USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

House Republicans are going to vote to officially authorize an impeachment inquiry and select committee next week.

They want to have a final vote on articles of impeachment sometime in January or February, but are allegedly running into problems with a few Republican representatives who are in competitive/blue seats and are supportive of the inquiry because they can say they "just voted to get more information," but are worried that voting for impeachment with no evidence will make them look partisan and hurt their ability to get re-elected.

Hunter Biden and James Biden were supposed to appear for closed-door testimony tomorrow, but those interviews are likely being delayed because they are requesting to have their questioning done in public.

The primary reason Republicans want to formalize the impeachment inquiry is to strengthen their hand legally with subpoenas because they anticipate several of the people they will call will resist the subpoena because it isn't part of an authorized investigation or inquiry.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1732059796583375357

quote:

WASHINGTON � The White House is rebuking House Republicans for continuing to pursue their impeachment inquiry into President Joe Biden despite admitting that they haven't uncovered any evidence of wrongdoing.

Ian Sams, White House spokesperson for Oversight and Investigations, argued in a statement Tuesday that Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene, R-Ga., appears to be calling the shots.

"All these House Republicans and their colleagues should answer for why they would change tune now and go along with her baseless exercise to smear President Biden when their allegations have already been thoroughly fact-checked and debunked," Sams said, "instead of focusing on the issues they claimed they would prioritize when they ran for office, like lowering inflation, growing the economy, and strengthening national security.�

The White House said that House Republicans have engaged in these probes for months and no documents, testimony or sensitive law enforcement information "has supported their allegations of wrongdoing by President Biden." The White House highlighted several quotes from Republican lawmakers saying they had not seen evidence of wrongdoing.

"Despite this reality, the far right is calling the shots and demanding House Republicans continue down this path of failure," said the White House, which called the impeachment inquiry "illegitimate."

The House Oversight Committee did not immediately respond to a request for comment. Oversight Committee Chairman James Comer, R-Ky., is leading the investigation in conjunction with House Judiciary Committee Chairman Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, and Ways and Means Committee Chairman Jason Smith, R-Mo.

House Republicans are gearing up to soon vote to formally authorize the GOP's impeachment inquiry, which was announced by former Speaker Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., in September. Leaving the GOP conference meeting Tuesday, Majority Leader Steve Scalise, R-La., and Majority Whip Tom Emmer, R-Minn., both said that a vote to formalize the impeachment inquiry would happen next week, with Emmer adding the caveat �if it comes."

Democrats criticized McCarthy's decision, pointing out that he had lashed out at then-Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., for announcing an impeachment inquiry into then-President Donald Trump herself without a formal House vote authorizing it.

A month later, the House voted to formalize rules and procedures for the Trump inquiry.

Key House Republicans say that the purpose of a vote to authorize the impeachment inquiry into Biden is to strengthen the GOP's enforcement of subpoenas in a potential legal fight.

As part of the inquiry, the Oversight panel has already issued subpoenas to the president's son Hunter Biden and the president's brother, James Biden. Republicans are insisting that Hunter Biden appear first for a closed-door deposition, while he has proposed that he testify publicly instead.

James Biden was originally scheduled to appear for a deposition on Wednesday, but that's no longer expected to happen that day, according to a source familiar with the process. The committee is in communication with his attorney about scheduling a time for him to come in.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 17:04

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 00:13

FLIPADELPHIA: Apr 27, 2007; Heavy Shit; Grimey Drawer

Didn't a bunch of Trump affiliated people just ignore subpoenas over the last few years? It's tough to keep track of all the million scandals and ethics/legal violations associated with these people.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 17:09

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

FLIPADELPHIA posted:

Didn't a bunch of Trump affiliated people just ignore subpoenas over the last few years? It's tough to keep track of all the million scandals and ethics/legal violations associated with these people.

Some of the people who were actually serving in government at the time argued that they couldn't be subpoenaed for fulfilling their normal duties. Most of them eventually complied or ended up in contempt.

Betsy Devos was eventually required to testify two years later, Peter Navarro was indicted for refusing a subpoena, and Steve Bannon got 4 months in prison for refusing to testify to the January 6th committee.

Trump himself successfully ignored several subpoenas by taking them to court for years and then waiting it out until he was out of office and the Republican House withdrew them.

Kellyanne Conway was the only major Trump staffer who successfully dodged a subpoena with no consequences or fight because she eventually agreed to voluntarily testify publicly.

