4 ms·

If you have relatives who got killed by a speeder you may think differently.

• gambiting 2y ago
  Given that the tech doesn't actually work reliably I'd remove it even without any intention to speed. It's the same reason why I keep lane keeping assistance off in my car - not because I disagree with the idea, but because the implementation is so bad it's actively dangerous.
• ars 2y ago
  The slight speed increase that ordinary people do does not kill people. We aren't talking about people going freeway speed in a residential area.
  • Thorrez 2y ago
    Increasing speed increases the chance that someone will die in a crash if it happens, and also increases the chance that a crash will happen. Check out these graphs: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Resources3/08%20-%20The%20Relation%20Between%20Speed%20and%20Crashes.pdf https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/fhwasa1304/Res...
  • Symbiote 2y ago
    The "normal" speeding in residential areas absolutely does increase the chance of death and injury in a collision with a pedestrian or cyclist. K = m v² That energy increases with the square of the speed, and has to go somewhere (person's body) in a collision.
    • beaeglebeachedd 2y ago
      It reduces the amount of time you are in the residential area meaning there is less opportunity to even contact a pedestrian or cyclist. At the extreme in some areas if you could go the speed of light you could essentially pick a time when no pedestrian could even possibly enter the road while you are on it.
• alfalfasprout 2y ago
  Crashing into another person is the problem-- not that they were speeding. Unless they were driving recklessly in a congested area in which case this would do nothing to help.
  • croes 2y ago
    That's like saying, it's not the fall that kills you but the landing. If you crash with higher speed you inflect more damage.