers/semis don't even need to be doing 80mph at all, ever.

lol k bro

75 and above should be reserved for emergency vehicles and police.

Fast lanes should be 100mph.
---

Kyuubi4269 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Most commuters/travelers/semis don't even need to be doing 80mph at all, ever.

lol k bro

75 and above should be reserved for emergency vehicles and police.

Fast lanes should be 100mph.

At least there won't need to be an execution when a huge, traffic stalling accident happens.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Kyuubi4269 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Most commuters/travelers/semis don't even need to be doing 80mph at all, ever.

lol k bro

75 and above should be reserved for emergency vehicles and police.

Fast lanes should be 100mph.

At least there won't need to be an execution when a huge, traffic stalling accident happens.

Less likely to hit the fishtailing caravan when you're near it for less time.
---

They should definitely have DRAMATICALLY increased fines for causing traffic and dangerous road conditions as a result of their accident. Everyone hates traffic. And if you are on the freeway, of all places, and backed up for hours because some asshole wanted to aggressively merge at the last second and caused an accident...yeah. That fucker should pay. A lot. Extra. For the inconvenience he just caused thousands of people behind him.

Enforcing these increased fines might motivate a lot of people to stop driving like maniacs.

Key word: might.

But it's worth a try.
---

Insanity: "Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result"

Or, thinking that increasing the penalties for driving like an inconsiderate asshole will actually do anything when they've never been a deterrent before.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Insanity: "Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result"

Or, thinking that increasing the penalties for driving like an inconsiderate asshole will actually do anything when they've never been a deterrent before.

Fairly sure people would stop after year long prison sentences.
---

SunWuKung420 posted...

Or, thinking that increasing the penalties for driving like an inconsiderate a****** will actually do anything when they've never been a deterrent before.

So you've resorted to talking out of your ass now? Increased fines and regulations have absolutely made an impact before. Crackdowns on seatbelt use and drunk driving for instance made a huge impact. I've also seen a lot more phone docks in cars since states started implementing the hands free law.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

SunWuKung420 posted...

Insanity: "Doing the same thing over and over again, expecting a different result"

Or, thinking that increasing the penalties for driving like an inconsiderate asshole will actually do anything when they've never been a deterrent before.

Fairly sure people would stop after year long prison sentences.

Comments from the Gestapo gallery.
---

OhhhJa posted...

Man, the goalposts sure have shifted since the beginning of this topic.

Not really. The issue is people driving poorly. Discussing ways to improve that isn't shifting anything.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Because accidents are totally unavoidable and people never have loooooong ass no-claims.

You said yourself that stopping speeding wouldn't stop accidents. Accidents are always going to happen. Not everyone is going to have one that they're responsible for, but citing the idealistic goal of 0 accidents as a reason not to pursue any sort of harm reduction strategies is just silly.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Not everyone drives a new car, particularly not those careless enough to crash one.

Any mechanical control is indeed going to require a lengthy phase-in process. Mandate a limiter's inclusion on all new vehicles, and require one to be installed on the vehicle of anyone who racks up a certain number of speeding tickets (similar to interlock systems for repeat DUI offenders), and you'll have a decent chunk of the vehicles on the road limited within 10-15 years.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Ban those with low IQ from driving.

I don't think mathematical and linguistic reasoning skills have much to do with driving ability. Or are you one of those people who's clueless enough to think that IQ is a comprehensive measure of intellectual and physical ability?

Kyuubi4269 posted...

Speed is not an error.

It is when it isn't safe to speed.

Kyuubi4269 posted...

lol k bro

He's not wrong. Why do you think you need to speed?

OhhhJa posted...

So you've resorted to talking out of your ass now? Increased fines and regulations have absolutely made an impact before. Crackdowns on seatbelt use and drunk driving for instance made a huge impact. I've also seen a lot more phone docks in cars since states started implementing the hands free law.

Just increasing fines doesn't do much. Increasing enforcement, on the other hand, does. If people don't think they're going to get caught, it really doesn't matter what the penalty is (see: non-zero 1st degree murder rates in places with the death penalty).

