Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb
-
@Gurth said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Heavy goods vehicles in the EU are limited to, IIRC, 90 km/h, and that frequently leads to one overtaking another at a crawl (relative to the one being overtaken), blocking anyone else from overtaking the two of them on a four-lane dual carriageway.
And then the road goes up a bit of an incline and everyone gets to go even slower! Yay! Actually, the problem was so acute on a stretch of the A42 between Birmingham and Nottingham that the authorities had to ban trucks from the fast lane on one hill (an incline that's a couple of miles long). Which would be fine except for the occasional dipshit idiot who thinks that obeying the law is really an optional thing so far as they're concerned.
-
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
s in, you pay someone money and they admit to having driven your car at the time the infringement was made.
Shows that fines are too small. Nobody's going to do a false confession without making a profit out of it…
-
@dkf the fine for running red light is IIRC 300zł (about 10-20% of a typical single person's monthly income), so I guess they're fine. It's more about that we have a score system where each ticket adds points to your score (between 1 and 10, for red light it's 6), and if you get 26 points you lose your driver's license and it takes months to get it back.
-
@FrostCat said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
There's a reason Dallas shut off most of the red-light cameras after only a year or two--they weren't generating any revenue, because people were drastically cutting down on red-light running.
Really? "Fuck the greater good, it's not generating any money"?
-
@JBert Fuck off, you commie bastard!
-
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
It's more about that we have a score system where each ticket adds points to your score (between 1 and 10, for red light it's 6), and if you get 26 points you lose your driver's license and it takes months to get it back.
Our points system is a bit stricter (and uses a different scale because of course it does ) so it's hard for someone to play that game as much.
-
@Rhywden said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
You state that you did not know who was driving the car. You now have to go the station to prove (using the photo) that it indeed wasn't you driving the car. If you can prove that using the photo you now don't have to pay. However: You most likely are now required to have a driver's logbook in the car which details who drove where and when.
Here in Czechia everybody was excusing that they didn't know who was driving. So they added to the law that the owner must know. From that point, everybody switched to saying that their close relative was driving and that they refuse testimony to avoid incriminating close person. Thud! That's a constitutional right and constitutional court already said it won't allow any workarounds for it.
So they changed it so that the owner might be fined if the driver can't be ascertained, but for the more serious punishments (suspending driving license, points towards suspending driving license) they can recognize you on the photo or they can go fuck themselves.
Why doesn't this work in Germany? I would expect it to—you have a logbook, but you won't turn it over because that might incriminate your close person—or you don't have that right?
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@dkf the fine for running red light is IIRC 300zł (about 10-20% of a typical single person's monthly income), so I guess they're fine. It's more about that we have a score system where each ticket adds points to your score (between 1 and 10, for red light it's 6), and if you get 26 points you lose your driver's license and it takes months to get it back.
Ditto. Why doesn't excuse for not incriminating close person work? That's how we avoid points in Czechia.
-
@Bulb said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Here in Czechia
Is it official already? Cuz I heard Czech govt wants to make this name official.
-
@Bulb said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Why doesn't excuse for not incriminating close person work?
Because in Poland you can do this only in criminal cases, and driving like moron isn't crime.
-
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Is it official already? Cuz I heard Czech govt wants to make this name official.
As far as I understood, yes, they finally (after something like 20 years since it was first proposed) did.
-
@Onyx said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@JBert Fuck off, you commie bastard!
It's just that it sounds less like decent government and more like literal highway robbery.
Didn't commies call it something different?
-
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Because in Poland you can do this only in criminal cases, and driving like moron isn't crime.
If it was, you'd have to lock the whole country up!
-
@JBert nah man, I agree, I'm just preempting the inevitable with a shitty joke. Probably didn't work, but I'm bored, so
-
@Lorne-Kates Do you know black boxes are already a thing? The insurance company makes up its own definition of good driving, which you can go along with in exchange for lower premiums.
-
@Bulb said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Why doesn't this work in Germany? I would expect it to—you have a logbook, but you won't turn it over because that might incriminate your close person—or you don't have that right?
You have no rights to deny handing over the logbook if you have been ordered to keep one.
-
@Zecc said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
There's plenty of situations where you need to go fast to overtake someone going slow.
You never need to overtake, traffic isn't a racing game
-
@groo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
You never need to overtake
- life or death situation, driving someone to the hospital or something
- the person in front is driving like such a lunatic that you know they're going to crash, and badly. Your survival chances are far higher if you're not behind them when that happens
-
@Jaloopa said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
the person in front is driving like such a lunatic that you know they're going to crash, and badly. Your survival chances are far higher if you're not behind them when that happens
In such cases, you usually can't even catch up with them, let alone overtake.
