California state senate has voted for new legislation that, if passed, would force every new car sold in California starting in 2032 to beep at drivers and display a warning graphic should they exceed the speed limit by at least 10 mph. While not a speed limiter, this nanny wouldn’t be able to be turned off, and contravening this legislation would violate the criminal code, should it pass. Needless to say, this is a big deal, and if you read into the actual Senate bill, you might find one major potential problem.
It’s worth noting that California’s goal isn’t without precedent. The European Union has mandated intelligent speed assistance, although it permits active systems that push back against drivers by modulating accelerator pedal control, along with systems that can be turned off. California, on the other hand, only wants to mandate a passive system that gives just visual and auditory alerts, but the alerts can’t be disabled.
It’s easy to see a potential common-sense legal issue with the wording of SB-961, and it has to do with the fundamentals of connected cars. The bill refers to the proposed form of passive intelligent speed assistance as “an integrated vehicle system that uses, at minimum, the GPS location of the vehicle compared with a database of posted speed limits.” This would require all new cars from 2032 onward to have access to updated reference data, but what happens when a car’s internet connectivity is killed off due to network sunsetting like we saw with 3G? While the bill is written to provide leniency towards database inconsistencies, what if a car can’t access the database altogether?
Under the proposed legislation, manufacturers would only be able to disable passive speed assistance on any vehicle “sold as an authorized emergency vehicle,” so this may be a backdoor for continued connected services support after the eventual 4G sunset. However, that fails to take into account what might happen if an automaker goes bust. Not every EV startup will survive, and if that data connection is severed, what legal area does that fall under?
The concept of a simple speed limit warning is a good idea, but the proposed implementation of SB-961 seems like well-intentioned legislation lacking in execution. There are a few potential pitfalls that the bill doesn’t seem to take into account, but fortunately, it still needs to make it through the House of Representatives in order to become law.
I have a few ideas on how to fix it.
Firstly, data from camera-based traffic-sign-recognition systems that are built into the car and don’t require any data connection should be the first suggested method for manufacturers to enable vehicles to “know” the speed limit of the road being traveled on. Admittedly, such systems aren’t perfect, but they are future-proofed against network sunsetting. Secondly, allow the passive intelligent speed assistance system to be disabled, but force it to be on by default every time the ignition is cycled. That ought to reduce pushback while still ensuring that the vast majority of systems remain in use.
There are some decent conceptual fundamentals here and it just needs a little tuning up, but what else would you expect when bureaucrats are in charge? Oh, and it’s worth noting that even if this legislation passes, it won’t curb speeding overnight. The average age of a car on U.S. roads is 14 years old, so regardless of how things shake out, there will be plenty of cars on California roads without audible speed limit warnings for years to come.
Support our mission of championing car culture by becoming an Official Autopian Member.
-
California Is About To Vote To Ban Sales Of New Gas-Powered Cars By 2035: Report
-
The EU Totally Caved On Its Internal Combustion Ban. Here’s Why That Could Be A Good Thing For The Environment
-
You Only Need 50 HP To Get By Even In Modern Traffic
Got a hot tip? Send it to us here. Or check out the stories on our homepage.
Just convert the country’s highway system to gravel roads filled with potholes (like Michigan)
New laws aren’t meant to solve problems overnight but eventually.
If this is mandatory then 10 years later nearly every car will have this system on board.
Is that good? I think so. If that prevents idiots from doing 100 mph and becoming a danger for others then I’m fine. Cut the fuel and limit it at 80 and that would be fine as well. There is hardly any valid use case for needing to drive above the speed limit.
Unless you’re on a track day or something and the system with a database of roads should easily recognize a track, Laguna Seca, Sebring and the likes, for unlimited speeds and no warnings etc.
While we all love cars ; it is is the idiots who cause these rules. They should be found, punished and prevented from doing it again. Imagine cars would be limited to the actual speed limits ; no more car chases with a lot of risks and danger to others.
I drive on tracks and then I drive hard and fast and I take risks you shouldn’t take on normal roads. There I am not insured (except medical) so any damage to my car is mine. I am fully aware what I am doing. My car will be in perfect conditions. I’ll be wearing gloves, a helmet and an anti-slip mat on my (leather) seat so I don’t slide out of it during high speed corners. Everything that can move is removed from the car. I install endurance brake pads. Tire pressure is checked and set to optimal for the track. THEN you can drive fast.
On regular roads I hardly speed, why the heck would you? You hardly save any time, you just burn more gas, increase risk for accidents exponentially and have a chance for a fine.
Want to drive fast? Go to a track(day). Public roads are no race tracks.
Sooner or later some government official, maybe you are one, I don’t know, will say, “it is is the idiots who cause these rules. They should be found, punished and prevented from doing it again.”