Most of the staffers successfully ran out the clock until they were out of office, but eventually complied after a court order or were held in contempt. Trump himself evaded several subpoenas without consequence.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 17:20

FlamingLiberal: Jan 18, 2009; Would you like to play a game?

This is going to be a huge self-own by the GOP. It�s going to just make people feel bad for Biden at worst.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 17:32

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

The Oversight Committee is trying to structure it in such a way that the Republicans in blue seats can say they were forced to impeach because of the evidence and that they weren't doing it for partisan reasons.

quote:

�It�s important we get it done as soon as possible so we can move forward with this investigation,� Rep. Kevin Hern, R-Okla., said last week, noting that the GOP still has to tread carefully and convince any Republicans who could be skeptical of the inquiry, given the party�s razor-thin majority in the lower chamber. �We can only lose four votes. We have to make sure everybody�s involved in that because we know the Democrats won�t support it.�

quote:

�Lots of members want to make sure that it is actually legally constitutional and that we�re not prejudging facts,� Dusty Johnson said, adding there is a concern from members that the inquiry could appear as if the GOP was being �motivated by politics.�

quote:

But members who represent districts Biden won in the 2020 election, occasionally referred to as the �Biden 18,� have not been as vocal with their support on impeachment. The officials have indicated they would approve authorizing the inquiry but are still keeping their cards close to their chest.

�I didn�t come here to impeach anyone,� Rep. Marc Molinaro, R-N.Y., told reporters last week, but also adding that the House has a �fundamental responsibility of provide accountability to the executive branch� and that he �is troubled by some of the behavior� from the White House.

Some Republicans are also having trouble staying on message and pretty blatantly saying the quiet part out loud:

quote:

For what it�s worth, Rep. Troy Nehls, R-Texas, one of Trump�s most vocal supporters in the House, has not shied away from pushing for Biden�s impeachment in part to play politics.

If Trump, who has been impeached twice, is the 2024 Republican nominee, Nehls said he wants to give Trump �a little bit of ammo to fire back� and say Biden has also been impeached.

quote:

And one GOP lawmaker, granted anonymity to speak more freely, offered an even blunter assessment: �There�s no evidence that Joe Biden got money, or that Joe Biden, you know, agreed to do something so that Hunter could get money. There�s just no evidence of that. And they can�t impeach without that evidence. And I don�t I don�t think the evidence exists.�

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/04/republican-impeach-joe-biden-vote/71803686007/

# ? Dec 5, 2023 17:34

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Traffic deaths increased 27% over the last 10 years, with especially large increases in 2020 and 2021 despite far fewer people being on the road, and the NHTSA is opening an investigation to figure out why.

About 1/3 of roadway deaths are related to speeding and the majority of the rest are due to distracted driving or impaired driving. Even though cars have gotten safer, drivers have gotten more dangerous.

There are several areas they are studying and running pilot programs to test:

1) Whether car advertisements that include footage of reckless driving or advertise features that can encourage reckless driving (like basing an ad around the 220 MPH max speed of a car) are influencing people to drive more recklessly or purchase cars with features that increase accidents (such as advertising rapid 0 to 60 stats or 1,000 horse power engines as selling points).

2) Speed limiters that will cap a car's speed.

One possible example would be a global speed cap of 120 MPH. Another would be to dynamically cap the car's speed based on location - the example they are looking at is a cap at 20 MPH above whatever the speed limit is on the road.

3) This is already being implemented and started in 2021: The SAFE system that encourages cities to redesign their roads, bike lanes, and pedestrian pathways to follow the principles SAFE design with the goal of reaching 0 traffic fatalities.

A summary is here:

https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-06/FHWA_SafeSystem_Brochure_V9_508_200717.pdf

4) Getting hard data on why driving quality and accidents fell so rapidly during the pandemic and never recovered.

5) How much new car designs, particularly in trucks and SUVs, featuring taller cabs are contributing to increased pedestrian deaths due to the driver having a larger blind spot in front of the car.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1731863538161906099

quote:

Automakers often display a warning in commercials when showing a car executing incredible stunts: "Professional driver on a closed course. Please do not attempt."

But with deaths from car crashes rising every year, experts are asking if that kind of boilerplate language, which more or less fades into the background as a vehicle burns rubber on the screen, goes far enough.

Last month, the National Transportation Safety Board called for a study of car advertisements, saying the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety (IIHS) should try to determine if there is a link between commercials that show unsafe driver behavior and real-world speeding or reckless driving.