-
@Zecc said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
There's plenty of situations where to overtake someone going slow you need to go fast.
There. Rearranged the words for you.
-
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
In such cases, you usually can't even catch up with them, let alone overtake.
There other types of lunatic too.
-
@Jaloopa said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@groo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
You never need to overtake
- life or death situation, driving someone to the hospital or something
- the person in front is driving like such a lunatic that you know they're going to crash, and badly. Your survival chances are far higher if you're not behind them when that happens
- Someone has rigged a bomb to your car and it will blow up if your car goes slower than the speed limit.
-
@groo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
You never need to overtake, traffic isn't a racing game
Do you ever drive out of city and/or highways? Because there's, like, you know, tractors and shit. And they move very slowly.
-
@Onyx said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
tractors
Also old gimmers who wear a cap in the car and who are pulling a caravan in a vastly underpowered car.
-
@dkf Bonus points for adjusting their seat so they can barely see over the dash.
-
@Bulb said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Why doesn't this work in Germany? I would expect it to—you have a logbook, but you won't turn it over because that might incriminate your close person—or you don't have that right?
We do, but there's a difference between not testifying and preventing the police from collecting evidence (i.e. obstructing law enforcement).
-
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Because in Poland you can do this only in criminal cases, and driving like moron isn't crime.
Maybe that as well.
-
@Onyx said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@groo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
You never need to overtake, traffic isn't a racing game
Do you ever drive out of city and/or highways? Because there's, like, you know, tractors and shit. And they move very slowly.
I'd like to point out that the original statement was "in order to overtake I'd need to go above the speed limit."
If you need to go over the speed limit to overtake a tractor then you're probably in a 50kph zone. Where overtaking is usually a bad idea in pretty much any case.
-
@dkf said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
In such cases, you usually can't even catch up with them, let alone overtake.
There other types of lunatic too.
Usually they're going half the speed limit, swerving all over the place, and holding up traffic at green lights because they're so engrossed in their cell phone screen they apparently don't realize they're driving a vehicle. Or they keep passing, pulling in front, and slowing down, and you just want to get the hell away from them before you fall into road rage.
-
@mott555 said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
engrossed in their cell phone screen
Or they had a liquid lunch in a local bar.
-
@Rhywden I was not responding to that in particular in this case. But fine, if you want my response regarding overtaking in general, yes, I've done it at speeds near speed limit and then drove barely faster than them.
For reasons, see examples of erratic drivers above. Also, fuel economy. I've been in situations where I'm pretty happy with the speed myself, but it was some weird not-quite-suitable-for-any-gear speed, which means I'd drive at either too high or too low RPM for the given engine. In such cases, yes, I may have been over the speed limit for like 30 seconds while overtaking.
-
@dkf said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
In such cases, you usually can't even catch up with them, let alone overtake.
There other types of lunatic too.
A couple months ago, on my way home from work, some idiot in a pickup kept swerving all over the place. Nearly hit me and two other cars besides. I got his license plate number, then passed safely in front of him and called 911 and reported him for DUI, because he was either drunk or something equally bad.
-
@dkf said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
It mostly gets it right, but occasionally doesn't
When "it doesn't", do you get a $500 fine, have you insurance premiums increased, and lose your license?
-
If you truly want to improve road safety, here's two simple steps.
- Raise (not lower) the speed limit on all highways (not city traffic) by 10 MPH. Most of our current speed limits were established decades ago according to the limits of contemporary technology, and car safety has improved by leaps and bounds since then. Aggressive behavior will decrease once the car in front of you is going faster.
- Direct police and courts to treat tailgating exactly the same way as drunk driving.
-
@Gurth said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Hell, they're almost as effective as just putting up an empty box that says "red light camera".
Around where I live, maybe 15 years ago they installed speed camera boxes at various points along a main road, but with only a few cameras that were installed in different boxes every couple of days. Not sure how effective this scheme was, since the boxes were removed again some years later.
Speed cameras are shit and any politician who votes them in should be driven out on a railway spike.
They're buggy, inefficient, and inaccurate for all the reasons discussed above. They can't tell the difference between two cars close together. They require extreme calibration and maintenance or they give false positives. They don't account for the inaccurate speed measurement devices that drivers have available to them. They have to "human error" forgiveness factor for if someone sneezes, hits the gas and goes 5kmph over the limit for 3 seconds. They're put in predatory locations to prey on changing speed limits.
