Would you give up some freedom for safety? As a motorist, would you be willing to have your vehicle electronically limited to only 10 mph over the limit to stop the scofflaws that endanger our public roads by travelling at breakneck speed? A California politician believes so.
In the US, the total number of car accident fatalities is estimated to be 42,939, with California alone representing 4,407 traffic deaths in 2022. The federal government’s National Highway Traffic Safety Administration estimates that 1/3 of traffic fatalities are speed related. The statistics are startling; car crashes killed more people than homicides in Los Angeles last year.
In light of these disturbing statistics, a bill that would eliminate speeding on California roads was introduced into the legislature this past week. State Senator Weiner’s Bill 961 would require all cars built or sold in California by 2027 to be equipped with a speed governor. For example, cars on a freeway with a 70 mph limit could only blast up to 80 mph to enable passing. And on quiet residential streets where kids play, the 25 mph limit could be broken by only 10 mph before vehicle speed would be electronically retarded.
Of course, certain vehicles would be exempt; ambulances, fire trucks, LAPD and California Highway Patrol would be entrusted with the discretion to disable speed governors. Although not mentioned in Bill 961, driving a ‘street car’ on a race track would not be impacted; oval tracks, road courses and drag strips are private property and not public roads which are subject to speed limits.
Weiner’s package of bills, dubbed SAFER California Streets (Speeding and Fatality Emergency Reduction) is not expected to pass without opposition. There was public outcry in 1968 when American motorists were legally required to wear seat belts. Again in 1992 when California motorcyclists were mandated to wear helmets, freedom loving Americans cried foul. But in the decades since, have we not come to see the benefit to society of enforcing minimum safety requirements?
“We have speed limits, and they exist for a reason. And it’s perfectly reasonable to say you can’t travel more than 10 miles over the speed limit. That’s what this bill will do. It’s very reasonable, and it’s an idea whose time has come.”
State Senator Weiner
Bill 961 is ambiguous as to how speed limits would be enforced. Would it require use of ‘active’ speed governors, which employ a GPS signal and cameras to determine if a vehicle is speeding, then electronically slow the vehicle (as if by remote control) before it goes 10 mph over the limit? Or would California follow the European Union’s lead, using ‘passive’ speed governors which emit an alarming buzzing sound to warn drivers that they’re exceeding limits, but quite toothlessly do not slow vehicles down. The EU’s new rules kick in as of July 2024.
No freedom loving (North) American wants to have Big Brother’s foot on the brake pedal. Yet the daily news shows us yet another speed-demon caught going double or triple the maximum speed limit on public roads. The same roads where we drive our kids to school.
As much as motorists love the freedom imparted by the automobile, has the idea of automatically limiting vehicle speeds truly arrived? But perhaps we should be concerned about what freedoms will be curtailed next.
I’m sorry but that is truly a wiener of an idea. I don’t even speed (much) but I dislike the idea of the govt deciding for me. My vote is Nay.
I drive plenty: on public roads for work, and also on race tracks for fun.
.
I just cannot believe how poor most driver’s skills are. Combine that with speed and it makes even ME … a freedom loving motorist…wonder if speed limiters are a goo idea.
.
And I truly hate to say that. Because once Big Brother controls how fast I can drive, what will he try to control next? Will he stop me from visiting high-crime areas if I wamt to buy hard drugs (just an example).
Good thoughts. That does seem to be the issue with Big Bro — the slippery slope of where it leads.
I know my example is ‘out there’. But the point is that government controls and surveillance must be kept in check.
.
This ‘speed governor’ idea caught my interest, because people will voluntarily give up their God-given rights in the name of safety. That seems to be the trick.
Let’s control how fast you can go but hey, if you wanna buy an assault rifle and enough ammo to start a war, you are free to do so. (maybe not in California, though).
I guess I’m too much of a sheltered Canadian to have thought of that gun analogy.
.
Guns and ammo? No problem.
.
Drive fast? Government mandated satellite tracking device on your car, reducing your speed by remote control.
.
Here’s something else to think about; how long it would take for this to have an impact. For example, it’s quite common for drivers to keep their cars for 8-12 years nowadays. That means that is the law in Cali is passed, by 2040 still nearly 50% of cars on public roads would not have governors.