Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[pat]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7803997.stm

Calls for 'speed-limiting' cars
Speed-limiting devices should be fitted to cars on a voluntary basis to help save lives and cut carbon emissions, according to a new report.

The government's transport advisers claim the technology would cut road accidents with injuries by 29%.

The device automatically slows a car down to within the limit for the road on which it is being driven.

Ministers are planning to help councils draw up digital maps with details of the legal speed on every road.

The system uses satellite positioning to check its location and when the speed exceeds the limit, power is reduced and the brakes are applied if necessary.

It has been well-trialled, and the Commission for Integrated Transport and the Motorists' Forum, which both advise the government, are calling on ministers to promote a wide introduction of the system.

The advisers believe it should be voluntary but say drivers who have tried it, liked not having to worry about exceeding the limit.

However, the BBC's transport correspondent Tom Symonds said the report is likely to be rejected by some motoring groups which believe the government overestimates the importance of speed in causing accidents.


'The advisers believe it should be voluntary but say drivers who have tried it, liked not having to worry about exceeding the limit'    Of course they bloody like it 'cos it's only the bloody sanctimonious annoying meandering twats that delight in getting in my way that would have volunteered to have the sodding thing installed in their cars in the first place !  Mainly 'cos it means they no longer need to take their head out of their arse now & again to check the speedo!!       

[arek PL]

dont worry it won't work. even if they try to do something like that traffic congestions will sort it out. if all road users travel within speed limits getting to work will take us hours. imo it won't work. anyway idea is ...... ......... cant find words but im sure u know what i mean. 

[Andy J]

so, we all drive within the limits with this new technology which I assume isn't free to purchase and the government loses out ona significnt revenue stream, can't see that happening 

[EXJ10R]

Add to the fact that it'll only be on new cars, which aren't selling and the current finacial situation, plus people aren't going to speed much anyway as it's more costly on fuel and can't afford the fines. I remember when Labour came to power in 1997 and not long after they wanted to make speeding more socially unacceptable than drink-driving. Says it all.  Kerr-ching.

[r1ninja]

it does say "voluntary"

[pinky]

This has already been triled on bikes, I think it was at leeds uni. It has been suggested to the government and rejected (thats not to say it won't be tried again) last year I did an interview on BBC radio Sheffield about it.  The main problem is taking away some form of control from the rider/driver.

 EVSC - ISA - No To Throttle Control - No To Control

 30th March 2007 - Update

A Transport Select Committee recommends, "that the Government commission a companion piece
of research on the viability of introducing speed limiters on motorcycles."

Read MAGs comments on the "EVSC - ISA Information" page "The Good And The Bad".

EVSC - ISA - No To Throttle Control - No To Control

MAG re launches its 2001 campaign to oppose the compulsory fitment to privately owned vehicles of any device designed to arbitrarily remove control from the driver to remote operation and asks all vehicle users to sign the Mulhouse Declaration.

MAG President Ian Mutch was emphatic about the issue. "Let's keep this one simple, we don't want it, not today not tomorrow not ever."

Withdrawing control from the rider is fundamentally what MAG was set up to oppose.

Motorcycling is about fun and freedom and control, your hand on your throttle, your decision.

If people abuse that control and fall foul of the law then that is a different issue but when technology is deployed to directly control motorcycles then a big line is crossed and MAG knows exactly which side of that line it stands on.

Withdrawing control from the rider is fundamentally what MAG was set up to oppose.

This is ultimately a philosophic issue, it's not just about safety, it's about what sort of society we want to live in.

MAG says, "We don't want to live in a society with the level of control which ISA can make possible and we intend to get more votes for our point of view than the safety zealots get for theirs.

MAG's Director of Public Affairs Trevor Baird recently rode a prototype motorcycle fitted with ISA technology which was developed by the University of Leeds, the Department for Transport and MIRA (Motor Industry Research Association).


taken from the Motorcycle Action Group website http://www.mag-uk.org/


If this comes into force on cars they may wish to try and extend it to bikes.

[pat]

it does say "voluntary"

Thin end of the wedge!

Obviously they know there'd be uproar if they tried to bring them straight in as a compulsory item, but by making them 'voluntary' it gets them onto the market & into the public perception.

Next we'll no doubt find that insurance companies will be offering discounts if they're fitted making them more attractive to the general public, but more significantly the big fleet operators like rental companies & company car schemes will then start specifying them on all their new vehicles due to the savings they'll make (not just on insurance but fuel costs too), after 1-4 years these fleet vehicles enter the 2nd hand market....

Soon you'll end up with a significant proportion of drivers in controlled vehicles, they'll get pissed off every time they get passed by a free car/bike & will start demanding they be made compulsory, it'll get more & more difficult &/or expensive to get insurance without one.

10 years down the line even without government legislation they've become de facto compulsory...