They're the exact opposite of red light cameras in every way.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
When "it doesn't", do you get a $500 fine, have you insurance premiums increased, and lose your license?
Almost. It blinks at me annoyingly when I drive at 27mph in a 30mph area. The oppression is unbelievable!
-
@Gąska said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Fun fact: ever since Poland introduced the show-who-was-driving law for speedtraps and red light cameras, the confession market has grown rapidly. As in, you pay someone money and they admit to having driven your car at the time the infringement was made.
See, this is why you need to relax your immigration / refugee laws. Not only will you have more people willing to do this service, but you can also have one person confess multiple times because all brown people look the same.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Speed cameras are shit and any politician who votes them in should be driven out on a railway spike.
They're buggy, inefficient, and inaccurate for all the reasons discussed above. They can't tell the difference between two cars close together. They require extreme calibration and maintenance or they give false positives. They don't account for the inaccurate speed measurement devices that drivers have available to them. They have to "human error" forgiveness factor for if someone sneezes, hits the gas and goes 5kmph over the limit for 3 seconds. They're put in predatory locations to prey on changing speed limits.
They're the exact opposite of red light cameras in every way.dunno what shitty speed cams you have up there, but down here the sensors are actually buried in the road, and the camera is just for taking a photo of your license plate. these sensors work well AFAIK
-
@Lorne-Kates We have a couple of sections of 'traject controle', where they snap a photo at two points 5-30km apart, determine what your average speed was, and ticket you based on that.
For some reason those systems still need to be recalibrated every year or so, which seems to take 4 months.
-
@groo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
dunno what shitty speed cams you have up there, but down here the sensors are actually buried in the road, and the camera is just for taking a photo of your license plate. these sensors work well AFAIK
The radar spot-check cameras are tricky, but the ones which measure an average speed over a measured stretch of road (e.g., half a kilometre) are really quite reliable. And automated number plate readers are so much better than they used to be…
-
@groo and how exactly do those sensors account for different vehicle lengths or number of axles?
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
#7 - Limit the RPM-- what the dumbfuck are you talking about? How the shit would you even do that without forcing everyone to buy a new car? I've never once heard of RPM limiting tech on a car. Did you just make this up? Did you just make it up because you don't LIKE NOISY CARS? Holy fucking shit. So you want to introduce new, unproven, possibly faulty tech that may fuck everyone over (I'm pressing gas and nothing's happening CRASH), because some noise bothers you? You do know there are already laws on books for things around this-- excessive noise laws-- road-worthy (damaged mufflers)-- dangerous/stunt driving for acceleration-- jumping the green-- leaving tire rubber behind during unsafe operation of a vehicle. Jesus fucking christ man, when @lorne-kates is giving you an you've gone too far.
First off, I agree with you on all the points, but most cars limit their RPM anyway just to save the engine and also to limit top speed to either self-imposed standards or to the capability of the tires. If you were to hold down your throttle to wide open, you might notice it start to cutout or misfire instead of dangerously over-revving. A similar thing happens when you hit the top speed limited. It is all part of the engine management system, and these are parameters that can be changed. Also, this is very old tech that has been around for a long time. The first steam engines had mechanical governors that limited their speed.
Hell, even my gokart I had when I was young was RPM limited. It was a bit of a rite of passage to rural boys to learn how to take off all the safety stuff that was meant to keep you from injuring yourself. But on modern cars you can adjust these parameters up or down by reflashing the engine management system.
-
@clatter said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Do you know black boxes are already a thing?
Yes, and you're an idiot if you sign up to have one of those in your car.
@clatter said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
The insurance company makes up its own definition of good driving
Exactly. It's inexact, undefined, and who knows what that black box is measuring, or how, or how accurately. And no matter, it certainly isn't up to the science-fiction level "black box" from the original article.
which you can go along with in exchange for lower premiums.
HAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA... haaaaaaaaaa.... HAHa... aha.
Oh good one. I'm sure insurance companies are just falling over themselves to shell out money for hardware that they have to buy, deploy and maintain-- just so that they can make less profit. Because if there's one thing insurance companies are WELL KNOWN for, it's their excellent customer service and hatred of earning money.
