3 ms·

Not leaving your house would solve a lot of things. Why don’t people do that? Anyway, slowing down traffic is not the answer. Driving should either be more aut

by Laarlf 6y ago

Not leaving your house would solve a lot of things. Why don’t people do that? Anyway, slowing down traffic is not the answer. Driving should either be more automated or more engaging so drivers stop using their phones. 2 hours of driving 20 mph in a straight line will be boring enough to create more accidents.

zip1234 6y ago
If cars were limited to a certain speed it would for certain cut down on crashes. It would also cut down on fatalities. When the news article says "speed was not a factor", they are only referring to the fact that the driver was going at or under the posted speed. That does not mean speed was not a factor. You think it would not work because driving is boring? Perhaps if you can't handle driving responsibly, you should not do it?
- Laarlf 6y ago
  Europe has built roads forever that makes driving engaging. Europe has a lot less issues with phones while driving etc. Germany also solves that problem by having no speed limit when it gets boring. Making driving engaging is the best way to create mindful drivers.
  - zip1234 6y ago
    What do you think makes for an engaging road? One thing that comes to mind is road width. A narrower road forces a driver to pay more attention.
    - Laarlf 6y ago
      Regular corners. Road width isn’t even that important really. Smaller roads makes some people drive very inconsistent with their speed, which annoys people and encourages overtaking at possibly risky spots.
  - throwaway0a5e 6y ago
    See also: fewer accidents at rotarys because people know they need to be on their A-game.
elric 6y ago
That comparison is obviously nonsense. I don't drive and I can live my life just fine, without staying confined indoors. If people had to drive 2 hours at 30km/h, they'd be more inclined to quit driving. It's a stupid addiction which is way more lethal than smoking. Better public transport is a much better idea than messing around trying to improve driving. The situation where the majority of the population has (or "needs") a car is ridiculous.

by Laarlf 6y ago

zip1234 6y ago

If cars were limited to a certain speed it would for certain cut down on crashes. It would also cut down on fatalities. When the news article says "speed was not a factor", they are only referring to the fact that the driver was going at or under the posted speed. That does not mean speed was not a factor. You think it would not work because driving is boring? Perhaps if you can't handle driving responsibly, you should not do it?

Laarlf 6y ago
Europe has built roads forever that makes driving engaging. Europe has a lot less issues with phones while driving etc. Germany also solves that problem by having no speed limit when it gets boring. Making driving engaging is the best way to create mindful drivers.
- zip1234 6y ago
  What do you think makes for an engaging road? One thing that comes to mind is road width. A narrower road forces a driver to pay more attention.
  - Laarlf 6y ago
    Regular corners. Road width isn’t even that important really. Smaller roads makes some people drive very inconsistent with their speed, which annoys people and encourages overtaking at possibly risky spots.
- throwaway0a5e 6y ago
  See also: fewer accidents at rotarys because people know they need to be on their A-game.

elric 6y ago

That comparison is obviously nonsense. I don't drive and I can live my life just fine, without staying confined indoors. If people had to drive 2 hours at 30km/h, they'd be more inclined to quit driving. It's a stupid addiction which is way more lethal than smoking. Better public transport is a much better idea than messing around trying to improve driving. The situation where the majority of the population has (or "needs") a car is ridiculous.