And this is exactly why we idiots should have the freedom to keep doing idiotic things. The last thing I want is the government finding me, punishing me and preventing me from doing things again.
Putting a speed limiter in our cars is an intrusion on our rights because it requires a means of tracking our whereabouts. If the car knows where the speed limit sign says 35, so does the government. It’s two things if Ford Motor Company and my wife knows where I am. They can make me subscribe to in car wi fi (another expense, which will probably become mandatory if this law goes through) or tell me to get on home. But the government can take my stuff, throw me in jail or at very least require me to hire a lawyer to defend my innocence and keep me out of jail and in possession of my stuff.
This law has nothing to do with track days or speeders and everything to do with the thumb of government pressing on our necks.
And by the way, I seldom speed, have been to track days and have raced cars on tracks. Further, I’m not affiliated with a political party nor do I have any radical political interests. I appreciate the great freedoms we are afforded in the United States and get damn mad when I see our freedoms threatened.
The gov’d knows already exactly where you were, how fast you went because your phone is sending your location all the time if your use GPS/navigation.
The cellphone towers triangulate your position (accurate to about 100-200 yards) so they know which antenna they need to use to serve you best.
If your car would have an offline database which gets updated once a week then the car could perfectly well know how fast you are allowed to drive on a certain road, without the government knowing anything.
Freedom has NOTHING to do with being allowed to speed. Cars could perfectly well be limited to 80 mph or even less. And they will be eventually if the -idiots- aren’t regulated.
I am not affiliated with the gov’d or law enforcement or anything else. I have 2 cars with standard speedometers with 200 mph marks. They don’t go that fast but 175 mph is possible.
Yet I use them on the track and not on the streets or on the highways since I don’t want to hurt or kill myself or someone else.
You are FREE to go and drive anywhere you want and how you want. But we should get rid of idiots nearly killing kids in school zones, people driving 100 mph at night on the highway because “there are no other cars around” or for example bikers on rural roads going twice the limit because “the visibility is good”.
Old fashioned navigation uses a GPS antenna to know its position and a map stored on a disk or sd card with road data. Without an internet connection.
So first enforcing a speed limit or at least a nagging system doesn’t need any internet at all. It also doesn’t snitch on the government where you are or where you want and lastly the gov’d can already track you while you’re running around with your phone on.
The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” ~ H. L. Menck
you can just disconnect the speaker and run a boom box for your sound system. (or headphones )
Would a speed sign recognition device recognize the signs if they were in unusual places? I got caught in a speed trap in Florida two decades ago because the speed limit sign was overhead, on a pedestrian overpass. The cop running the speed trap was sitting on the center island right under a speed limit sign (in the usual location) that raised the limit, but if you accelerated before you passed the cop, tag you were it.
My car has a speed sign recognition system, and it can not recognize anything but the number.
So if the sign says “School Zone 25 When Children Are Present”, it reads only the 25. Now it’s 6 years old and maybe it’s improved since, but who knows?
I’m reading comments that blame speeders as an impediment to flow. I’m from California too. Get your Prius- sienna or otherwise “hate driving” shitbox…. out of of the way. Driving near the limit and feeling entitled to block the flow for faster drivers causes others to drive reckless and erratic. You cannot control them. So don’t…..
So let’s agree that if your entitled and lane camp, too lazy to move right, causing road rage in others and slowing the flow- you are just as much the problem. Impeding flow is also a violation- speeding or not. So please get off your consummate high horse and mind yourself and be considerate of others. That ought to fix most problems…
Yes, because current mfrs have demonstrated such a high level of respect for best-security practices with regards to connected technology in automobiles, we should definitely implement a system of always connected GPS for every new vehicle.
What could go wrong?
Most of my commute I can’t get over 45 because of traffic and when I drive through the state I stick to 10 over the speed limit. I can tell you from experience that a vision based system will not work well when we have 55 mph signs for semis and another for everyone else.
Some areas are allowing speed cameras as a pilot so I imagine we will be getting those soon enough.
Remember 1974’s seat belt interlocks? Those sure were popular.
Ha! I had those in my 75 Grandville. In 1991 I managed to screw up an entire valet parking garage because my car wouldn’t start (according to the valet). When I showed up to retrieve my car, he was going off on me about how they had to shift the entire lot because of my ratty convertible. I asked if he buckled the seatbelt to drive it. Negative ghostrider.
