Kill switch in 2026

[Jim2000]

Slow roll-out complacency..."its so far in the future it's not that big of a deal"...sorry, but it is a big deal. I understand the 'boiling a frog by slowing turning up the heat' metaphor is scientifically inaccurate, but the concept of creeping normality is 100% valid.

For me this all started with the huge expansion of executive powers that effectively authorized spying on us after the 9/11 attacks. The abuse that resulted from that power is the headwaters for some of my distrust in certain elements of "the government". Whether they can turn the car off or not is immaterial, it's the fact that we accepted this intrusion into our lives in the first place.

Lastly, just because some are expressing skepticism about our government, perceived overreach, and abuse of power does not preclude us from being constructive contributors to our families, our neighborhoods, our communities, and patriotic supporters of our country (will I get canceled for saying that last part?).

You are an American Patriot. I agree with you 100%

 

[rubberduck]

Life is inherently dangerous. Maybe if people are afraid of dying they should not leave their house. Then they only have to contend with carbon monoxide poisoning, gas explosions, falling in the shower, electrocution, a crazed maniac in the neighborhood, a car going through their house, falling objects from the sky, etc.

 

[Jim2000]

Life is inherently dangerous. Maybe if people are afraid of dying they should not leave their house. Then they only have to contend with carbon monoxide poisoning, gas explosions, falling in the shower, electrocution, a crazed maniac in the neighborhood, a car going through their house, falling objects from the sky, etc.

This isn't about taking risks or being fearful. This is about having the government being overly intrusive into our lives creating something that most Americans do not want to have in their cars. It's bad enough that our beloved Blackwings won't be made in the near future as we are forced to buy an electric car. Is having a kill switch in our cars helpful to most people?

 

[1Evil55]

Reminds me of this cartoon:

 

[rubberduck]

This isn't about taking risks or being fearful. This is about having the government being overly intrusive into our lives creating something that most Americans do not want to have in their cars. It's bad enough that our beloved Blackwings won't be made in the near future as we are forced to buy an electric car. Is having a kill switch in our cars helpful to most people?

It is exactly about being fearful. That is why the sheep are so eager to allow every aspect of their lives to be "safeguarded" by all these regulations and why we are where we are today. The Government doesn't do anything we don't allow them to do.

 

[Finally-a-V]

We already know police are much more likely to enforce speed limits (whether someone is driving competently or not) rather than penalize truly dangerous driving, even when they see it.

Good Lord is this correct. I was stopped for going 10 mph over the limit out on I-10. Trooper says you sped up whenever you went around some one. I said that's because the people in the left lane aren't yielding the right of way. You know, slower traffic keep right? He says, they're doing the speed limit, technically within the letter of the law. What? So, slower traffic keep right, failure to yield, basically blocking the left lane, isn't worse than speeding? So, me being 10 over is worse than the guy who won't move over, holding up traffic causing everyone to change lanes to get around him? Lane changes, especially as people get pissed off, can be dangerous, leading to road rage and possible accidents? What? He says....YES, speeding is worse. I guess he knows speeding will hold up in court, but a ticket for "slower traffic keep right" will get thrown out. Sorry for the rant, and being off topic. It's just a huge issue here in AZ.

 

[Jim2000]

It is exactly about being fearful. That is why the sheep are so eager to allow every aspect of their lives to be "safeguarded" by all these regulations and why we are where we are today. The Government doesn't do anything we don't allow them to do.

Not exactly true concerning your comment that the government doesn't do anything we don't allow them to do. When a minority of people govern a country and do not take into account the needs of the majority, then we have a problem such as this topic of a kill switch being installed in our cars. I do not believe that the majority of Americans are in favor of this.

 

[Jim2000]

Good Lord is this correct. I was stopped for going 10 mph over the limit out on I-10. Trooper says you sped up whenever you went around some one. I said that's because the people in the left lane aren't yielding the right of way. You know, slower traffic keep right? He says, they're doing the speed limit, technically within the letter of the law. What? So, slower traffic keep right, failure to yield, basically blocking the left lane, isn't worse than speeding? So, me being 10 over is worse than the guy who won't move over, holding up traffic causing everyone to change lanes to get around him? Lane changes, especially as people get pissed off, can be dangerous, leading to road rage and possible accidents? What? He says....YES, speeding is worse. I guess he knows speeding will hold up in court, but a ticket for "slower traffic keep right" will get thrown out. Sorry for the rant, and being off topic. It's just a huge issue here in AZ.

I can see both points of view on the topic of moving out of the fast lane when others want to go faster. Certainly drivers who are barely going the speed limit should move out of the fast lane. But should we move out of the fast lane if we are traveling at the rate of speed that traffic is moving to allow a person who wants to drive at 100 on the freeway and wants everyone to move out of his way? In other words should we give the reckless speeder the fast lane like we would clear the lane for an ambulance. I do agree with you in regards to the reckless speeding drivers who will change lanes and weave through traffic being a danger to everyone.

