Cars and traffic safety

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

evo video (2:22)

I always loved the intensity Senna displayed when either racing are talking about racing. The fact that he was far calmer in every other context made that intensity even more palpable.

From what I can tell, the accident that claimed AS' life occurred because he pushed his car before his tires had a chance to warm up enough to lift the chassis to a point where he had enough airflow-generated traction for the turn he was attempting. (The other theory is that he had insisted that the the steering post be shaved down because he wasn't getting as much feedback from the front as he liked. So when he turned the wheel the post snapped and the car went straight into the wall.)

Here's a video (5:58) explaining the accident.

Senna is the last F1 driver to have died behind the wheel, an incredible engineering achievement given the size and weight of these cars, the speeds, tracks and level of competition involved.

Speeding kills. It is well the the spectators are protected from the Speed Freaks.

ruveyn

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

Fortunately, human beings have free will so it's not a lock that people driving such cars will act irresponsibly. In addition, we have law enforcement to deter reckless conduct.

Law enforcement only kicks in after the fact. I drive my car in New Jersey where the drivers tend to be vicious and irresponsible. I see Free Will in action every day on the N.J. Turnpike and at times it scares the living bejaysus out of me. I am not totally in favor of giving Speed Freaks an instrument of death to be used on public highways. Ultra fast cars should be licensed to run on private speedways where the public is not endangered.

Look up what happened to New Jersey's ex governor Jon Corizine who was nearly killed when he had his driver (a New Jersey state cop) drive his executive chariot at 91 mph in a 65 mph zone on the N.J. Turnpike. Law enforcement to prevent driving stupidity is closer to a joke than a useful thing.

I would like to see drivers licensed as thoroughly are airplane pilots. Then we would have fewer deaths caused by fast machines.

the privilege of driving is not a legal carte blanch to endanger the lives of others

ruveyn

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

But it's not meant for ordinary use. And I assure you that the Pagani is a very, very practical way of experiencing a variety of thrills, everything from high build quality, to cutting edge tech, to ludicrous speeds, to exclusivity, etc.

In short, that Hot Chariot is like dope for the Speed Addicts. Toys for the Boys and Thrills to the Gills. I am happy that it is not affordable for the typical New Jersey driver. Life in N.J. is already dangerous enough. N.J. the Bidabing State where real life Tony Supranos live and whack their business competition and the drivers kill more frequently than the gangsters the the murderers.

ruveyn

[JohnRgt 0]

Hate to tell you, ruveyn, but $35K can buy you a car with about 500hp -- new! So you're already living in an environment in which people that want tons of power in their cars can have it for little or no premium. Yet, you're still in one piece . . .

[JohnRgt 0]

Law enforcement only kicks in after the fact.

You're not seriously advocating preemptive regulation, are you?

I drive my car in New Jersey where the drivers tend to be vicious and irresponsible. I see Free Will in action every day on the N.J. Turnpike and at times it scares the living bejaysus out of me. I am not totally in favor of giving Speed Freaks an instrument of death to be used on public highways. Ultra fast cars should be licensed to run on private speedways where the public is not endangered.

Aren't there steps that we could and should take before an Objectivist resorts to calls for preemptive regulation? (How about better roads, better training for all drivers, variable speed limits as a function of road quality or the type of license the driver has, etc?)

Look up what happened to New Jersey's ex governor Jon Corizine who was nearly killed when he had his driver (a New Jersey state cop) drive his executive chariot at 91 mph in a 65 mph zone on the N.J. Turnpike.

I once drove from Montreal to the middle of Nassau County, Long Island, in less than five hours. I never endangered anyone, never came close to killing myself. Citing individual examples doesn't get us very far, ruvyen.

Law enforcement to prevent driving stupidity is closer to a joke than a useful thing.

It's almost as effective as blocking the sale of hypercars . . .

I would like to see drivers licensed as thoroughly are airplane pilots. Then we would have fewer deaths caused by fast machines.

I like the standards of pre-EU West Germany. More importantly, though, private road owners would probably issue a range of licenses, some of which would allow people to regularly travel at speeds that are considered dangerous today. I suggest we advocate for that instead of coming our for even more joy killing legislation.

the privilege of driving is not a legal carte blanch to endanger the lives of others

Driving isn't a privilege, it's something we trade for. And no one claimed that any driver has the right to endanger anyone's life, so I don't see what you're countering in the above.

[JohnRgt 0]

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

You're not seriously advocating preemptive regulation, are you?