"Nearly one-third of our roadway deaths are speeding related, and this sort of advertising is dangerous and contributes to a culture of speeding that costs lives," said NTSB Chair Jennifer Homendy in a statement to NBC News. "Everyone � including vehicle manufacturers � shares in the responsibility for safety on our roads."

If there is such a link, it's going to be hard to prove, according to David Zuby, the chief research officer at IIHS. Still, Zuby said his group will work on ways to examine whether there could be a link between crashes and commercials that show dangerous driving.

"It probably doesn't help driver behavior to have everyday cars being shown driven aggressively," he told NBC.

The NTSB's suggestion was one of a series of observations it made in a report about a January 2022 crash in Las Vegas that killed nine people.

Homendy and the NTSB is not suggesting that car commercials were solely responsible for that crash. As the agency's report noted, driver Gary Dean Robinson was impaired by cocaine and PCP, and he had a history of speeding. At the time of the crash, he was driving more than 100 miles per hour on a street where the speed limit was 35. He hit a Toyota Sienna carrying seven people in it, including four children. All seven died, as did Robinson and a passenger in his car.

The NTSB recommended a series of more concrete steps, including that regulators consider implementing "an intelligent speed assistance system (ISA) that electronically limits the speed of the vehicle," and that states make it a priority to reduce repeat-offense speeding.

Meanwhile, experts have been revamping street designs and city plans to discourage dangerous driving and make the road safer for pedestrians and bicyclists.

Col. Matt Langer of the Minnesota State Patrol said drivers started taking more risks at the height of the pandemic, when roads were relatively empty. The number of drivers on the road has returned to normal, but the manner in which people are driving hasn't improved.

"The roads today are more dangerous than they were five years ago, and some of the progress that we'd made in the U.S. related to traffic safety have been erased," he said.

Langer, who is also the chair of the roadway safety committee for the International Association of Chiefs of Police, said that speeding makes other problems, like impairment or not using seatbelts, even worse.

"We've got this huge problem all across the country and all across the world with speeding motorists. It�s creating all kinds of other problems," he said.

So the idea of addressing car advertising is only one suggestion. But what's clear is that the report comes at a time of growing concerns about how drivers are behaving.

The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, which is part of the Department of Transportation and is distinct from the independent NTSB, says that deaths in car crashes increased 27% from 2012 to 2021, the most recent year for which it has reported data.

"It's becoming increasingly accepted that contributing factors to the increase in road deaths over the last decade or so is largely due to bad driver behavior, or risk-taking behavior," said Zuby.

But even if there is no link between commercials and risky driving, he suggests that car companies are making choices that make driving more dangerous.

�The horsepower of all vehicles has gone up dramatically over the last 20, 30 years," said Zuby, who said he�s been working on highway safety since 1986. He noted that automakers have been competing to outdo each other in recent years, with the engines in some Dodge Charger variants for example offering nearly 1,000 horsepower.

�What�s the point of selling a 1,000-horsepower car to people who are going to drive it on the road?� he asked.

Crashes involving pedestrians are killing more people as well. Zuby said that�s connected to growing sales of large, tall SUVs and to some cities encouraging more people to bike and walk, creating more pedestrian traffic.

The IIHS is best known for crash tests and for evaluating safety claims made by automakers, but Zuby says the group is starting to consider more drastic steps.

"We�ve never un-recommended a vehicle because we think it�s got an irresponsibly powerful engine, but that is the kind of thing we�re talking about with deaths on the rise, and the contribution of speeding seems to be an important part of that rise,� he said.

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 18:50 on Dec 5, 2023

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:01

Mid-Life Crisis: Jun 13, 2023; by Fluffdaddy

Killer robot posted:

The Whiskey Rebellion is probably the most famous example of the Second Amendment being used as originally intended but no one really talks about it that way since it doesn't fit either competing narrative about it. First, and most obviously, the "militia" described in the Amendment itself wasn't the rebellion against supposed government overreach. It was the army Washington led, raised by the states at the order of the federal government. At some 13,000 men, it was as big as the armies Washington led during the Revolution, despite the Constitution and federal character of the time having a strong stance against standing armies.

Which is the second point: despite the Militia Act of 1792, it's not like there was any sort of organized and equipped militia ready to call up like the National Guard today. They drafted random people, and where they could they leveraged people who had guns or firearm training (military or private) to make it less of building an army ground up. You're right that it took a long time due to the scales involved and the size of the army called for (The reports they were getting said there were 8000 armed rebels, thus the demand to outclass them.) Individual states drafting smaller militias could presumably act more quickly.

