Theorherjonv for president.
Alternatively make everyone drive a 1.4 auto polo.
You can just about overtake a bike with a run up. So you drive everywhere super chill.
I don't really understand why it shouldn't be the case that all new cars come with towards and backwards cameras which are always on and can't be switched off.
I use it all the time. I set it to an indicated 33 around town, which is an actual 30mph verified by GPS. It’s not perfect, it occasionally craps itself when passing parked cars or “undertaking” vehicles which are in right-hand lanes waiting to turn, but I’m used to that now and aside from that foible it’s great. How is your overridable limiter preferable to my adaptive cruise? Will it slam on the brakes if the car in front does an emergency stop?
"Better"? Dunno, you're previous point about wanting to be able to stomp over the posted limit was about needing to be in "control" wasn't it? I have no excuses if I run someone over or fail to brake in time, but if that happens I definitely wasn't speeding which is the only point of the limiter TBF, it doesn't absolve me of responsibility, neither does your cruise control, they're both "Driver aids"...
But it still sounds like you'll let a computer and a radar system that occasionally "craps itself" decide if you breeze through town or heave on the anchors at Random, sort of the opposite of you controlling the vehicle's speed for yourself, I'm still not sure why you're so against having a limiter, it's not like your averse to letting the toys have input on your driving? I'm pretty sure braking assist is also available without enabling cruise control, at least on some cars.
I still don't know why I need to be able to speed for safety yet either...
I do wonder which one of us would have the easier time with the attending officer when we both inevitable kill a Child's face to death; The one having to explain that his cruise control was set above the posted limit cos his GPS said it was fine, or the one who had enabled his limiter?
Let's just both carry on testing our theories in the real world shall we?
Alternatively make everyone drive a 1.4 auto polo.
My middle-aged sensible driving epiphany had a double cause - one, seeing the difference in increased mileage and decreased stress by setting off early, not having to race the clock and just take it nice and easy, and two, driving an automatic Volvo estate. It wasn't a slow car but somehow.... it just makes you drive slow. 🙂
for me the answer is dashcams. I am surprised at how slowly insurance companies are making folk have them. Dashcam for free and lower insurance if you fit it.
That way after collisions ( they are NOT accidents) its easy to see who is at fault.
If I bought a car the first thing I would do is fit a dashcam
There's ongoing work for black boxes (AKA Event Data Recorders) to be fitted to an international standard. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Event_data_recorder
for me the answer is dashcams.
dashcams make you angry or only angry people use them one or the other.
I don’t really understand why it shouldn’t be the case that all new cars come with towards and backwards cameras which are always on and can’t be switched off.
Now this, I'm happy with. I think (most) people will (mostly) behave when they know they are being watched.
for me the answer is dashcams. I am surprised at how slowly insurance companies are making folk have them. Dashcam for free and lower insurance if you fit it.
You assume that a dashcam will more often than not absolve the driver of blame. I suspect insurers are less confident about that - at least until virtually everyone has them - they will show the mistakes you make as well as others. Their 50/50 claims suddenly might have evidence you were are fault and none that I was.
For insurers dash cams are probably a zero-sum game. They would prove as many policy holder culpable as they would exonerate.
Judging my most of the dash cam footage you see online (admittedly its probably a biased sample) people with dash cams don't drive anymore safely then anyone else.
