Prev: toyota tarago
Next: Which old car would you like to own and possibley restore?
From: PHATRS on 3 Jun 2010 18:16
I guess you guys heard the premier got a bunch of "important" people
together to try to find a solution to the increasing road toll, just the
other day?

Well, the outcome is that they want speed limiters in all vehicles.

When will they learn that punishment and tighter controls do not make
safer drivers?

I am adamant that the increase in the road toll is due to ever
increasing levels of nannying in this state. People think they don't
have to do anything other than drive under the limit to drive safely,
and also there seems to be increasing level of "it won't happen to me".

Or is it just that I'm getting old and more aware of the world around me
and it's always been like this?

Ben
From: Diesel Damo on 3 Jun 2010 19:07
On Jun 4, 8:16 am, PHATRS <stoptryingt...(a)m.me> wrote:

> I guess you guys heard the premier got a bunch of "important" people
> together to try to find a solution to the increasing road toll, just the
> other day?
>
> Well, the outcome is that they want speed limiters in all vehicles.

What exactly do they mean by that though? Like trucks have? I can see
them trying to do something like that, but if they're talking about
something that knows what speed zone you're in and prevents you
breaking any speed limits, then I can't see that ever happening
because then they'll instantly lose MILLIONS in revenue. Not to
mention probably increasing the road toll at the same time.
From: John_H on 3 Jun 2010 19:13
PHATRS wrote:
>
>I am adamant that the increase in the road toll is due to ever
>increasing levels of nannying in this state. People think they don't
>have to do anything other than drive under the limit to drive safely,
>and also there seems to be increasing level of "it won't happen to me".
>
>Or is it just that I'm getting old and more aware of the world around me
>and it's always been like this?
>
>Ben

It was some other Ben who once said.... "They who can give up
essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither
liberty nor safety." (Benjamin Franklin)

Pretty well sums it up I would've though.... And we're now way too
far down the road to change any of it! :(

Which of the following did you NOT agree with.... :)

1) The ban on fireworks (the earliest example I can remember).
2) Compulsory wearing of seatbelts (to protect idiots from themselves
thereby ensuring they outnumber the rest of us).
3) Gun control (to ensure that cops and crims were the only ones who
have 'em).
4) 0.05% BAC (to prevent us socialising in pubs and planning an
insurrection).
5) The crackdown on speeding (to ensure the state coffers are
maintained so we can be kept in check while the noose is tightened
further).
6) The Rudd Government (that empts the coffers quicker than ever
before).

--
John H
From: PHATRS on 3 Jun 2010 19:14
On 04/06/10 09:07, Diesel Damo wrote:
> On Jun 4, 8:16 am, PHATRS<stoptryingt...(a)m.me> wrote:
>
>> I guess you guys heard the premier got a bunch of "important" people
>> together to try to find a solution to the increasing road toll, just the
>> other day?
>>
>> Well, the outcome is that they want speed limiters in all vehicles.
>
> What exactly do they mean by that though? Like trucks have? I can see
> them trying to do something like that, but if they're talking about
> something that knows what speed zone you're in and prevents you
> breaking any speed limits, then I can't see that ever happening
> because then they'll instantly lose MILLIONS in revenue. Not to
> mention probably increasing the road toll at the same time.

They mentioned using GPS and an audio alert if you exceed the speed
limit anywhere, and then went on to mention speed limiting, implying
speed limiting everywhere.

Ben
From: D Walford on 3 Jun 2010 19:57
On 4/06/2010 9:07 AM, Diesel Damo wrote:
> On Jun 4, 8:16 am, PHATRS<stoptryingt...(a)m.me> wrote:
>
>> I guess you guys heard the premier got a bunch of "important" people
>> together to try to find a solution to the increasing road toll, just the
>> other day?
>>
>> Well, the outcome is that they want speed limiters in all vehicles.
>
> What exactly do they mean by that though? Like trucks have? I can see
> them trying to do something like that, but if they're talking about
> something that knows what speed zone you're in and prevents you
> breaking any speed limits, then I can't see that ever happening
> because then they'll instantly lose MILLIONS in revenue. Not to
> mention probably increasing the road toll at the same time.

Biggest problem that I could see with that is the huge drop in new car
sales, if they mandated speed limiting on all new cars people would keep
their old cars which would defeat the purpose of also mandating many new
safety devices like stability control.
Speed limiting systems would only work on cars with computer controlled
engine management so it may result in old carby cars increasing in value.
The cost would also be staggering.



Daryl
 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
Prev: toyota tarago
Next: Which old car would you like to own and possibley restore?