There's only two possible scenarios for them wanting to put a box like that in your car. Both are equally likely, and in fact both are probably happening simultaneous:
- They're just waiting for something to happen that the black box can detect, and using that to jack up your premiums and/or deny you a claim
- They're sucking up MASSIVE amounts of PII. They already have your demographics (address, age, gender, income, preferred car type, etc). Now they can correlate it GPS data-- where you like to go, for how long, etc. That's the sort of ultra-pure, high-end analytics that ad companies snort off the ass of a Japanese hooker.
-
@groo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@Zecc said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
There's plenty of situations where you need to go fast to overtake someone going slow.
You never need to overtake, traffic isn't a racing game
What was this downvoted? It's true.
The very rare instances where you need to pass are when someone is going significantly slower than traffic. Let's say half the speed limit or less. In that case they're either:
- A piece of farm equipment. They have signs saying "goin slow srry". There's plenty of room to pass them without exceeding the speed limit.
- A disabled or in distress car. Their four ways are on. You can pass them at the speed limit.
- A car going slow because of adverse road conditions (snow, heavy fog, etc). You shouldn't pass them you fucking moron, there's a reason they're going slow.
Maybe once in a blue moon you're get behind a vehicle going the speed limit, but it's dangerous to be behind them-- let's say they have insecure cargo in their back that might fall on you. You CAN pass them. But if they're going the speed limit, slow down for a second, make sure there's a huge safe following distance between them and you, and you're good.
-
@anotherusername said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@groo and how exactly do those sensors account for different vehicle lengths or number of axles?
Dunno, but I don't hear people complaining about false positivies here. Maybe longer vehicles would appear slower to it and get away with speeding.
-
@Jaloopa said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
@groo said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
You never need to overtake
- life or death situation, driving someone to the hospital or something
- the person in front is driving like such a lunatic that you know they're going to crash, and badly. Your survival chances are far higher if you're not behind them when that happens
- Call emergency services. You aren't an ambulance. You aren't trained to drive like one, and other drivers aren't expecting you to drive like one. You're more likely to get someone else injured or killed than to save someone.
- See above. You slow down and put a huge gap between you and them. You can see them, you can avoid them. You have 10-30 seconds of reaction time. If you pass them, congratulations, you're now likely to be rear-ended.
-
@masonwheeler said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
I got his license plate number, then passed safely in front of him and called 911 and reported him for DUI, because he was either drunk or something equally bad.
That is exactly what nearly any LEO will recommend you do. There are even exemptions in most cell phone laws to allow dialing 911. Dashcam footage and/or passengers with a camera is appreciated.
Drivers who get enough reports will even get a visit at home from a friendly officer.
In some places, schoolbus drivers are authorized to record people running past buses with their signals on, and can file a report directly with the police. Who will issue a ticket.
-
@masonwheeler said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Direct police and courts to treat tailgating exactly the same way as drunk driving.
Physics. You don't get it ignore it because you own a BWM.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
You aren't trained to drive like one,
lol... trained to drive like one. They're not trained. They're 10 dollar an hour kids fresh on the job site and just thrown the keys.
It's their sirens, and the laws about getting the fuck out of their way, that makes them safer.
With that said... yes, emergency services is usually the best option. No one knows you're driving with a hurt person, so no one knows to get out of the way while your blazing down the road. You just look like an asshole.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
Call emergency services. You aren't an ambulance. You aren't trained to drive like one, and other drivers aren't expecting you to drive like one. You're more likely to get someone else injured or killed than to save someone.
Meh, that depends. A little over a year ago my wife gave birth to our second child in my vehicle while we were enroute to the hospital. It was 1:30AM and we pulled over and called 911.
They were completely useless. I made a judgment call that I could get to the hospital well before an ambulance were to reach us so the 4-ways went on and I sped to the hospital. I slowed down for red lights and when I deemed it clear and safe to proceed I went through them. In all likelihood, I made it to the hospital before 911 would have even contacted an ambulance.
You may have complete faith in emergency responders. I do not.
-
@Lorne-Kates said in Idiot comes up with stupid demands for "safe driving" that even @Lorne-Kates says are idiot dumb:
That is exactly what nearly any LEO will recommend you do. There are even exemptions in most cell phone laws to allow dialing 911.
I sure hope we don't have any laws against what my car does. The computer syncs up with Bluetooth, and if I'm in trouble, I hit a toggle on my steering wheel and wait for the computer prompt, then I say "Dial 9-1-1" out loud, and it connects me, with a microphone in the cabin and relaying the other end of the call through the car stereo. No need to take my hands off the wheel or my eyes off the road at any point.