6 ms·

That was a bad call on the part of the police. You're only allowed to drive as fast as conditions permit. If it's dark enough that you can't avoid an obstacle

That was a bad call on the part of the police. You're only allowed to drive as fast as conditions permit. If it's dark enough that you can't avoid an obstacle by the time your headlights illuminate it, you need to slow down.

hazardmat 9y ago
That's not really true. Thousands of deer get killed on the road every year, because deer aren't smart enough not to be an obstacle when it's dark. Do we therefore change all the speed limits at night? No. It's a driving risk taken, just like any other.
- favorited 9y ago
  The point isn't that speed limits need to change, it's that it is incumbent upon the driver to slow down if environmental conditions prevent them from traveling safely at the speed limit.
  - hazardmat 9y ago
    What is that supposed to mean? You can't have 100% safety at any speed. If it really is incumbent upon the driver to always drive at night in such a way that no collision can occur at all, then why not change the speed limit? My whole point is that it's not the driver's responsibility to account for every possible scenario. It can't be.
    - deleted 9y ago
      [deleted]
    - favorited 9y ago
      It's not about accounting "for every possible scenario." Arizona has a Basic Speed Law, which says "A person must drive at a speed that is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions." If the speed limit is 55 MPH, but conditions (rain, darkness, etc.) would prevent you from being able to safely stop in time to avoid a collision, then you are not allowed to drive at 55 MPH until conditions change.
    - anonymouz 9y ago
      Um, do you have a driver's license? Nobody said anything about 100% safety in some provable way. But certainly it is very much the driver's responsibility to pick a safe speed. Driver's Ed (at least in most? EU countries) teaches that the posted speed limit is just that, the maximum legally allowed speed. As a driver you -- and nobody else -- are responsible for picking a safe speed depending on the environmental conditions. In particular, the following are explicitly taught in Driver's Ed: 1) Don't overdrive your visibility (headlights, curve)... you must be able to look sufficiently far ahead such that you can stop in the event of an obstacle appearing. (In case of two-directional traffic in the same lane, you must be able to stop in half your visible distance.) 2) Reduce speed according to weather: Rain (aqua-planing), Snow/Ice (slippery), Fog (reduced visibility as in 1) 3) You must be aware of situational dangers and be ready to stop if necessary (e.g. parked cars on the side of the road between which children could emerge...) Nobody else will tell you what the maximum safe speed at any given moment is. You're supposed to learn how to handle your vehicle during driver's ed, and then act accordingly. Overdriving your visibility is just plain stupid -- you simply will not be able to avoid a collision with an object in time; you're basically driving blind and hoping for the best.
      - hazardmat 9y ago
        What is that supposed to mean? What's prudent and what is safe? The reality is that driving at night isn't safe at all and that people often can't avoid collision from an obstacle suddenly appearing at night. Maybe if they drove at 15MPH at all times, it would be possible in 99% of cases, but in practice we don't expect that. Hence, we have collisions. Not because the drivers are always guilty of recklessness, but because driving at night has a risk to it. That's the point.
        anonymouz 9y ago