Here in these great United States of America you can go down to city hall, pay a few bucks and start a business; strap on a pair of skis or a snowboard and ride them down an impossibly steep hill, maybe even in an avalanche area; jump off a cliff with a parachute; fly a dirt bike 50 feet in the air; build a street legal car that goes four times the speed limit and sell it to the public; shoot damn near any kind of gun at non-human targets; and stand on a street corner and shout that the governor of California, the president of the United States and the other party candidate for the president of the United States are all flaming asshats. The freedom to do things that might not be in our own personal best interest – or might be – is none of the government’s damn business. It’s a big reason why the USA is such a world business and technology leader. Our laws, or lack thereof, encourage us to take risks. Laws like this are un-American. Speed is bad. Ok. I’m sorry. Occasionally I speed. Sometimes I get caught. Fair enough. But I don’t want to wear a goddamned ankle bracelet that warns me I’m breaking the law (or tells the government, which is the next step) every time I climb into the machine that brings me the most freedom and enjoyment I experience in my daily life. Piss off California. Leave us kids alone.
Not sure it’ll tell the government, but rest assured something like that will 100% be set up to send that info along to every major auto insurance company. Lots of people gonna end up seeing unexplained and unexpected rate increases even though they might have never gotten popped by the local or highway patrol
Insurance companies don’t need that. You have your phone on you, after all
You need a nanny.
Why would you suggest any ideas to possibly help the implementation of this?
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/bc/Doublenickels.jpg
Real rebels keep it 55, kids.
Everyone has already covered how idiotic this is so instead I’ll propose some common sense solutions.
1) Pull the fuse for your GPS antenna (if possible)
2) break you GPS antenna
3) upsize your tires, one or two sizes up will buy you some cushion. Probably wont help much when the GPS thinks your on the complete wrong road.
4) Disconnect your internal speaker that is beeping at you.
5) get out of California
“5) get out of California”
Please do. We’ve got too many people as it is.
Sadly, these warnings come from the audio system itself nowadays, you can’t just disconnect a little buzzer to stop the noise…
Oh no! That means it would have to a software based fix which is way more complicated (on some makes)
Just pull the radio then and replace it with a non-california after-market one. I don’t even know if the radio in my car works – i’ve never even tried to turn it on.
There’s another problem here, which is that not a single soul in CA drives at or below 10 over the speed limit. I grew up in SoCal, and I think the cops would pull you over if you were going under 75 on suspicion of being high.
I live in California and I always drive at or below the speed limit.
Every river has stones in it which disrupt the smooth flow. It’s only the ones you find in traffic that get smug about causing turbulence though.
Turbulence is caused by disruption in an otherwise even flow. Like speeders passing people observing the speed limit.
Slow down.
As someone who’s been driving on California freeways for a few decades I can guarantee that if you’re going the speed limit or below while not in a traffic jam, you are 100% the disruption. Keep pace or keep to surface streets. And since I’m betting you don’t, let me request that you at the very least stay in the far right lane.
As someone whose been driving on those same California freeways for longer than you I can say its you and speeders like you who are the problem. YOU are the disruption and its YOU who are 100% responsible for any unfortunate outcome.
SLOW DOWN!!
As someone who drove on the Arroyo Seco Parkway from downtown to Pasadena and back on the day it opened, where’s my gruel?
What is your point exactly?
None, other than the linguistic pleasure of asking, “Where’s my gruel?”
I dunno but I hope you find it.
As someone, I am occasionally the disruption, unless other people are.
My friend, if you’ve been going 65 on Southern California highways for “longer than me,” I don’t know what to tell you. Stubbornness can be a virtue, I guess.
You’re welcome.
Dude you are all over these comments defending the honor of…California? And granny driving? Is there a lameness award that you’re in the running for or what? You’re in the minority on this one so just take the L. I’m sure you’re used to it.
Comments like the ones I have been responding to (and yours) are excellent examples of why this speed limit warning proposal is needed and if anything does not go far enough. Speeders need to be constantly reminded speeding on shared public roads is not safe nor acceptable. “Granny driving” as you so derisively put it is.
You’re probably in the way.
Of who?
You’re in the way of every other driver on the road. I can tell that you’ve had a few too many falls with head impacts for me to be able to explain this to you, as I’ve already seen you demonstrate your imperiousness to logic in all of your other comments. But here’s a feeble attempt anyway: I lived in California for several years…
“Well I was driving slow here when the dinosaurs died and California Vehicle Code 21055 says…”
Okay cool, I don’t care. When I lived in California what I observed was that everyone drove 10-15 mph over the speed limit. When I first arrived there I tried going the speed limit because that’s what I was used to where I was from, but I quickly realized I was being a dumbass and I was going to get run over. About 10% of vehicles actually drove at the speed limit, usually ones that couldn’t safely exceed it. Of those, about 1% insisted on camping in the far left lane, disrupting traffic, forcing people to go around them, increasing highway danger because of people needing to unexpectedly brake, etc. It was such a rare sight to see a person driving in that manner, that it’s likely you’re one of the people I remember doing it. You’re lucky you’re not dead, if not from someone accidentally rear ending you, then from road rage caused by the incredible amount of anger you generate in all other drivers on the road.