Not at all. I am only pointing out that law enforcement does not prevent a**holes behind the wheel from endangering prudent drivers. Over 40,000 people a year die in auto related accidents. Law Enforcement is useless.

The cops are crooked, stupid and negligent and act only to fulfill their quota of tickets. And who do they go after? Not the people doing 80 in a 60 mph zone, but the slow coaches doing 64 in a 60 mph zone.

my proposal is to license auto drivers as carefully as we license air plain pilots (I am a pilot so I know something about that). Compared to the number of miles travelled, the rate of fatality in air accidents is miniscule compared to the wholesale butchery that takes place and the highways and the back roads. And I do think we should restrict high performance automobiles to privately owned raceways, where the owners can set the safety standards.

I am all in favor of allowing thrill seekers to slaughter themselves as long as they do not endanger the more safety minded public. Toys for the Boys and Thrills to the Gills, but in private and away from us safe drivers.

ruveyn

[JohnRgt 0]

Not at all. I am only pointing out that law enforcement does not prevent a**holes behind the wheel from endangering prudent drivers. Over 40,000 people a year die in auto related accidents. Law Enforcement is useless.

First of all, unless you give us the top causes of highway deaths we have no way of knowing what to do with that number; left floating, it can just as easily represent a perfectly acceptable number of deaths/cars/trips/miles. Second, law enforcement is probably having an impact, it just isn't what it could be (of course, on a privatized road system, where you go on a roadway voluntary, there could and would be measures and rules enforcement that today's law enforcement simply can't even dream about.) Third, when you say you want high performance cars restricted to tracks, you are coming out for preemptive regulation, aren't you?

The cops are crooked, stupid and negligent and act only to fulfill their quota of tickets. And who do they go after? Not the people doing 80 in a 60 mph zone, but the slow coaches doing 64 in a 60 mph zone.

Historically, so-called professional speeders have the lowest accident rates among drivers. And I don't buy that police corruption is rampant or that they don't have good reason for chasing down the people they chase down. (The tickets I used to get were always over 90mph, at 3:00AM on near empty, out of state highways.)

Compared to the number of miles travelled, the rate of fatality in air accidents is miniscule compared to the wholesale butchery that takes place and the highways and the back roads.

I'm sure the licensing standards are a huge part of it. I'm also sure that there are aspects of flying that contribute at least as much to the impressive safety record aviation enjoys (and just to remind you: small plane safety isn't anywhere near what's taken for granted commercially.)

And I do think we should restrict high performance automobiles to privately owned raceways, where the owners can set the safety standards.

Why, though? You've yet to make the case for this point, even though you've stated it twice. (Look at the numbers, ruveyn. It isn't sports cars that are causing either the accidents or the fatalities.)

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

First of all, unless you give us the top causes of highway deaths we have no way of knowing what to do with that number; left floating, it can just as easily represent a perfectly acceptable number of deaths/cars/trips/miles. Second, law enforcement is probably having an impact, it just isn't what it could be (of course, on a privatized road system, where you go on a roadway voluntary, there could and would be measures and rules enforcement that today's law enforcement simply can't even dream about.) Third, when you say you want high performance cars restricted to tracks, you are coming out for preemptive regulation, aren't you?

Major causes: DWI, speeding, driving unsafe machines with defective tires, steering, lights and brake and people who think the speed limit is for the other drivers and drive from Montreal to Long Island exceeding the speed limit most of the way. Another major danger: unnecessary and excessive lane changes at high speed. That is one of the major illnesses afflicting New Jersey drivers. Driving skillfully is nice. But driving legally is more important. The speed limit applies to all. People who fancy themselves expert drivers are not excepted from obeying the traffic laws.

If the licensing of air plane pilots were as slipshod as the procedure for licensing automobile drivers, planes would be raining from the sky.

ruveyn

[JohnRgt 0]

First of all, unless you give us the top causes of highway deaths we have no way of knowing what to do with that number; left floating, it can just as easily represent a perfectly acceptable number of deaths/cars/trips/miles. Second, law enforcement is probably having an impact, it just isn't what it could be (of course, on a privatized road system, where you go on a roadway voluntary, there could and would be measures and rules enforcement that today's law enforcement simply can't even dream about.) Third, when you say you want high performance cars restricted to tracks, you are coming out for preemptive regulation, aren't you?

