Deleted member 11345
Guest
it'll never pass, but only because of what it would do to the revenue generated by speeding tickets
California Senate Passes Bill Requiring Passive Speed LimitersThis will never pass, and is probably one of the dumbest bills to be proposed in a long while. Aside from just obvious reasons, there's so many caveats why this would never work and would instead be potentially dangerous for everyone involved...
FWIW these were mandatory in all cars in a Middle Eastern country I used to live in. As soon as our brand new, made-in-USA-but-takes-regular-leaded-gasoline-company-issued Chevrolet Lumina exceeded 120 kph, the dashboard made a very loud and constant beep. I chose not to disable it, but I heard through the grapevine that some of my co-workers did.A passive speed limiter is a system that warns drivers with audible and visual signals when their speed exceeds the posted speed limit by more than 10 miles per hour.
"A passive speed limiter is a system that warns drivers with audible and visual signals when their speed exceeds the posted speed limit by more than 10 miles per hour."
The proposed bill is for a passive speed warning, not a speed limiter. You can still exceed 10 mph over the limit you will just have to listen to the car beep at you and display a warning. Still stupid, but not a speed limiter.

So pretty much constantly. Just going with the flow of traffic you drift over and under the 10 mph threshold and get beeped at again and again. Not too annoying while accomplishing not much.Correct.
But the warning occurs each time the speed limit plus 10 mph threshold is exceeded.
Oh, California . . .
Have you ever had to drive a U-Haul truck? Somehow I always seem to get the one with the speed limiter on it. And you’re right - not being able to accelerate in certain circumstances can be very stressful."A passive speed limiter is a system that warns drivers with audible and visual signals when their speed exceeds the posted speed limit by more than 10 miles per hour."
The proposed bill is for a passive speed warning, not a speed limiter. You can still exceed 10 mph over the limit you will just have to listen to the car beep at you and display a warning. Still stupid, but not a speed limiter.
Can you imagine merging onto a 65 mph highway, where everyone, including the semi in your side view mirror, is doing 75 and you are capped at 75? What is your option other than to slow down, pick a spot and merge at a speed below the flow of traffic. I can see more harm than good from a hard cap on speeds.
The text of the California bill in post #20 above does not provide for "turning it off" except specifically for emergency vehicles.I guess I misread the original bill that it's meant to be passive, still though. A lot of new cars do already have this feature, you can just turn it off. I'm hoping they will just let you turn it off in the newer cars as well, because as mentioned... merging on to any freeway you are gonna be going 75-80 instantly or else you're going to be rammed just on the merge. Sometimes I wonder if people who propose and vote for these laws think long term what this will do, because it won't get people to slow down and those who own cars manufactured before won't care and won't slow down.
Violations of .. not alerting? Or violations of the speed limit + 10? Does that depend on the year model of the vehicle? (Yes, I am 'leading'..)California Bill Requires All New Cars To Beep When You Speed
Drivers in the state narrowly avoided an even harsher restriction on their automotive freedom.
On Saturday, a new driver safety law passed the California legislature. Senate Bill 961 requires every passenger vehicle of the 2030 model year and beyond to "utilize a brief, one-time, visual and audio signal to alert the driver each time the speed of the vehicle is more than 10 miles per hour over the speed limit." Passing the Assembly 42–12 and the Senate 26–9, the only thing that stands between S.B. 961 becoming law is Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom's signature. Once the bill becomes law, violations would not carry mere civil penalties but "would be punishable as a crime."