That makes you a dangerous driver.
Bullshit.
This is a topic that is deliberately difficult to find information on. The closest you can get is “speeding-related” crash statistics. Take, for example, a situation where I’m focused on the road, following every rule except for the speed limit, and in the far left lane. A guy driving a mini-van while texting and eating swerves into my lane, I hit him in the sliding door right behind the drivers seat, and put him in the hospital. Despite the fact that I’m following every rule and he’s following few to none, the officer is going to place the blame for the accident on me, and I become part of that statisic. If I wasn’t speeding, he would be forced to rightfully place the blame on the moron that’s now in the hospital. Why does it change when I am doing over the speed limit? Because speeding is the easiest to ticket, the hardest to fight in court (especially with modern radar guns), and therefore the largest source for revenue for most municipalities. Therefore, they dump every bit of leverage they can into pushing the idea that “all speeders are bad drivers”, and useful dipshits like you take that as license to cause traffic by gumming up the far left lane.
Despite the fact that I’m following every rule
Except you’re not. By your own admission you are speeding. Given how in this scenario it sounds like by more than a couple/few MPH if the cop can prove you were in excess from the evidence at the scene. Puttign on my wig for the prosecution I’d hypothesize because of your speeding the other driver was not reasonably able to see you approaching and that by speeding you created an unsafe speed gradient.
Don’t worry, you’ll have your day in court and you can explain it all to the judge. I’m sure you will be acquitted with a handshake and a sincere apology.
Why does it change when I am doing over the speed limit?
Because you are exceeding the speed that the state has decided presents the maximum acceptable risk for that roadway.
and useful dipshits like you take that as license to cause traffic by gumming up the far left lane.
Ah there is is. Yep, username checks out.
You sound like a left lane Prius driver….are you a left lane Prius driver? Please let us know how we can suspend your license and make the roads a safer place, since your prerogative is to teach us a lesson rather than follow the rules of the road. If you’re not passing, stay far right or GTF off the road, thanks. And no, two wrongs don’t make a right, but because of that, I’ll repeat myself – you don’t get to teach anyone else a lesson in slowing down – that’s what highway LEOs are for. Stay right since you’re below the speed limit, and keep your bureaucracy 2800 miles away in California.
Sounds like you need a nanny. Like now.
I’m good, but it sounds like your holier than thou approach is insufferable. I rarely go more than 10 over, and stay right when I’m not passing. Care to tell us if you camp in the left lane to try and get people to slow down?
A nap then. And a binkie.
Based on your ignoring the question, you break the law to the same degree as speeders by impeding traffic. Stay right, or get off the road – we’re safer without you present.
I use the left lane at the posted speed limit as I please and I don’t allow speeders to bully me into yielding it if that is what you are asking. My state of California defines the left lane as a travel lane and drivers to stay in it regardless of how many speeders want to illegally go faster.
CVC 22400. (a) No person shall drive upon a highway at such a slow speed as to impede or block the normal and reasonable movement of traffic unless the reduced speed is necessary for safe operation, because of a grade, or in compliance with law.
(emphasis mine)
https://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH§ionNum=22400.
(Oh and before you smugly quote CVC 21654 that law only applied to roadways controlled by the prime facie speed limit which is not the same as the absolute (posted) speed limit being discussed here.)
we’re safer without you present.
That is laughable. You are much safer driving the speed limit than exceeding it. Therefore you the speeder are the danger.
SLOW DOWN!
Prima facie speed limit is what takes place when you’re not in the presence of a speed limit sign (i.e. implied speed limit based on safety in the flow of traffic) – what’s your point? And since you made a point of mentioning that you travel under the speed limit if not at the speed limit, if you’re doing 60 in a 65 zone in the left lane, an officer can cite you for impeding traffic as you’re not at the maximum allowable limit and are holding up traffic. The point here is that you yield the passing/fast lane for overtaking traffic – this is common sense and what they teach you in driver’s ed. The fact that you’re using the left lane as your “entitled” lane proves that you’re a danger to all of us. If you were in Germany, you’d be facing some steep fines, if not losing your license. Reframe your mindset – you aren’t fixing any problems, you’re a part of it.
Also, you ignored what I said earlier – I rarely speed, but I STAY RIGHT when I’m not passing. You should get off your high horse and start doing the same – for the safety and benefit of everyone else on the highway.
what’s your point?
