Try digitalPLUS for 10 days for only $0.99

Readers Respond

News Opinion Readers Respond

Auto safety and technology's limits

One of your readers recently wrote that "speed limits were developed before" power steering, anti-lock brakes, and other technological improvements in vehicles. The implication by that writer was that speed limits could be increased now, and that speed cameras were not needed. While it is true that, technologically, vehicles have had all kinds of safety improvements done by engineers and factories over the years, what remains in effect are the laws of physics. A 2-ton piece of metal traveling at 60 mph will still require a certain amount of minimum distance in order to come to a halt.

The human element is the most crucial, as video game programming has been transferred to many human nervous systems by instantly-gratifying "screen time." The highway is not a video game, and a car windshield is not a television screen. However, real physical laws are still the same as always, and not all people are robots (yet). Following another car at 60 mph with only 10 or 20 feet between cars is insanely dangerous for everyone within harm's way. Check out the hospital emergency rooms and the accident statistics for the effects of speeding and following-too-closely references.

Just as the technology exists now for the automatic application of a car's brakes to prevent a backing-up accident in the driveway or to park a car "hands free," engineering could also produce a device built into all cars (front and back) which automatically calculates the speed and weight of each vehicle and automatically applies the corrective mechanical and electrical measures to the car that is following too closely. Thus, a safe following distance could be created automatically — or at least warn the driver of the car behind. The technology exists. Car insurance companies and body shops may protest, but injuries and deaths from tailgaters and speeders would go down.

Drivers need to learn or re-learn to behave as responsible adults, minding the basic driving rules of safety such as maintaining "one car length for every ten miles per hour" (depending on weather and road conditions). Meanwhile, let those speed cameras roll to inhibit those unwilling or unable to drive safely, encouraging them to keep a safe following distance, technology or no technology and let everyone buckle up.

Edgar C. Ludwig, Baltimore

Copyright © 2015, The Baltimore Sun
Related Content
  • Speed cameras save lives? Prove it

    Speed cameras save lives? Prove it

    I read the article about money machines (speed cameras) in Baltimore County, and there certainly are a number of different numbers associated with these money grabbers ("Is Baltimore County doubling its speed camera budget?" May 30). I use these term because I believe most people think speed cameras...

  • Annapolis and speed cameras

    Annapolis and speed cameras

    Isn't it amazing how the courts have found that speed cameras are a safety feature and not an un-mandated nuisance tax, yet The Sun finds the news in the loss of revenue instead of the great job they are doing in slowing down traffic and clogging up the streets of Annapolis with bumper to bumper...

  • Cameras and corruption

    Cameras and corruption

    I have followed The Sun's investigation of Baltimore's speed and red light cameras from the beginning and believe a desire for a back door tax is what is driving Baltimore's concern and not protecting the poor innocent school children they claim when defending the constitutionality of such laws...

  • Smaller is better

    Smaller is better

    A Baltimore City Council investigative committee looking into the city's problem-plagued speed- and red light-camera program has discovered what should have been obvious all along: That the now suspended system was far too big to be managed efficiently, that it was set up too quickly by the companies...

  • Speed cameras don't save lives

    Speed cameras don't save lives

    A recent editorial claimed "speed cameras are a powerful tool for saving lives" ("Safety first," June 3) but the supporting evidence, "a reduction in speed-related crashes — 29 percent from 2009 to 2012" is about crashes, not lives.

  • Get a move on: Local speed limits are too low [Letter]

    Get a move on: Local speed limits are too low [Letter]

    Congratulations to Howard County for trying to figure out sensible speed limits ("Are Howard County's speed limits too low?" Aug. 5).

  • Safety or revenue?

    Safety or revenue?

    Before it was shut down over reports of widespread errors, Baltimore ran by far the largest speed camera program in the state and one of the largest in the nation. It generated a lot of tickets and a lot of revenue for the city — so much so that officials were fighting over what to do with the...

  • Speed cameras didn't make streets any safer

    Speed cameras didn't make streets any safer

    I enjoyed your recent article on the statistics regarding pedestrian accidents during and after the use of speed cameras ("Even with speed cameras off, no pedestrians injured in school zones," Dec. 19).

Comments
Loading

86°