        I already told you what is safe: Your headlamps must illuminate a distance within which you can stop (including reaction time). With 50km/h this is ~40m. This is a distance that your low-beams will illuminate even in a dark night. If you want to drive faster you need high-beams or some other sources of light (street lamps). If you don't overdrive your headlamps than objects will not just "suddenly" appear in front of you unless they are doing something genuinely stupid (e.g. jumping in front of the car). In this case the policy or a judge will decide whether you were driving prudent or safe. We have collisions (during day and night) mainly because people don't pay attention or don't follow some basic rules (visibility, distance to car in front,...). This isn't rocket science. Don't blame fate or "general risk" if you cause a collision.
- davidgould 9y ago
  Those deer are killed because thousands of humans aren't smart enough to not overdrive their headlights so they hit obstacles in the dark. Hitting a deer is not a small thing. You will seriously damage your car, and may be severely injured or killed yourself if the deer is tall enough to come through the windshield. In open range country you can also hit a cow. In some areas you can hit a moose. Do we therefore change all the speed limits at night? No, but we shouldn't drive like idiots either. It's not just "a driving risk taken", it's reckless and negligent behaviour.
  - docker_up 9y ago
    I've driven in Palo Alto near 280, and from the distance, in broad daylight, I saw a buck run across an entire field at full speed and straight across the road about 3-4 cars in front of me, and get hit by the car. There was no way the driver could see what I saw, and he had no chance to avoid it. The deer was simply acting irrationally. To say that people who hit deer are "driving like idiots" is wrong.
    - davidgould 9y ago
      I should probably let this go as it's off topic, but I don't understand the description of this incident: - Was this on 280, or near 280? - If the car that hit the deer was 3-4 cars ahead and you could see the deer "run across an entire field", why was "there no way the driver could see what you saw"? I'm trying to imagine what sort of obstruction could block the drivers view but not yours. - How fast was the car going? - How long did it take the deer to "run across an entire field"? - Normally deer are active around sunrise and sunset and bed down during the day (source: deer hunting). It seems odd to see a deer in running in "broad daylight".
- InitialLastName 9y ago
  > Do we therefore change all the speed limits at night? No, but we legally require drivers to modulate their speed to suit the conditions. > It's a driving risk taken, just like any other. So generous of drivers to take up that risk to others.
- cli 9y ago
  In British Columbia, the speed limit is defined as the maximum speed limit when the road is bare and dry and visibility is good. From the driver's guidebook[1]: >Aim for a speed that’s appropriate for the conditions in which you are driving. The posted speed is the maximum for ideal conditions only. Choose a slower speed if the conditions are not ideal — for instance, if the roads are slippery or visibility is limited. If a driver was driving too fast to react and stop without hitting that deer, then that driver was driving too quickly. [1] http://www.icbc.com/driver-licensing/driving-guides/Pages/Learn-to-Drive-Smart.aspx http://www.icbc.com/driver-licensing/driving-guides/Pages/Le...
- flogic 9y ago
  That's not really what tends to happen with deer. The situation starts with them on one side of the road deciding to cross. Then the partway through they freeze. There's often not time to react. Deer are very poorly adapted to dealing with roads. They're camouflaged which makes them hard to see. And while freeze is a perfectly good strategy against wolves, it absolutely sucks against a Buick.
- crististm 9y ago
  I have a question for you: did you create this account just to troll around?
jnwatson 9y ago
A self-driving car doesn’t need visible light to see a pedestrian. Between Lidsr and IR, she would have lit up like a Christmas tree.
- jakelazaroff 9y ago
  Sure, but my point is that whether or not the video was darkened (and regardless of how the car "sees") overdriving your radius of obstacle detection is an unsafe way to operate a vehicle.