My point is the law that is most often used by speeders to demand speed limit adherents to yield the left lane does not apply to roadways with posted speed limits. So to save time I recommended you and others don’t even bother trying.
And since you made a point of mentioning that you travel under the speed limit if not at the speed limit, if you’re doing 60 in a 65 zone in the left lane, an officer can cite you for impeding traffic as you’re not at the maximum allowable limit and are holding up traffic.
That is true which is why I said:
“I use the left lane at the posted speed limit as I please and I don’t allow speeders to bully me into yielding it if that is what you are asking.”
at =/= below. I yield when traveling in the left lane below the posted speed limit. In addition I only drive in the left lane at speeds below the posted speed limit when the right lane is undesirable because of excessive traffic coming on and off, poor road surface, lots of slower trucks and other traffic, etc. Otherwise if I drive BELOW the posted speed limit I stick as far right as is practical.
I rarely speed, but I STAY RIGHT when I’m not passing*.
That is your choice but know this – if California you have the right to travel in any lane at the posted speed limit if conditions allow and nobody has the right to demand you yield to their speeding.
The point here is that you yield the passing/fast lane for overtaking traffic
“Fast” is legally limited to the posted speed limit so it makes no difference to you if there is someone doing the speed limit in front of you or not in the left lane. You are not allowed to speed in it or any lane. Period.
In addition in states with “left lane is for passing only” laws that lane is off limits to you if the person you are following in the right lane is doing the speed limit. You are NOT allowed to exceed the speed limit to pass them in any state. IMO such laws are stupid as they force everyone into the right lanes, increasing road damage, congestion and the risk of collisions due to traffic ingress/egress.
If you were in Germany, you’d be facing some steep fines, if not losing your license*.
But we’re not talking about Germany are we?
for the safety and benefit of everyone else on the highway*.
*That sure is a nice high horse you have there.
A heck of a stretch on your return fire on usage of high horse here, but I’ll cede to the ignorance as it’s a waste of time to correct you.
You’re not “being bullied” to get out of the passing/fast lane, it’s having common courtesy and knowledge of how highways work to get the hell out of the way if you’re blocking a lane. Most people have the situational awareness to know that it’s also simple risk mitigation. If someone comes up behind you as you’re doing the speed limit in the fastest lane, you choose not to move because…uh…reasons or something…that person may take irrational actions and pass you on the right, which is not only worse than the speeding you’re so self righteous to call others out on, but a huge safety issue. Worse yet, they could plow into the back of you, sending your Prius all over the highway in pieces, endangering others. Common sense would say, make your pass in lane 3 and get back over to lane 2, yielding lane 3 for – gasp – people passing slower vehicles in lane 2 to the right. A highway is a progressive system with Lane 1.) slowest, Lane 2.) faster Lane 3.) fastest – if the road is empty, you should be in 1, period, unless yielding for traffic entering the roadway, in which you’d go to 2, returning to 1 after passing said traffic. This is not me being elitist or on a high horse – this is driver’s ed 101. For someone so adamant about the rules, you’re sure set to die on this hill about breaking one of the cardinal ones in any driving – awareness of yielding the right of way.
having common courtesy and knowledge of how highways work to get the hell out of the way if you’re blocking a lane.
That is absolutely not true.
Such courtesy only applies if you are traveling BELOW the speed limit. The speed limit is a legal threshold which no-one is allowed to exceed so that courtesy ends there whether you believe otherwise or not. At the speed limit you are blocking no-one as they are not legally entitled to pass you even if you were to move over.
that person may take irrational actions and pass you on the right, which is not only worse than the speeding you’re so self righteous to call others out on, but a huge safety issue.
Which is a very good reason for the speeder to simply slow down to the same speed limit and follow at a safe distance like they are legally required to do. If they take “irrational actions” that is completely on them.
A highway is a progressive system with Lane 1.) slowest, Lane 2.) faster Lane 3.) fastest
This is true UP TO THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT. “Fastest” =/= “as fast as you can go”.
How do you not understand this?
Holy smokes….your head is so far into the clouds that it’s incredible to me. The law with regard to speed limits may be an ideal scenario, but the world rarely functions exactly to it, and you should know this if you’re as old as your posts have implied. You seriously expect the world to bend to you like you’re explaining, rather than using sense and logic to yield adequate space to faster moving vehicles, and attempting to maintain the most safe route of travel? Or are you purposely being hyperbolic here to attempt to prove your point? If you’re not…man…I fear for your safety, especially if you leave California.
Thank you for your concern. I’ve been outside of California many times and I’ve been just fine every time. I have found warnings such as yours to be grossly overblown.