 

[Finally-a-V]

@Jim2000 ...I understand your point, but when some one is "doing the speed limit" and holding up traffic when the flow is higher, that's wrong. That's why some state have "slower traffic keep right" laws or "left lane is for passing" laws. I'm not talking about the guy doing 20 or 30 over. If some one is behind you, move over. I don't care how fast you're going. Lead, follow or get out of the way!

 

[Jim2000]

@Jim2000 ...I understand your point, but when some one is "doing the speed limit" and holding up traffic when the flow is higher, that's wrong. That's why some state have "slower traffic keep right" laws or "left lane is for passing" laws. I'm not talking about the guy doing 20 or 30 over. If some one is behind you, move over. I don't care how fast you're going. Lead, follow or get out of the way!

@Jim2000 ...I understand your point, but when some one is "doing the speed limit" and holding up traffic when the flow is higher, that's wrong. That's why some state have "slower traffic keep right" laws or "left lane is for passing" laws. I'm not talking about the guy doing 20 or 30 over. If some one is behind you, move over. I don't care how fast you're going. Lead, follow or get out of the way!

People should move over if they are not keeping up with the speed in the fast lane. What I object to is the driver who wants to go 100 and expects everyone to get out of the fast lane just for him. I think it is rude and dangerous and there are many drivers who are acting like that. We all share the road regardless of the amount of taxes that we pay.

 

[ernsteeng]

Agreed. If you are in the left lane with a line of traffic behind you and nobody in front of you - you NEED to move over.

 

[rubberduck]

Not exactly true concerning your comment that the government doesn't do anything we don't allow them to do. When a minority of people govern a country and do not take into account the needs of the majority, then we have a problem such as this topic of a kill switch being installed in our cars. I do not believe that the majority of Americans are in favor of this.

I was just reading from the Constitution, which we all know the politicians routinely ignore. CA is a prime example. They purposely pass laws they know are unconstitutional, but it takes decades of court battles to unwind them. Yet, for some reason people keep voting for these people. In that sense we are allowing them to do what they do.

 

[Tall Steve]

Good Lord is this correct. I was stopped for going 10 mph over the limit out on I-10. Trooper says you sped up whenever you went around some one. I said that's because the people in the left lane aren't yielding the right of way. You know, slower traffic keep right? He says, they're doing the speed limit, technically within the letter of the law. What? So, slower traffic keep right, failure to yield, basically blocking the left lane, isn't worse than speeding? So, me being 10 over is worse than the guy who won't move over, holding up traffic causing everyone to change lanes to get around him? Lane changes, especially as people get pissed off, can be dangerous, leading to road rage and possible accidents? What? He says....YES, speeding is worse. I guess he knows speeding will hold up in court, but a ticket for "slower traffic keep right" will get thrown out. Sorry for the rant, and being off topic. It's just a huge issue here in AZ.

The cop was power tripping! Most are A-holes!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tall Steve]

People should move over if they are not keeping up with the speed in the fast lane. What I object to is the driver who wants to go 100 and expects everyone to get out of the fast lane just for him. I think it is rude and dangerous and there are many drivers who are acting like that. We all share the road regardless of the amount of taxes that we pay.

If someone comes up on your 6 and you are in the left lane, you are wrong!

 

[Jim2000]

If some comes up on your 6 and you are in the left lane, you are wrong!

Nope. That person behind you does not own the road.

 

[Tall Steve]

Nope. That person behind you does not own the road.

The left lane is not for cruising down the road like you own it, its for passing.....

 

[Jim2000]

The left lane is not for cruising down the road like you own it, its for passing.....

Not in all states. Why should we move over for the inconsiderate people who want to travel at 100mph? The people who are excessively speeding and are riding your tail are the ones who think they own the road.

 

[ernsteeng]

I believe it is called sharing the road. Let the faster people pass and then you can move back over. When my kids were taking drivers ed they were all told to avoid being a traffic block by staying in the left lane and allow faster cars to pass.

 

[Jim2000]

I believe it is called sharing the road. Let the faster people pass and then you can move back over. When my kids were taking drivers ed they were all told to avoid being a traffic block by staying in the left lane and allow faster cars to pass.

I have no issues sharing the road. I do have a problem with aggressive drivers who demand that you move over when there is traffic ahead of you and the left lane is traveling well above the speed limit and they expect all to get out of their way so they can travel at 100mph.

 

[Matt27]

I have no issues sharing the road. I do have a problem with aggressive drivers who demand that you move over when there is traffic ahead of you and the left lane is traveling well above the speed limit and they expect all to get out of their way so they can travel at 100mph.

I don't think anybody is suggesting that you jam yourself into traffic just to let somebody by, but if it's safe you should.

Doesn't matter how fast you're going.