The whole point of the 2nd was "raise an army on the cheap to deal with rebels or invaders" which only made sense from the perspective of a thinly populated agrarian nation with no great powers nearby and then only if you squinted, but it's still why no matter what the right tells you "militia" doesn't mean rebels marching on Washington to throw the bums out, and no matter what the right tells you, "the people" does not mean "employees of a government organization with government-issued arms." The correct left-wing argument is that it was a dumbass pipe dream replacement for an army, and was being called out as such by 1810, never mind how outdated it is today. That and how if you really care about the founders' fears of government tyranny, they were way more concerned about "expensive standing military draining the economy and looking for wars to fight."

I agree this is closer to the truth than most. But the turn on overreaching the government was absolutely still a part of it.

Try to build a standing army today and see how far you�d get. They couldn�t even make a house full of hippies in Waco without government violence.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:15

Mid-Life Crisis: Jun 13, 2023; by Fluffdaddy

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Traffic deaths increased 27% over the last 10 years, with especially large increases in 2020 and 2021 despite far fewer people being on the road, and the NHTSA is opening an investigation to figure out why.

About 1/3 of roadway deaths are related to speeding and the majority of the rest are due to distracted driving or impaired driving. Even though cars have gotten safer, drivers have gotten more dangerous.

There are several areas they are studying and running pilot programs to test:

1) Whether car advertisements that include footage of reckless driving or advertise features that can encourage reckless driving (like basing an ad around the 220 MPH max speed of a car) are influencing people to drive more recklessly or purchase cars with features that increase accidents (such as advertising rapid 0 to 60 stats or 1,000 horse power engines as selling points).

2) Speed limiters that will cap a car's speed.

One possible example would be a global speed cap of 120 MPH and at 120 mph. Another would be to dynamically cap the car's speed based on location - the example they are looking at is a cap at 20 MPH above whatever the speed limit is on the road.

3) This is already being implemented and started in 2021: The SAFE system that encourages cities to redesign their roads, bike lanes, and pedestrian pathways to follow the principles SAFE design with the goal of reaching 0 traffic fatalities.

A summary is here:

https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-06/FHWA_SafeSystem_Brochure_V9_508_200717.pdf

4) Getting hard data on why driving quality and accidents fell so rapidly during the pandemic and never recovered.

5) How much new car designs, particularly in trucks and SUVs, featuring taller cabs are contributing to increased pedestrian deaths due to the driver having a larger blind spot in front of the car.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1731863538161906099

The Fed can allow states to put actual speed limits into place instead of the overly conservative nonsense they only keep around pretending they are somehow improving gas mileage and then let the states actually enforce the limits.

Everyone knows the speed limits are the number +10 and in big cities the limits are so hilariously low it�s closer to +25.

The ambiguity enables high percentages of dangerous driver.

These people speeding and dying aren�t doing so in custom cars or decked out cars in appreciable numbers. They�re driving minivans and SUVs and are top heavy and handle like poo poo.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:21

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

2) Speed limiters that will cap a car's speed.

One possible example would be a global speed cap of 120 MPH and at 120 mph.

In which situations would a speed cap of 120 MPH make traffic safer? NASCAR?

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:27

Discendo Vox: Mar 21, 2013; We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.

I'll be curious about what research finds regarding the move to screen interfaces in cars. I'm not sure how prevalent they actually are on the roads.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:29

DEEP STATE PLOT: Aug 13, 2008; Yes...Ha ha ha...YES!

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

Traffic deaths increased 27% over the last 10 years, with especially large increases in 2020 and 2021 despite far fewer people being on the road, and the NHTSA is opening an investigation to figure out why.

About 1/3 of roadway deaths are related to speeding and the majority of the rest are due to distracted driving or impaired driving. Even though cars have gotten safer, drivers have gotten more dangerous.

There are several areas they are studying and running pilot programs to test:

1) Whether car advertisements that include footage of reckless driving or advertise features that can encourage reckless driving (like basing an ad around the 220 MPH max speed of a car) are influencing people to drive more recklessly or purchase cars with features that increase accidents (such as advertising rapid 0 to 60 stats or 1,000 horse power engines as selling points).

2) Speed limiters that will cap a car's speed.

One possible example would be a global speed cap of 120 MPH and at 120 mph. Another would be to dynamically cap the car's speed based on location - the example they are looking at is a cap at 20 MPH above whatever the speed limit is on the road.