I do not understand however why YOU are so tolerant of speeders. Speeders are bullies, that is very clear in the comments. You claim to rarely speed so those speeders are making the roads less safe for you as well. And that mistakenly entitled attitude is getting worse. You can be part of the solution:
I) Don’t enable speeding. Don’t go with the flow and certainly don’t go faster. Stick to the speed limit or below (in the right lane if you have to) but don’t speed yourself. You claim to already be doing that, good, keep it up.
2) Don’t encourage others to speed. Chide them. Sure they will call you names, so what? What is the derision of a petulant child to you? Forums like the Autopian are important in this. There are many speeders looking for an echo chamber.to resonate with them. Don’t let that happen. Tell them their speeding is unsafe and unacceptable to you as well.
I agree w/ your points except: the left-most lane is #1, and the next is #2 and so on.
Oh, man. You’re that guy! The one that I have to pass on the right! I guess that’s why SoCal highways have so many lanes.
BTW – Have you noticed that the CHP will pass you at 10 mph over the limit or more, without lights and sirens on? That’s a clue about how seriously to take speed limits.
The one that I have to pass on the right!
Nobody driving the posted speed limit is making you pass. The law specifically prohibits you to pass so yo have no legal entitlement to pass. If you pass it’s because you WANT to.
BTW – Have you noticed that the CHP will pass you at 10 over or more, without lights & sirens on? That’s a clue about how seriously to take speed limits.
Regarding lights and sirens you might want to review California Vehicle Code 21055:
“The driver of an authorized emergency vehicle is exempt from Chapter 2 (commencing with Section 21350), Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 21650), Chapter 4 (commencing with Section 21800), Chapter 5 (commencing with Section 21950), Chapter 6 (commencing with 22100), Chapter 7 (commencing with Section 22348), Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 22450), Chapter 9 (commencing with Section 22500), and Chapter 10 (commencing with Section 22650) of this division, and Article 3 (commencing with Section 38305) and Article 4 (commencing with Section 38312) of Chapter 5 of Division 16.5, under all of the following conditions:
(a) If the vehicle is being driven in response to an emergency call or while engaged in rescue operations or is being used in the immediate pursuit of an actual or suspected violator of the law or is responding to, but not returning from, a fire alarm, except that fire department vehicles are exempt whether directly responding to an emergency call or operated from one place to another as rendered desirable or necessary by reason of an emergency call and operated to the scene of the emergency or operated from one fire station to another or to some other location by reason of the emergency call.
(b) If the driver of the vehicle sounds a siren as may be reasonably necessary and the vehicle displays a lighted red lamp visible from the front as a warning to other drivers and pedestrians.
A siren shall not be sounded by an authorized emergency vehicle except when required under this section.
You are of course always welcome to note the license # and file a complaint.
All right, Grampa, let’s get you to bed.
I accept your concession.
Left lane is for crime. GTFO.
…And there it is. Before you said it out loud we all knew that you’re a person who makes highway driving more dangerous by being completely oblivious to the flow of traffic by intentionally camping out in the left lane, and by thinking you’re the police.
I saw your comments on my phone, then got up and left the room to log in on my computer just to tell you how horrible a driver you are.
BTW, when you go to other states and pull this same maneuver, you -are- breaking the law. For example, here in Colorado the left lane is for passing only. If people are able to pass you on the right, you’re breaking the law – and cops are going to be a lot more annoyed with you for impeding them and everyone else going 5-10 over the speed limit.
by thinking you’re the police.
If that were true I’d give you and your speedy friends hefty tickets.
For example, here in Colorado the left lane is for passing only.
Fine for Colorado. Whether that law achieves its stated goals of reducing gridlock and road rage is questionable. Those laws increase the risk of collisions by increasing the number of lane changes, they increase road wear on the right lane (necessitating more frequent road repairs thus increasing congestion), they send mixed messages and they reward road rage and reward speeding. Anyone who dosen’t give a crap about following the speed limit isn’t going to give a crap about the left lane law either.
Hey everyone, we found the source of traffic. It’s this guy. We got him, boys!
Seriously, you’re a piece. Please, dear God, keep your ass in California.
If someone is driving the speed limit in the left lane by definition they are not “the source of traffic”.
Grow up.
If traffic is generally traveling faster than you are in the passing lane at the speed limit, then you are exactly the cause of jams. Get your head out of your ass. You can feel as good as you want to with your legal high ground, but in practice you lose the moral and practical high ground to be a sanctimonious troll.
No, you grow up. You’re the problem.
I bet you make your grandkids claim their birthday card money from you on their taxes.
Better yet, I bet you send grandkids butterscotch candies in birthday cards.
So ageism is funny to you?
How sad.
Why is this loser on a car enthusiast site?
