199
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Sep 2024
199 points (95.9% liked)
Fuck Cars
9640 readers
294 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 Civil
You may not agree on ideas, but please do not be needlessly rude or insulting to other people in this community.
2. No hate speech
Don't discriminate or disparage people on the basis of sex, gender, race, ethnicity, nationality, religion, or sexuality.
3. Don't harass people
Don'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 topic
This community is about cars, their externalities in society, car-dependency, and solutions to these.
5. No reposts
Do 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:
- [meta] for discussions/suggestions about this community itself
- [article] for news articles
- [blog] for any blog-style content
- [video] for video resources
- [academic] for academic studies and sources
- [discussion] for text post questions, rants, and/or discussions
- [meme] for memes
- [image] for any non-meme images
- [misc] for anything that doesn’t fall cleanly into any of the other categories
Recommended communities:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sounds like NHTSA recommended the veto so we don’t end up with competing standards.
Good move, IMO. For a system as large as this, with severe safety implications, you really don’t want to start on the wrong foot.
We all be walkin' here. GET OUT (I kid)
It’s a car’s world, we’re just walkin in it.
The article doesn't say that the NHTSA asked Newsom to veto, just that they were working on a similar regulation.
It sounded like the car companies just wanted him to veto it so they could keep reckless drivers as a customer base.
The proposed regulation only kicks in at 10 mph over the speed limit (ie reckless driving and deadly to pedestrians)
It's weird to see 10mph considered reckless driving.
In California, 10mph over is the slow lane.
If you hit a pedestrian going 35 on a 25 mph neighborhood street, the majority of the time, that pedestrian will die. Probably closer to like 70% if you're driving a truck. Going 10 over in pedestrian areas kills people.
https://aaafoundation.org/impact-speed-pedestrians-risk-severe-injury-death/
To be fair, going 10 over on a highway isn't as reckless.
In residential I tend to go around 15-20 instead of the posted 25. I'm almost never in a hurry. I drive a 20 year old 2 seater convertible sports car, not a truck.
I was talking about highways. Posted speeds are 65 for the vast majority of them. Many are 5 lanes in each direction. If you go 65, you will be passed by 99% of traffic, including semi trucks. Most traffic is going 75-80mph and it's not uncommon to have the entire freeway cruising around there. At 65, you may be following the law, but you become an obstacle. I've been on highways on Sundays where traffic is flowing almost at 90mph. And I don't mean a few cars weaving, I mean almost everyone.
California freeways can be nuts.