3) This is already being implemented and started in 2021: The SAFE system that encourages cities to redesign their roads, bike lanes, and pedestrian pathways to follow the principles SAFE design with the goal of reaching 0 traffic fatalities.

A summary is here:

https://highways.dot.gov/sites/fhwa.dot.gov/files/2022-06/FHWA_SafeSystem_Brochure_V9_508_200717.pdf

4) Getting hard data on why driving quality and accidents fell so rapidly during the pandemic and never recovered.

5) How much new car designs, particularly in trucks and SUVs, featuring taller cabs are contributing to increased pedestrian deaths due to the driver having a larger blind spot in front of the car.

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1731863538161906099

it's because of tesla autopilot, op

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:29

Acebuckeye13: Nov 2, 2010; Ultra Carp

Nenonen posted:

In which situations would a speed cap of 120 MPH make traffic safer? NASCAR?

Street racing, drunk drivers, very dumb teenagers with cars their parents really shouldn't have bought for them.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:30

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

Mid-Life Crisis posted:

The Fed can allow states to put actual speed limits into place instead of the overly conservative nonsense they only keep around pretending they are somehow improving gas mileage and then let the states actually enforce the limits.

Everyone knows the speed limits are the number +10 and in big cities the limits are so hilariously low it’s closer to +25.

The ambiguity enables high percentages of dangerous driver.

These people speeding and dying aren’t doing so in custom cars or decked out cars in appreciable numbers. They’re driving minivans and SUVs and are top heavy and handle like poo poo.

People aren't going to be safer if urban speed limits are increased by 25mph you loving idiot. We need to stop people from going 50mph in cities, not increase the speed limits to accommodate anti social assholes. Road deaths haven't gone up due to low speed limits.

With SUVs, you're missing the core issues as well, the overall curb weight, along with poo poo sightlines. Speeding in these vehicles is especially dangerous due to their sheer mass. Turnovers don't happen nearly as much and with more and more hybrids and full electric cars, SUVs aren't even that top heavy on average.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:32

Cimber: Feb 3, 2014

No more police chases if cars can't go over a certain limit.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:34

Nenonen: Oct 22, 2009; Mulla on aina kolkyt donaa taskussa

Acebuckeye13 posted:

Street racing, drunk drivers, very dumb teenagers with cars their parents really shouldn't have bought for them.

Wouldn't something like... 90 MPH be more sensible then?

fwiw I have never owned a car that could go 120 MPH without falling apart from the vibration and condition of roads first. I don't understand why any car should go that fast on public roads.

Nenonen fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Dec 5, 2023

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:35

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

I'm going to put my money on the shift to taller and larger vehicles with enormous human sized blind spots in the front so bad that they install cameras.

There needs to be some law regarding the minimum angle and distance you can see the ground in front of the vehicle.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:37

Acebuckeye13: Nov 2, 2010; Ultra Carp

Kagrenak posted:

People aren't going to be safer if urban speed limits are increased by 25mph you loving idiot. We need to stop people from going 50mph in cities, not increase the speed limits to accommodate anti social assholes. Road deaths haven't gone up due to low speed limits.

I mean it's more of an edge case but there's definitely areas where the road might be built up like a highway but have a very low speed limit (Like, 35mph), that is never enforced and results in the vast majority of drivers ignoring it. That does result in unsafe situations, where a handful of people are driving at 35 mph while everyone else is whizzing past them at 50-60. Either raise the speed limit or enforce the existing one!

That said, I seriously doubt those specific situations are a major cause of traffic fatalities.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:39

Kagrenak: Sep 8, 2010

Heck Yes! Loam! posted:

I'm going to put my money on the shift to taller and larger vehicles with enormous human sized blind spots in the front so bad that they install cameras.

There needs to be some law regarding the minimum angle and distance you can see the ground in front of the vehicle.

Yeah you should need a CDL or something beyond a certain blind spot threshold imo.

Acebuckeye13 posted:

I mean it's more of an edge case but there's definitely areas where the road might be built up like a highway but have a very low speed limit (Like, 35mph), that is never enforced and results in the vast majority of drivers ignoring it. That does result in unsafe situations, where a handful of people are driving at 35 mph while everyone else is whizzing past them at 50-60. Either raise the speed limit or enforce the existing one!

That said, I seriously doubt those specific situations are a major cause of traffic fatalities.

Yeah this is why I specified urban areas. Semi limited access roads which are clearly signed 30mph lower than their design speed is pretty different than saying a road like Massachusetts Avenue in Boston should be signed at 45 because some assholes like to go irresponsibly fast through one of the densest areas in the country.

