Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It doesn't matter- it's just another law that won't be enforced. How often do we see trucks pulled over by police- very rarely.
It will be enforced because the companies will regulate the trucks not allowing a trucker to drive over a certain speed limit. Before anyone thinks that is a great idea, we had that happen to our vehicles when I was an MP. It didn't last long because it only took a bobby pin to break in to the stupid thing and disable it, and rather than bring us all up on charges, they abandoned the stupid idea.
Regulating vehicles is very unsafe, but that is what companies are doing already, and will be doing to all those trucks out there if the government gets away with this.
You all thought trucks on the road was a pain in the arse as it is? Wait until one trucker tries to pass another in a regulated truck and it takes him 4 miles to get around.
You all don't want this, truckers don't want this...only the lobbyists want this.
In that future I will be dead or they will be for forcing it.
I actually want to die before we get to that sort of thing. I simply won't have a place there. The world I grew up in, thrived in, will be gone. I don't see a reason I'd subject myself to the kind of cognitive dissonance that will result. I don't want to stand in the way of "progress." For my sake and for that brave new world's sake the best course of action, I believe, will be to take an early exit.
the problem is not the truckers, they are getting the short stick because of the icc. the problems are the car darting in and out, high speeds in rain, slow speed on interstates, talking on phone, texting and just plain being stupid
You will have access to what rations government wants you to have access to. You will have zero freedom, zero independent choice, zero reason to even exist. Zeitgeist is a fraud of tyrants and elitists. (the same as any form of anti-human anti-freedom tyranny wearing the costume of collectivism) It is computerized dictatorship and slavery of the human race...
Imagine the beauty of having all of the vanilla ice cream that you ever wanted, but then realizing that you actually want chocolate...however the computers, the majority, or the State decided vanilla was for everyone...
You will have "access" to the shackles provided to you
Utilization of passenger vehicles currently is in the 4% range. That is, the average car in the US spends about 96% of its time just sitting, turned off. Autonomous, shared vehicles could be utilized at a level of magnitude greater percentage of the time.
Yes they could and unlike taxi's it may even be cheap if you don't do a lot of traveling.
Retaliatory force is the only just form of force. "Regulations" and presumption of guilt (or liability) "crimes" before the fact are abominations. "Speeding" in and of itself, until an accident actually occurs, is a fictional "crime".
All actual crimes, initiations of force, are committed by those who breathe. We could "regulate" and "fight" these future crimes by making breathing illegal.
I cannot agree that speeding untill an accident occurs is a fictional crime. It is clearly against the law to drive beyond the posted speed limit---accident or no accident. If ALL drivers had proper judgement and consideration we could do without most motor vehicle regulations.
If ALL drivers had proper judgement and consideration we could do without most motor vehicle regulations.
That is never going to happen in real life. Every summer, when highway construction usually adds delays to the daily commute for most of us, the only answer the bureaucrats can offer is "allow more time to travel to work" -- which often is not easy for young adults with families and a complicated work/life balance.
It's the same with additional traffic legislation and/or restrictions dreamed up by ivory-tower bureaucrats -- people who often have never taken the time to understand what it takes to meet a tight schedule and negotiate any number of unanticipated obstacles in the process.
I worked in and around both trucking and railroading at various times over my 43-year career; can attest that tight as things are, the pressure to cut corners and flout well-intended "safety" measures was a lot stronger back in the Seventies when I was starting out.
There is plenty of proof -- most notably in a reduction of about 1/3 in highway fatalities since the 1960's -- that an overall safety effort pays off; the objections on the part of the people involved in, and affected by the process arise almost entirely due to the detachment from reality of those who propose "one size fits all" regulations.
IMHO speed regulation should be accomplished by law enforcement officers. I can testify that in Fl. and many other areas speeding and some other violations go accepted and tolerated. I have heard that among police personnel trafic duty is considered the bottom of all duties. They would rather be in persuit of "bad men"when in actuality the bad --s in the speeding cars kill and maim more people than violent criminals.
I can not drive one mile from my home without seeing someone going faster than everyone else or weaving in and out and getting away with it every time they get behind the wheel. Tailgating is common practice. Commercial drivers should not be singled out--law enforcement can and should detect the violators and remove the smart --ses from our roadways.
I cannot agree that speeding untill an accident occurs is a fictional crime. It is clearly against the law to drive beyond the posted speed limit---accident or no accident. If ALL drivers had proper judgement and consideration we could do without most motor vehicle regulations.
It is not a real crime. If no one has been harmed, there is no victim, thus there is no crime. Speed however does increase one's liability if a victim does materialize from that liability. Just as someone lighting a match is not an arsonist until his flame burns down someone's property, lighting a match is not a crime against anyone. You are free to think otherwise, but if there is no victim, there is no crime...
I will grant you that speeding does increase one's liability, and IF they cause damage while speeding their punishment should be increased beyond that which someone driving at slower speeds would receive.
But we all know that victimless "crimes" or assumption of future guilt "laws" (regulations) are only created to destroy human freedom or to extort wealth from people...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Speed Regulation