Major causes: DWI, speeding, driving unsafe machines with defective tires, steering, lights and brake and people who think the speed limit is for the other drivers and drive from Montreal to Long Island exceeding the speed limit most of the way. Another major danger: unnecessary and excessive lane changes at high speed. That is one of the major illnesses afflicting New Jersey drivers. Driving skillfully is nice. But driving legally is more important. The speed limit applies to all. People who fancy themselves expert drivers are not excepted from obeying the traffic laws.

If the licensing of air plane pilots were as slipshod as the procedure for licensing automobile drivers, planes would be raining from the sky.

ruveyn

You need more than one category of "speeding" for the numbers and trends you cite to mean anything. Bottom line in this exchange: people that collect an inordinate number of speeding tickets are among the safest risks insurers undertake.

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

You need more than one category of "speeding" for the numbers and trends you cite to mean anything. Bottom line in this exchange: people that collect an inordinate number of speeding tickets are among the safest risks insurers undertake.

They are scoff-laws. If pilots did what they did they would be grounded real fast.

ruveyn

[JohnRgt 0]

They are scoff-laws. If pilots did what they did they would be grounded real fast.

That doesn't change the fact that they represent one of the lowest risks insurance companies undertake. Besides, pilots enjoy far more freedoms than drivers do.

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

They are scoff-laws. If pilots did what they did they would be grounded real fast.

That doesn't change the fact that they represent one of the lowest risks insurance companies undertake. Besides, pilots enjoy far more freedoms than drivers do.

They are scoff-laws. If pilots did what they did they would be grounded real fast.

That doesn't change the fact that they represent one of the lowest risks insurance companies undertake. Besides, pilots enjoy far more freedoms than drivers do.

Does not matter. The law is the law. Pilots have to obey the law or they are grounded. It ought to be the same for drivers. If a driver wants to show how nifty he is behind the wheel, let him do his speeding and four wheel slides on a private race course with the approval of the owner. But NOT on public roads. On public roads anyone who does not obey the law should be busted without exception.

and as to frequent lane changers of which we have far too many in New Jersey, they should be depended from the ends of ropes from highway overpasses until the birds consume their flesh. Nay, I will go one step further. Drivers who speed dangerously should have their pedal foot amputated. They used to punish thieves by chopping off the offending hand. The same principle should apply to speeders. Anyone who does 80 in a 50 mph zone is doing Reckless Endangerment. In England under the Common Law they used to cut their ears off.. I am not so blood thirsty. I think being flogged once by a cat of nine tails for each mile over the speed limit would be just punishment. Yes, Yes. flogging and the stocks for speeders.

ruveyn

[JohnRgt 0]

This is the last post I'm putting up on this issue. We've managed to take a thread that was meant to celebrate an incredible automotive achievement and turn it into a debate on speeding, reckless driving, insurance risks, and legal ethics.

That doesn't change the fact that they represent one of the lowest risks insurance companies undertake. Besides, pilots enjoy far more freedoms than drivers do.

Does not matter. The law is the law.

It sure is. Government shouldn't own the roads. That it has a monopoly on roadways violates our rights and denies us quality roads, many of which would safely accommodate cars that could easily handle two even three times the legal speed limit.

Pilots have to obey the law or they are grounded. It ought to be the same for drivers.

But drivers are grounded . . .

Drivers can loose there licenses for a variety of reasons. Getting caught at over 100mph will often get your car and license confiscated on the spot, followed by an arrest.

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

Tell that to a pedestrian who has been run down by a speeder or a passenger in a car rammed by a speeder.

Solopsist drivers think only their safety matters. Sane drivers take the safety of others into consideration.

Inappropriate speeding is Reckless Endangerment which in small degree is a misdemeanor and a tort and in high degree a felony (criminal negligence). By the way, I have problem with high performance automobiles. I think they should be driven on private roadways and in a place where they cannot endanger the general public. It may be the case that roads should be privately owned and governed, but IN FACT most of the roads and streets are publicly owned and operated and no one has or ought to have a privilege for using said roads in a manner that endangers the public which uses them. Which is (1) why we have speed laws and (2) why speed laws should be absolutely and rigorously enforced. Zero tolerance for speeders and a caution about using vehicles which have to be driven carefully to keep them within the speed laws is in order.

Performance cars are nifty machines built to go fast and for that reason should not be permitted on public roads without a speed governor to keep them from going over 65 or 70 which is as fast as any vehicle should go on a public road. Fast drivers have this urge to test their skills, but the public road is not the place to test them and they believe in their hearts they are incapable of driving badly. A racetrack is. the proper place for such hot shot drivers to put their skill and beliefs to the test. If they screw up, uninvolved parties are not made to pay the price of their assumed infallibility and proven stupidity. If every driver had a Fancy Shmancy Mobile that could accelerate to 1.7 g the roads would be turned into slaughter houses.

ruveyn

[JohnRgt 0]

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

Tell that to a pedestrian who has been run down by a speeder or a passenger in a car rammed by a speeder.