It is also worth noting that the examples you're citing can be attributed as much to cultural changes as to crackdowns. Entire generations have grown up with the ideas that wearing seatbelts is good and driving drunk is bad, and that's shaping the overall societal attitudes on the matter, including a growing number of options for getting home after drinking and a certain degree of respect for DD's. Similarly, as it becomes less acceptable to use a phone while driving, the market has responded by offering convenient hands-free options. People generally accept that all of those things are bad ideas, so if avoiding them is convenient and socially encouraged, they'll jump on that bandwagon.

By contrast, people generally accept that speeding is bad, but tend to feel that they're competent enough that they can handle it even if others can't. There also hasn't been that cultural shift against speeding yet. Enforce it more reliably, and maybe you'll get somewhere. Until then, people will just complain about how unfair their occasional ticket is and go right back to speeding.
---

I haven't read the whole topic yet, but execution seems like a major over reaction. It is an accident. You act like they are doing it everyday. But it would probably be the only time they back up the freeway. It is an accident. Maybe there boss made them stayed for extra hours and they were more tired than they thought. Or maybe a passenger did something that distracted them. Or a hornet of something got in the car and scared them(maybe they are like dealy allergic). Anything can cause the accident. But it still is an accident. A huge fine is ok. Execution is idiotic.

Troll_Police_ posted...

5 year tests, and actually make the tests you know... tests

I feel like if this were the case, there would be a lot of people driving without licenses and probably insurance... Plus, the time it took would be insane. Back home, I remember first getting my license took hours. And even here, people are constantly there trying to get a new license, renew ones that are about to expire, and getting CDLs. And it this case, it's just people getting it once. Imagine everybody there having to take it every 5 years. It would be an insane wait. And not everybody has that kind of time. And if they had that sort of practice for getting a license, you'd probably have to show the insurance company, and so people wouldn't have insurance. I feel 5 year renewal test(that were actually test) would just make everything worse. Unless the actual test were how people drive. The test they have don't really reflect how people actual drive.
---

adjl posted...

You said yourself that stopping speeding wouldn't stop accidents. Accidents are always going to happen. Not everyone is going to have one that they're responsible for, but citing the idealistic goal of 0 accidents as a reason not to pursue any sort of harm reduction strategies is just silly.

Speed has no effect on accidents, it's like banning forks to stop stabbings. Don't throw about restrictions that don't do anything. Stop accidents by dealing with negligence.

adjl posted...

Any mechanical control is indeed going to require a lengthy phase-in process. Mandate a limiter's inclusion on all new vehicles, and require one to be installed on the vehicle of anyone who racks up a certain number of speeding tickets (similar to interlock systems for repeat DUI offenders), and you'll have a decent chunk of the vehicles on the road limited within 10-15 years.

1) Not all though.
2) Won't stop crashes.
3) Cars can be legally be driven off-road, how do you account for that?
4) FUCK OFF, SPEED IS NOT A HAZARD IN AND OF ITSELF.

adjl posted...

I don't think mathematical and linguistic reasoning skills have much to do with driving ability. Or are you one of those people who's clueless enough to think that IQ is a comprehensive measure of intellectual and physical ability?

Spacial reasoning, major part of how people negotiate the world around them, people with poor spacial reasoning have low IQ as it is one of the areas of the test.

Also low IQ people are hard work so I'd like them punished.

adjl posted...

It is when it isn't safe to speed.

And 70mph was a safe underestimate in the 60s. Cars are immensely more agile and stable and can stop faaar quicker than any test claims now. Worse case scenario you could mandate a minimum brake force and tyre contact patch.

adjl posted...

He's not wrong. Why do you think you need to speed?

To get anywhere quicker? Can you imagine how many fatalities would be avoided if truck drivers could make their deliveries without becoming delirious from lack of sleep?

adjl posted...

There also hasn't been that cultural shift against speeding yet.

lol
---