Really government beaurcrats pass laws all the time with no idea if it’s possible or smart or a good idea. To work just pass laws on the power and speed capabilities. No state allows over 90mph. So pass the law no street legal cars except emergency vehicles can exceed 90mph. This will cure the mpg and decrease pollution because manufacturers can then just design cars for smart usage. And if it can’t surpass the speed limit criminals easier tocatch.
Cars don’t need GPS to know the speed limit. My car uses a camera to read the signs.
Hot take: If they do end up implementing this, then maybe they can end traffic stops for speeding? Hmmm. I bet the policymakers haven’t figured loss of revenue into their equation.
Also, I have an old car that has GPS enabled speed limit signs displayed in the dashboard. They are right about 70% of the time, but other times roads that were made after 2013 don’t exist, or how about that highway interchange that is no longer there? This kind of active speed warning will only work if traffic signs and GPS are always perfect and they NEVER will be.
“Hmmm. I bet the policymakers haven’t figured loss of revenue into their equation.”
Try this:
The car automatically logs the speeding with multiple images of the driver. If the driver complies to the warning within a minute or so the event is erased. If not the event is logged for the duration and the car automatically starts flashing the lights, honking the horn and contacts 911 to report an emergency and summon the nearest LEO. The driver then has to explain the nature of the emergency and if no acceptable explanation is given it’s a violation with a fine, maybe points depending on the conditions.
Level 5: Car locks all doors and drives you to nearest state police barracks for booking. We may never reach this one, though Elon says it will be available soon. lol
I’d settle for it just locks the doors and pulls to the shoulder for a 15 minute time out with a stern, pre-recorded safety sermon played through the audio system (volume knob disabled of course) with another 5 minute delay so the speeder can think about their life choices.
I went to a concours a few decades ago where a Ferrari was displayed with a hardbound book on the passenger’s seat entitled “How to Avoid Speeding Tickets in Your Ferrari.” After about 20 pages of preamble, the final page held the secret in just two words: “Don’t speed.”
Yet another reason to keep driving an old car, I can drive whatever speed I want. My only limit is horsepower, traffic conditions, and my own willingness to risk getting a ticket.
And to be responsible for a horrible crash, injure or kill others, etc.
Just make sure traffic conditions =0, plenty of perfectly straight roads in desert CA where you can risk a speeding ticket.
Just ask James Dean.
Checks out,
Looks like traffic for him =1 which is >0 bad move.
James Dean wasn’t driving in the desert when he was killed. He was east of Paso Robles where state highways 41 and 46 meet. Some dumbass farmer violated his right of way and turned left in front of him.
A desert is by definition “arid land with usually sparse vegetation”:
https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/desert
…which perfectly describes that area at the time of the crash:
https://s.hdnux.com/photos/01/24/10/74/22056738/6/960×0.webp
and still does:
https://californiathroughmylens.com/james-dean-crash-site/
Some dumbass farmer violated his right of way and turned left in front of him.
That’s not how the jury saw it:
Yeah exactly. I’ve done 167mph on perfectly smooth roads at midnight when nobody’s around, but that doesn’t mean I’m doing 100+ when there are people around, I’m not a sociopath. One can speed when the conditions are right and still drive like a normal person otherwise.
167 that is impressive, if I did that all my tires would explode, my hood would fly off along with my front bumper.
Also my car probably can’t break 105
That was in my 2000 M5, which had a bunch of Dinan bits, including a tune that removed the 155mph speed limiter. On good tires and a smooth road it felt pretty stable at that speed, I was just more concerned with getting a nasty ticket haha.
My current BMW is a 1995 525i with like half the horsepower of the M5, so I have to work pretty hard to get it to like 120mph.
“One can speed when the conditions are right”
The GLARING flaw in that reasoning is you don’t have all the information to make that judgement. As with my example of James Dean, who was a trained and experienced race driver driving in a car designed for high speed on a long stretch of desert road who slammed into a car that pulled out in front of him because its driver couldn’t see him coming. Shit happens and its a lot harder to avoid that shit when you’re speeding.
Sure, but many things in life come with some risk attached, you can’t account for absolutely everything. Gotta have some fun in life.
If it were just your life and property at risk I’d agree. Since we are sharing those roads I don’t.
Slow down!
You must be fun at parties.
I am. And I drive the speed limit or below.
You would actually get run off the roads in Phoenix driving the speed limit… I don’t think I’ve ever seen anybody do 65… 75-80 is the minimum speed when there isn’t traffic, and cops won’t even both pulling you over unless you’re doing 85+.
I lost count long ago of the number of times I’ve had no problems driving the speed limit or below in places I’ve been assured “You would actually get run off the roads in xxx driving the speed limit… “
I’m pretty sure they’re not fun anywhere.