Solopsist drivers think only their safety matters. Sane drivers take the safety of others into consideration.

Inappropriate speeding is Reckless Endangerment which in small degree is a misdemeanor and a tort and in high degree a felony (criminal negligence). By the way, I have problem with high performance automobiles. I think they should be driven on private roadways and in a place where they cannot endanger the general public. It may be the case that roads should be privately owned and governed, but IN FACT most of the roads and streets are publicly owned and operated and no one has or ought to have a privilege for using said roads in a manner that endangers the public which uses them. Which is (1) why we have speed laws and (2) why speed laws should be absolutely and rigorously enforced. Zero tolerance for speeders and a caution about using vehicles which have to be driven carefully to keep them within the speed laws is in order.

Performance cars are nifty machines built to go fast and for that reason should not be permitted on public roads without a speed governor to keep them from going over 65 or 70 which is as fast as any vehicle should go on a public road. Fast drivers have this urge to test their skills, but the public road is not the place to test them and they believe in their hearts they are incapable of driving badly. A racetrack is. the proper place for such hot shot drivers to put their skill and beliefs to the test. If they screw up, uninvolved parties are not made to pay the price of their assumed infallibility and proven stupidity. If every driver had a Fancy Shmancy Mobile that could accelerate to 1.7 g the roads would be turned into slaughter houses.

ruveyn

This thread is about a documentary on one of the most exciting race drivers in history. I'm not sure why you insist on making safety points on the threads you've focussed on over the last day or two, but after this post I'm not going to respond to these hijacks.

Yes, there's a ton of irresponsible driving that happens above the speed limit. My guess would be that there's even more irresponsible conduct going on below the speed limit. This sort of conduct needs to be curtailed. Lord knows we have the tech than can achieve these perfectly reasonable goals effectively and affordably. But it can't be deployed on public roads because when such techs are unleashed by government they're seen as Rights violations -- for now, at least.

Just as true, however, is the fact that there are many, many people who cross the artificial, money-making, power luster's speed limits that we see on our roads safely, without exposing others to higher risk levels.

The solution is to privatize our roadways. This would lead to higher driving standards, better, safer roads, and an infrastructure that could safely accomodate those who wish to drive faster. It would also help if land would be privatized and deregulated, so that more tracks can be built throughout the country.

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

The solution is to privatize our roadways. This would lead to higher driving standards, better, safer roads, and an infrastructure that could safely accomodate those who wish to drive faster. It would also help if land would be privatized and deregulated, so that more tracks can be built throughout the country.

Good idea. Do not hold your breath until it happens though, as you may turn blue and die.

ruveyn

[piz 0]

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

Nope. It's neither speed nor the sudden stop. What kills you is the fact that not all of you stops at the same instant.

[JohnRgt 0]

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

Nope. It's neither speed nor the sudden stop. What kills you is the fact that not all of you stops at the same instant.

. . . or in the same place.

[Paul's Here 0]

Speed doesn't kill. It's stopping suddenly that kills . . .

Nope. It's neither speed nor the sudden stop. What kills you is the fact that not all of you stops at the same instant.

I always wondered how they survived going into warp drive and coming out of warp drive so quickly.

[toyohabu 0]

It has been found that people will naturally drive at a reasonable speed for the given circumstance.

In Montana, when they briefly had no daylight speed limit, the accident rate was the lowest it had ever been and rose significantly when a court decision forced Montana to implement limits http://www.hwysafety.com/hwy_montana.htm . This study also validates this observation http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html

[ruveyn ben yosef 0]

It has been found that people will naturally drive at a reasonable speed for the given circumstance.

In Montana, when they briefly had no daylight speed limit, the accident rate was the lowest it had ever been and rose significantly when a court decision forced Montana to implement limits http://www.hwysafety...hwy_montana.htm . This study also validates this observation http://www.ibiblio.o...u/sl-irrel.html

Consider the population and vehicular density of Montana. In Montana there are more steers than people.

ruveyn

[JohnRgt 0]

There's all kinds of data out there that suggests that people do surprisingly better without posted speed limits, red lights, etc., in situations we'd expect chaos to ensue without "rules". People's alertness goes up when they know they're "in charge".

http://video.foxbusi...traffic-lights/