Kagrenak fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Dec 5, 2023

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:39

Zotix: Aug 14, 2011

We've talked about it before, but this is in my experience because police just aren't doing routine traffic enforcement.

Growing up I saw police pulling people over all the time. There were routine speed traps, etc. The last 4-5 years, nada. I can be out for an hour and see one police car and they often aren't pulling people over. Meanwhile I see cars passing me on double solid line roads. Cars speeding 20-30 over the limit. Accidents almost all the time. Cars slow to a crawl to get through the accident then when they get past just open it up, just to get into an accident themselves.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:42

Hieronymous Alloy: Jan 30, 2009; Why! Why!! Why must you refuse to accept that Dr. Hieronymous Alloy's Genetically Enhanced Cream Corn Is Superior to the Leading Brand on the Market!?!; Morbid Hound

Cops just don't want to work any more!

My vote is increased vehicle mass and decreased visibility.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:43

Tiny Timbs: Sep 6, 2008

It's kind of a tough dynamic in the US because I want better traffic management but I also don't want to die because the cop pulling me over for going 35 in a 30 is having a bad day

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:44

Heck Yes! Loam!: Nov 15, 2004; a rich, friable soil containing a relatively equal mixture of sand and silt and a somewhat smaller proportion of clay.

Stroads!!! :argh:

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:44

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

Nenonen posted:

In which situations would a speed cap of 120 MPH make traffic safer? NASCAR?

Currently, there is no cap. The average top speed of a car in the U.S. is 120 MPH. I'm assuming they picked that number to have a very light touch and bring down the large minority of cars that can hit 200+ down to the average.

There would be much less of a freakout over a 120 MPH global cap than the 20+ MPH over the speed limit cap and I'm sure that was part of what they considered. They haven't officially recommended speed limiters yet, but they are looking into it now. Who knows how many years it would be before that actually hits most cars on the road if they even did implement it?

Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 18:57 on Dec 5, 2023

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:53

single-mode fiber: Dec 30, 2012

Tax vehicle axle weight by a power of 4 and engine cowl height by a power of 2 and you'd probably start getting somewhere.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:57

Boris Galerkin: Dec 17, 2011; I don't understand why I can't harass people online. Seriously, somebody please explain why I shouldn't be allowed to stalk others on social media!

Kagrenak posted:

People aren't going to be safer if urban speed limits are increased by 25mph you loving idiot. We need to stop people from going 50mph in cities, not increase the speed limits to accommodate anti social assholes. Road deaths haven't gone up due to low speed limits.

With SUVs, you're missing the core issues as well, the overall curb weight, along with poo poo sightlines. Speeding in these vehicles is especially dangerous due to their sheer mass. Turnovers don't happen nearly as much and with more and more hybrids and full electric cars, SUVs aren't even that top heavy on average.

I understood the op you quoted as the op saying speed limits are hilariously not enforced. �Everyone knows� that the speed limit is whatever the sign says +5-10 in city and +10-11 on highway.

Anyway, I think I�ve posted before about how I�m deathly afraid of other drivers when I�m driving but have no issue with the people taking the driverless taxis? The predictability is the point. Just switching lanes induces so much loving anxiety in me because people are unpredictable loving assholes. I�ll be waiting for one car to pull ahead so I can switch, signal it, start to switch, and then some rear end in a top hat zooms up into the lane. gently caress people drivers.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:58

Jiro: Jan 13, 2004

Zotix posted:

https://twitter.com/JohnFetterman/status/1731786514512671228?s=20

Good top tier trolling here. You love to see it.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-67620882

Was just going to post about this. What a loving great troll.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:59

Kalli: Jun 2, 2001

Yeah, more then a handful of pro athletes get cited for going well north of 120mph in their sports cars per year.

Notably, former NFL Wide receiver Henry Ruggs was drunk driving at over 150mph when he plowed his corvette into an SUV, trapping the driver in the wreckage and cooking her to death.

Kalli fucked around with this message at 19:02 on Dec 5, 2023

# ? Dec 5, 2023 18:59

Beastie: Nov 3, 2006; They used to call me tricky-kid, I lived the life they wish they did.

I bike 4.5 miles to work each way, I probably pass about 5 city cops and about 10 country sheriffs.

They're always just driving around. I've never seen one actually pull someone over.

poo poo I saw one in an empty lot watch a woman change lanes recklessly with no signals. The cop started his car so I assumed he was going after her.