Contrarian takes for the sake of being contrary are unimaginative.
It’s all about infrastructure baby.
Build roads to discourage speeding, instead of quarter mile wide expanses of pavement, then setting the speed limit to 30mph. It’s stupid and we’ve all been witness to it not working.
That works for some people, but not me. One of the roads I commute on is intentionally curvy. It keeps the appliance drivers closer to the limit but just encourages me to go faster. If I ever get a ticket on that road, I’m going to claim entrapment for making the road too tempting.
Nitpick: CA has an Assembly, consisting of Assemblypersons.
Anywho, I do not need a car telling me I’m driving over the speed limit. I’m married, and she is built in to the passenger seat.
This would make for a great Clarkson rant if it was in the UK. It’s unfortunate that one state has been allowed to essentially create national legislation when it comes to vehicles. It is my sincere hope that their ability to set standards outside of the EPA is removed by the courts at some point in the future. There are just too many people in the California government that honestly believe any problem can be solved with the right law in place.
Another dumb idea to help curb speeding. Did the 85 mph speedometer in the 1980s help? No, it didn’t. How many people shift gears when the light on their dash tells them to do so? Likely no one. Another light telling us what to do isn’t going to help at all, eventually we’ll all just be blind to it. California needs to raise its artificially low speed limits, that would do more to curb speeding than literally anything else the state has ever done.
On the speedos, I did visually enjoy the circle around the 55 though. Added a nice little asymmetric pop to things.
Don’t remember seeing the circle, but plenty of 55 were orange, while everything else was white.
So instead of a feeble dash light blast “SLOW DOWN!!” in your mothers angry voice through the stereo.
It’ll be great until the warranty expires and it starts blaring at you for going over 15 in a 65 zone.
Or they could build infrastructure that discourages speeding, set appropriate speed limits, and design infrastructure to better protect pedestrians/cyclists. But it’s easier and cheaper to push a non-solution off onto a third party.
I don’t disagree with you but that’s easier said than done in certain areas of the country.
Many roads in urban environments here were never even designed for automotive traffic in the first place and would require extensive/expensive planning (let alone construction) to properly fix. There is no one-size-fits-all band-aid to apply.
This “solution” is moronic though.
Lets connect every car to GPS. Sure, because auto mfrs already do connected security so well, or at all.
Those are the best roads suited to speed-hostile and pro-pedestrian infrastructure. The roads that are the worst for speeding and non-car traffic are the quintessential car-centric developments of 4+ lanes, wide lanes roads with few traffic control signals, and significant setbacks. If more roads were like what’s found in central New York, Boston, Chicago, Charleston, etc. and less like the sprawl of LA, Houston, Atlanta, etc. we’d be far better off.
Part of the problem is that you have no room on (or around) older roads though.
If you have 4+ lanes, you at least have space to consider different options.
Narrow roads are the goal, usually. When there’s less width to work with, people naturally drive slower. About the only downside for those older roads is a lack of space for protected bike lanes, which is often ameliorated by removing on-street parking, which in-turn reduces driver distraction and congestion as people hunt for a parking spot.
“About the only downside for those older roads is a lack of space for protected bike lanes,”
Exactly, that’s one of the things we were talking about. It’s hard to create a natural space for bike lanes without a huge redesign if you don’t have any spare space to begin with. While some older roads around here do have on-street parking you could potentially cannibalize from (good luck with that because the narrow roads are often in areas that don’t have enough parking as it is), some do not.
Even in the places that do, you’re not going to make too many people happy removing parking spots in order to create bike lanes. Those areas where you’re looking to promote safer biking are usually the same spots that have a massive shortage of parking availability.
That is true, assuming the primary goal is to create dedicated biking spaces. But that’s not the explicit goal. Slowing traffic is because – even absent a dedicated bike lane – slower urban traffic is safer for pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists. Furthermore, these centuries old inner city streets aren’t really the target because they aren’t the problem. Multi-lane post-1950 urban and suburban arterials are.
Others raise the more salient points, but I’ll add that from a practical interface pov (esp. as it would eventually get watered down in final form), this strikes me as being somewhat similar to the upshift light on my dash that goes off to tell me when to move to the next gear for best fuel economy.
It’s literally there, but cognitively I don’t even perceive it anymore.
That’s just a beta test for what they really want, speed governors, which actually work pretty well on OTR trucking. Of course those are generally hired drivers and it’s part of the job.
Damned California. Every time you pass a law you create more criminals. Just let it be.
> Every time you pass a law you create more criminals
That’s a feature, not a bug. Gotta keep those campaign donations from the prison industrial complex flowing and your cred as a tough on crime law and order politician. Never mind the bribes you’re taking to do the private sector’s bidding.