hazardmat 9y ago

That's not really true. Thousands of deer get killed on the road every year, because deer aren't smart enough not to be an obstacle when it's dark. Do we therefore change all the speed limits at night? No. It's a driving risk taken, just like any other.

favorited 9y ago
The point isn't that speed limits need to change, it's that it is incumbent upon the driver to slow down if environmental conditions prevent them from traveling safely at the speed limit.
- hazardmat 9y ago
  What is that supposed to mean? You can't have 100% safety at any speed. If it really is incumbent upon the driver to always drive at night in such a way that no collision can occur at all, then why not change the speed limit? My whole point is that it's not the driver's responsibility to account for every possible scenario. It can't be.
  - deleted 9y ago
    [deleted]
  - favorited 9y ago
    It's not about accounting "for every possible scenario." Arizona has a Basic Speed Law, which says "A person must drive at a speed that is reasonable and prudent under the existing conditions." If the speed limit is 55 MPH, but conditions (rain, darkness, etc.) would prevent you from being able to safely stop in time to avoid a collision, then you are not allowed to drive at 55 MPH until conditions change.
  - anonymouz 9y ago
    Um, do you have a driver's license? Nobody said anything about 100% safety in some provable way. But certainly it is very much the driver's responsibility to pick a safe speed. Driver's Ed (at least in most? EU countries) teaches that the posted speed limit is just that, the maximum legally allowed speed. As a driver you -- and nobody else -- are responsible for picking a safe speed depending on the environmental conditions. In particular, the following are explicitly taught in Driver's Ed: 1) Don't overdrive your visibility (headlights, curve)... you must be able to look sufficiently far ahead such that you can stop in the event of an obstacle appearing. (In case of two-directional traffic in the same lane, you must be able to stop in half your visible distance.) 2) Reduce speed according to weather: Rain (aqua-planing), Snow/Ice (slippery), Fog (reduced visibility as in 1) 3) You must be aware of situational dangers and be ready to stop if necessary (e.g. parked cars on the side of the road between which children could emerge...) Nobody else will tell you what the maximum safe speed at any given moment is. You're supposed to learn how to handle your vehicle during driver's ed, and then act accordingly. Overdriving your visibility is just plain stupid -- you simply will not be able to avoid a collision with an object in time; you're basically driving blind and hoping for the best.
    - hazardmat 9y ago
      What is that supposed to mean? What's prudent and what is safe? The reality is that driving at night isn't safe at all and that people often can't avoid collision from an obstacle suddenly appearing at night. Maybe if they drove at 15MPH at all times, it would be possible in 99% of cases, but in practice we don't expect that. Hence, we have collisions. Not because the drivers are always guilty of recklessness, but because driving at night has a risk to it. That's the point.
      - anonymouz 9y ago
        I already told you what is safe: Your headlamps must illuminate a distance within which you can stop (including reaction time). With 50km/h this is ~40m. This is a distance that your low-beams will illuminate even in a dark night. If you want to drive faster you need high-beams or some other sources of light (street lamps). If you don't overdrive your headlamps than objects will not just "suddenly" appear in front of you unless they are doing something genuinely stupid (e.g. jumping in front of the car). In this case the policy or a judge will decide whether you were driving prudent or safe. We have collisions (during day and night) mainly because people don't pay attention or don't follow some basic rules (visibility, distance to car in front,...). This isn't rocket science. Don't blame fate or "general risk" if you cause a collision.
davidgould 9y ago
Those deer are killed because thousands of humans aren't smart enough to not overdrive their headlights so they hit obstacles in the dark. Hitting a deer is not a small thing. You will seriously damage your car, and may be severely injured or killed yourself if the deer is tall enough to come through the windshield. In open range country you can also hit a cow. In some areas you can hit a moose. Do we therefore change all the speed limits at night? No, but we shouldn't drive like idiots either. It's not just "a driving risk taken", it's reckless and negligent behaviour.
- docker_up 9y ago
  I've driven in Palo Alto near 280, and from the distance, in broad daylight, I saw a buck run across an entire field at full speed and straight across the road about 3-4 cars in front of me, and get hit by the car. There was no way the driver could see what I saw, and he had no chance to avoid it. The deer was simply acting irrationally. To say that people who hit deer are "driving like idiots" is wrong.
  - davidgould 9y ago
    I should probably let this go as it's off topic, but I don't understand the description of this incident: - Was this on 280, or near 280? - If the car that hit the deer was 3-4 cars ahead and you could see the deer "run across an entire field", why was "there no way the driver could see what you saw"? I'm trying to imagine what sort of obstruction could block the drivers view but not yours. - How fast was the car going? - How long did it take the deer to "run across an entire field"? - Normally deer are active around sunrise and sunset and bed down during the day (source: deer hunting). It seems odd to see a deer in running in "broad daylight".
InitialLastName 9y ago
> Do we therefore change all the speed limits at night? No, but we legally require drivers to modulate their speed to suit the conditions. > It's a driving risk taken, just like any other. So generous of drivers to take up that risk to others.
cli 9y ago
In British Columbia, the speed limit is defined as the maximum speed limit when the road is bare and dry and visibility is good. From the driver's guidebook[1]: >Aim for a speed that’s appropriate for the conditions in which you are driving. The posted speed is the maximum for ideal conditions only. Choose a slower speed if the conditions are not ideal — for instance, if the roads are slippery or visibility is limited. If a driver was driving too fast to react and stop without hitting that deer, then that driver was driving too quickly. [1] http://www.icbc.com/driver-licensing/driving-guides/Pages/Learn-to-Drive-Smart.aspx http://www.icbc.com/driver-licensing/driving-guides/Pages/Le...
flogic 9y ago
That's not really what tends to happen with deer. The situation starts with them on one side of the road deciding to cross. Then the partway through they freeze. There's often not time to react. Deer are very poorly adapted to dealing with roads. They're camouflaged which makes them hard to see. And while freeze is a perfectly good strategy against wolves, it absolutely sucks against a Buick.
crististm 9y ago
I have a question for you: did you create this account just to troll around?

jnwatson 9y ago

A self-driving car doesn’t need visible light to see a pedestrian. Between Lidsr and IR, she would have lit up like a Christmas tree.

jakelazaroff 9y ago
Sure, but my point is that whether or not the video was darkened (and regardless of how the car "sees") overdriving your radius of obstacle detection is an unsafe way to operate a vehicle.