He just went the opposite way.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:02

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

I feel like they are going to have an incredibly hard time ever proving a direct correlation between ads and driving habits and the speed limiter will probably be very broad or never get proposed because of backlash.

The SAFE urban design planning seems to be very effective based on the data, but it will be a long time/possibly never before most places are remodeling their streets like that.

I am most interested to see if they can get an official* scientific answer for why everyone started driving like a maniac during and after the pandemic. It is a weird sort of collective shift in behavior/thinking that wasn't brought on by any top-down change and didn't revert post-Pandemic like most other changes.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:02

His Divine Shadow: Aug 7, 2000; I'm not a fascist. I'm a priest. Fascists dress up in black and tell people what to do.

I bet new cars having touchscreens instead of physical controls has made cars more dangerous. I don't really see a big difference between using your phone while driving or trying to use the cars own touchscreen.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:05

duodenum: Sep 18, 2005

It's phones. It's people using their phones while driving. It's endemic.

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

House Republicans are going to vote to officially authorize an impeachment inquiry and select committee next week.

California should take the gloves off and gerrymander the GOP out of a house majority forever.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:05

Barrel Cactaur: Oct 6, 2021

The highest practical passenger car speed is 75 (some very well engineered highways), and the actual fastest posted is 85, add some pad for maneuvering and cap it at 90. 120 is far to fast for even decent drivers to control, there is no practical purpose for that speed.

For actually practical speeds: limit at 75 for maneuvers and cap speed limits to 55. Use metric to make the numbers seem bigger.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:09

SpeedFreek: Jan 10, 2008; And Im Lobster Jesus!

Acebuckeye13 posted:

I mean it's more of an edge case but there's definitely areas where the road might be built up like a highway but have a very low speed limit (Like, 35mph), that is never enforced and results in the vast majority of drivers ignoring it. That does result in unsafe situations, where a handful of people are driving at 35 mph while everyone else is whizzing past them at 50-60. Either raise the speed limit or enforce the existing one!

That said, I seriously doubt those specific situations are a major cause of traffic fatalities.

Most of the close calls I've seen involve some rear end in a top hat attempting the speed limit or less in the left lane. Working on people's lovely habits, bringing back physical buttons, reducing the size of blind spots, doing something about the people blowing red lights would do more than mandatory speed governors. When I'm on a motorcycle it's the people on their phones or not paying attention that worry me more than anything else.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:09

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

His Divine Shadow posted:

I bet new cars having touchscreens instead of physical controls has made cars more dangerous. I don't really see a big difference between using your phone while driving or trying to use the cars own touchscreen.

I wonder this too.

"Distracted driving" and impaired driving make up almost all of the non-speeding traffic deaths. But, they don't seem to break down if things like touch screens in cars count for that or if there is any impact at all.

According to this article, 97% of new cars have touchscreens. Only about a quarter of cars on the road currently have touchscreens, though. So it is a pretty big amount, but not everywhere.

https://tech.hindustantimes.com/tech/news/every-car-has-a-giant-touch-screen-now-71676315759987.html

This story also led me to this Chinese car company that has a 48-inch touchscreen in all of its cars:

duodenum posted:

California should take the gloves off and gerrymander the GOP out of a house majority forever.

California already passed an amendment to give control of redistricting to an independent commission several years ago.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:10

Mid-Life Crisis: Jun 13, 2023; by Fluffdaddy

Kagrenak posted:

People aren't going to be safer if urban speed limits are increased by 25mph you loving idiot. We need to stop people from going 50mph in cities, not increase the speed limits to accommodate anti social assholes. Road deaths haven't gone up due to low speed limits.

With SUVs, you're missing the core issues as well, the overall curb weight, along with poo poo sightlines. Speeding in these vehicles is especially dangerous due to their sheer mass. Turnovers don't happen nearly as much and with more and more hybrids and full electric cars, SUVs aren't even that top heavy on average.

You�re wrong but okay, be angry. Accidents slightly dip when limits are raised to 85th percentile. Enforcement can be more fair when the limits are more fair.

https://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html

Most speeding is a product of road design anyway. Especially in downtown urban areas, they can do a huge amount of things to force people to slow down. Posting a speed limit is a minor component. Were social creatures after all

Speeding is 1/3 of causes.

Urban highways with 55 mph speed limits when the roads are designed for 85 are indeed a problem. The fuckers actually driving 65 are a hazard to everyone else.

