Cars to be programmed to limit speed if California bill becomes law

A California state senator is calling for a “first-in-the-nation requirement that all new vehicles sold in California install speed governors, smart devices that automatically limit the vehicle’s speed to 10 miles above the legal limit.”

In a January 24th press release, California Senator Scott Weiner (D-San Francisco) announced Senate Bills 960 & 961, called the ‘Speeding and Fatality Emergency Reduction on California Streets (SAFER California Streets) Package,’ aimed at slashing traffic deaths. The release states that traffic fatalities have surged in recent years, a change he attributes to COVID-19:

These changes are a head-on attempt to tackle vehicle fatalities, which are surging across the U.S.—and especially in California—amid a rise in reckless driving since the onset of the pandemic. A recent report from TRIP, a national transportation research group, found that traffic fatalities in California have increased by 22% from 2019 to 2022, compared to 19% for the U.S. overall. In 2022, 4,400 Californians died in car crashes.

Senate Bill 961 mandates the installation of speed limiters and would also require side underride guards on trucks to “reduce the risk of cars and bikes being pulled underneath the truck during a crash.” 

Channel 7 Eyewitness News (video below) discussed Bill 961, stating that, should it pass, would make speed limiters mandatory in all new vehicles beginning in 2027. Eyewitness News's Scott Cabrera says that some believe this is just more government overreach and bureaucracy but Weiner disagrees, comparing it to seat belt regulations, though many consider those to be a component of the “nanny state” as well. 

Cabrera then says that it is not clear how the cars will know the applicable speed limit. It may be assumed, though, that a GPS monitoring system is all that is required, just as the Waze application uses location to determine the road on which one is traveling, and the applicable speed limit. 

In fact, as reported by Breitbart News, such technology already exists:

During a recent press conference, Wiener told reporters the technology already exists and is being used in different forms in other countries and areas of the United States, per NBC Bay Area.

“There are cars being manufactured right now where you have an option of having a speed limit,” he said. The outlet noted companies such as Volvo and General Motors offer an option for teenage drivers that allows their parents to limit their speed:

Safe?

Autocar, reacting to an EU decision four years ago to adopt a similar law, published an article entitled, "Speed limiters may create more dangers than they prevent," detailing the following safety concerns with the mandate:

• Inattention: Driving long distances in “tightly speed-limited conditions” leads to dangerous levels of inattention and to drivers falling asleep.
• Poor mapping: Computer-generated speed limits are often incorrect, which can lead to “unexpected rear-end collisions” and veering off the road in a turn.
• Risky driving: There's a potential for head-on collisions if drivers take chances to go against traffic to pass a vehicle limited in speed.
• Override: Some states may allow an override system, such as a hard press on the accelerator, which may lead to rear-end collisions with drivers not overriding the limit. 
• Older cars: Existing cars without speed limiters may likewise crash into the rear end of speed-limited cars.

Denial of auto-freedom?

Streetsblog lists “Six Arguments Against ‘Speed Limiting’ Technology,” including the potential need to rush to a hospital or get away from a dangerous driver in another vehicle (who may be driving without a speed limiter). The blog also lists the loss of the freedom of commuting as one wants, something that is even more endangered by climate-based legislation pushing people into ”sustainable" public transportation and “15-minute Communities.” 

Progressive Review goes so far as to justify the “denial of auto-freedom” in 15-minute cities with an attack on all car driving:

[T]he ‘freedom’ to drive is not so much a freedom but, rather, permission to operate dangerous machinery.

Vox even entitled a piece, “How to end the American obsession with driving.”

The loss of control over the driving experience may also lead drivers to more readily accept fully autonomous vehicles lacking a steering wheel altogether. Alex Roy founded the Human Driving Association to lobby to ensure the continued availability of traditional cars.

Another challenge to driver freedom comes in the way of lanes limited to multi-occupant vehicles, with the remaining lanes becoming more congested, requiring more fuel and taking longer to arrive at a destination. The Journal of Cleaner Production even published a study entitled, “Tackling single-occupancy vehicles to reduce carbon emissions: Actionable model of drivers’ implementation intention to try public buses.” [Emphasis added.]

Would the government mandate that a self-driving single-occupancy vehicle stop to pick up a stranger (using an app built into the vehicle's software) to protect the earth from climate change?