But yeah, cars going from a 75% share to a 25% share of new vehicles over the last 20 years is the problem, regardless of whatever of the dozen terrible attributes you want to pin it

https://www.epa.gov/automotive-trends/highlights-automotive-trends-report

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:12

duodenum: Sep 18, 2005

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

California already passed an amendment to give control of redistricting to an independent commission several years ago.

That's the problem. Until it's somehow made illegal nationwide, they should give control to a very partisan commission and give the GOP a taste of their own bullshit.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:21

Magic Underwear: May 14, 2003; Young Orc

I can't imagine that very many fatalities at 120+ would be any less fatal at 120. It just seems like a total waste of time and resources.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:26

Leon Trotsky 2012: Aug 27, 2009; YOU CAN TRUST ME!*

_{*Israeli Government-affiliated poster}

This article about a AAA safety study during the pandemic has a list of the biggest sources of increased crashes, but doesn't really have explanations for why.

One person they interviewed speculated that open roads during the pandemic and police stopping most traffic enforcement during 2020 because of covid and attempts to avoid racial profiling after George Floyd led people to develop bad habits that haven't gone away. They say that traffic enforcement in 2022 was about where it was in 2019, so there is still a little less enforcement, but it has mostly gone back to normal.

They also say that total crashes actually decreased, but crashes were much more deadly so traffic fatalities increased even while total crashes decreased.

According to the study, the biggest contributors to fatalities are:

- Phones.
- More people not wearing seatbelts.
- A large increase in DUI cases.
- An increase in drivers aggressively changing lanes.
- An increase in drivers running red lights on purpose.
- An increase in speeding.

The study and experts they talked to came to pretty much the same conclusions that the NHTSA did.

quote:

"Everybody�s checking their phones and distracted while they�re driving," Hamann said. "It is a formula for tragedy, essentially."

For young drivers, she said, that means texting or even watching videos while at the wheel.

"We know younger drivers as a whole are a somewhat riskier group," Goodwin said.

quote:

One of the simplest ways to reduce traffic deaths is to hold drivers accountable for breaking the law, Goodwin said.

"We really need to renew law enforcement efforts to make sure that drivers are aware that officers are out on the roads looking for impaired drivers, drivers who are not wearing seat belts and drivers who are speeding," he said.

quote:

Changes to road and car design could also reduce speeding, experts agreed.

Hamann said many roads allow people to go faster than the speed limit.

"Maybe the posted speed limit is 25 or 30, but it�s easy to feel safe driving 40 or 50," she said. "That is an engineering problem or a design problem that should be fixed."

Making roads narrower or installing roundabouts, speed bumps or automated cameras that capture traffic violations could address the problem, she said.

quote:

Car features like automatic emergency brakes, seat belt reminders and lower horsepower could also encourage safer driving, Harkey added.

"Horsepower in vehicles has changed over time, and it continues to increase," he said. "More horsepower means people drive faster."

But experts worry that reckless driving has become the new normal.

"The trends are very concerning," Goodwin said. "We need to figure this out quickly so we can turn these trends around."

https://www.nbcnews.com/health/health-news/fatal-car-crash-increase-risky-driving-rcna43969

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:27

mobby_6kl: Aug 9, 2009; by Fluffdaddy

single-mode fiber posted:

Tax vehicle axle weight by a power of 4 and engine cowl height by a power of 2 and you'd probably start getting somewhere.

Limit vehicle speed based on a maximum energy cap. It will make a lot of people really mad :v:

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:33

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? May 28, 2024 00:13

Gerund: Sep 12, 2007; He push a man

Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:

I feel like they are going to have an incredibly hard time ever proving a direct correlation between ads and driving habits and the speed limiter will probably be very broad or never get proposed because of backlash.

The SAFE urban design planning seems to be very effective based on the data, but it will be a long time/possibly never before most places are remodeling their streets like that.

I am most interested to see if they can get an official* scientific answer for why everyone started driving like a maniac during and after the pandemic. It is a weird sort of collective shift in behavior/thinking that wasn't brought on by any top-down change and didn't revert post-Pandemic like most other changes.

It may help to recall the protests against police brutality in 2020; traffic enforcement trended to zero, so people who depended on cops to mediate their behavior no longer had that guardrail.

People drive like maniacs now because no one stops them while they are in their over-height kid-dozer and no one can tell that they drive like maniacs outside it.

# ? Dec 5, 2023 19:33

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Debate & Discussion > USCE 2023: Please let them shove a camera up your butt

«‹›797 »