Congress to FORCE electric cars to be LOUDER

[Matt Collins]

:mad:

"The Pedestrian Safety Enhancement Act would require electric cars and hybrids to make noise (http://www.greencarreports.com/blog/1052712_ding-ding-ding-electric-cars-likely-to-be-made-noisier-by-law), and would fund the Department of Transportation to create a set of rules for automakers"

[ChaosControl]

You know, I just can't be shocked by this stupidity anymore.

[garyallen59]

just stick a baseball card in the spokes

[Matt Collins]

Isn't that a benefit of an electric car, that it's quieter?!!?

[Bruno]

The companies doing it voluntarily for safety reasons I can certainly understand, govt. intrusion of course not. The idea of being able to choose can change the sound of your own car with those custom drivetones is pretty cool.

I lol'd at this guy's comment:

by John Briggs #8, Posted: 12/21/2010


I think this illustrates the danger of looking at accident statics too carelessly.
Please, take care of yourself this Christmas. A recent joint study conducted by the Department of Health and the Department of Motor Vehicles indicates that 23% of traffic accidents are alcohol related. This means that the remaining 77% are caused by idiots who just drink coffee, carbonated drinks, juices, milk, water, and stuff like that. Therefore, beware of those who do not drink alcohol. They cause three times as many accidents. This message is sent by folks who care about your well being.
Merry Christmas!

[jkr]

fo real ! let me dissect this one.

is not blind more challenging than deaf? WHY DO YOU HATE BLIND PEOPLE?

some cars are almost all ROAD NOISE not propulsion related...

not only will they make us meet an arbitrary rule, that does NOT address universal design strategies, they will eventually have a bureaucratic (demoCRATIC) $ stream from "cops" to statistical analysis time to people deciding weather or not i can put "I WISH WAS IN DIXIE" on a loop on my car GENERAL LEE STYLE!
in short ever facet of it-now THAT is sum jERb creat'n

how about removing the now counter productive NoisE oRdaNNANCEEes which yield lower potential revenue than thier latest apparent scheme...just TURN IT UP BABY!!!

[Heimdallr]

most cars are quiet as hell anyway (verbal irony, sorta), and most of the noise is made from them coming down the road. The free market will solve the safety issue, no need to regulate. People won't buy cars that cause them to run over blind people.

[Bruno]

most cars are quiet as hell anyway (verbal irony, sorta), and most of the noise is made from them coming down the road. The free market will solve the safety issue, no need to regulate. People won't buy cars that cause them to run over blind people.

+ 1

Though it wouldn't be just blind people, but also the greater number of people who aren't paying attention.

[RSLudlum]

I lol'd at this guy's comment:

by John Briggs #8, Posted: 12/21/2010


I think this illustrates the danger of looking at accident statics too carelessly.
Please, take care of yourself this Christmas. A recent joint study conducted by the Department of Health and the Department of Motor Vehicles indicates that 23% of traffic accidents are alcohol related. This means that the remaining 77% are caused by idiots who just drink coffee, carbonated drinks, juices, milk, water, and stuff like that. Therefore, beware of those who do not drink alcohol. They cause three times as many accidents. This message is sent by folks who care about your well being.
Merry Christmas!

LOL, the comment reminds me of this NOFX song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hoNSiG8Vync


I'm not so worried
About how many I kill
I'm much more concerned
With how much beer I spill
35% of accidents
Are cause by pixilated
The other 65% are not
Alcohol related
What does this tell us
About the drunk drivers
They seem to have a
Better record than
the sober team


So they're trying to make sure the electric/hybrids are "clunkers" now? :confused:

I wonder if future electric police cruisers are going to be exempt from this requirement.

[Churchill2004]

Those saying "the free market will handle it" are missing a crucial factor: the government owns the roads. Any private road owner would impose this kind of safety requirement on the cars on its road. Granted, this is a direct requirement and not a condition of being street-legal, and moreover road safety is a state and not federal issue, but this is still the sort of thing that should probably be done. I wholeheartedly agree with the objections to the process used here, but the end result itself doesn't strike me as being any different than we would see in libertarian utopia.

[tpreitzel]

Although I can understand the motive behind such legislation, i.e. people are conditioned to jaywalk without looking for traffic based on sound, it's still more unconstitutional meddling. Drivers of electric cars simply have to be much more alert until a generation is raised that listens and LOOKS for traffic while crossing a street.

[Bruno]

Those saying "the free market will handle it" are missing a crucial factor: the government owns the roads. Any private road owner would impose this kind of safety requirement on the cars on its road. Granted, this is a direct requirement and not a condition of being street-legal, and moreover road safety is a state and not federal issue, but this is still the sort of thing that should probably be done. I wholeheartedly agree with the objections to the process used here, but the end result itself doesn't strike me as being any different than we would see in libertarian utopia.

Perhaps the private road owner would impose such a requirement. Just because a private owner might do something does not mean that governernment should force them to do it.

[Churchill2004]

Perhaps the private road owner would impose such a requirement. Just because a private owner might do something does not mean that governernment should force them to do it.

I agree! I'm just saying we should be careful not to flippantly dismiss this sort of technology as nothing more than statist oppression.

[angelatc]

I want mine to sound like the Jetsons'.

[RSLudlum]

I want mine to sound like the Jetsons'.

Now that's an idea and selling point: a fully customizable warning sound.

[Dr.3D]

+ 1

Though it wouldn't be just blind people, but also the greater number of people who aren't paying attention.

When is it going to be the fault of the person who doesn't look before walking out in traffic? I can see no reason an automobile should have to make any sound at all. Do deaf people get run over more than everyone else? I doubt it, they know to look both ways before walking out into the street. Heck, we learned that in grade school.

[Matt Collins]

I agree! I'm just saying we should be careful not to flippantly dismiss this sort of technology as nothing more than statist oppression.Where in the Constitution is the federal government authorized to do this?

[Dr.3D]

Where in the Constitution is the federal government authorized to do this?

Exactly! They don't have the authority do do anything like that.

[RideTheDirt]

Where in the Constitution is the federal government authorized to do this?
The ICC and GW clauses :p (I'm joking)

[devil21]

So which design is Congress going to choose?

http://i258.photobucket.com/albums/hh258/AllVWallthetime/DSCN3806.jpg

http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y76/chrisrathke/DSC06017.jpg

http://site.trainhornsdelivered.com/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/06/loudest_car_horn.jpg

They should open it up to public comment.

[Jordan]

There are ten million more important issues than this one.

[Churchill2004]

Where in the Constitution is the federal government authorized to do this?

It's not. I wasn't disputing that. I was just saying we shouldn't let our opposition to the law get conflated into opposition to electric cars having low-speed warning noises, which is in and of itself probably a good idea.

[Dr.3D]

There are ten million more important issues than this one.

Well, while we narrow it down to which one is the most important, I guess we can discuss some of the others. :D

[specsaregood]

There are ten million more important issues than this one.

But do you really want them working on those?

[Dr.3D]

It's not. I wasn't disputing that. I was just saying we shouldn't let our opposition to the law get conflated into opposition to electric cars having low-speed warning noises, which is in and of itself probably a good idea.

Well, if it starts to become a problem and people find themselves running over folks who are not watching where they are going, I suppose people would start installing noise makers on their own vehicles. I know mine already has one. The button is located on the steering wheel and when I push it, a loud sound is emitted from under the hood.

[Jordan]

But do you really want them working on those?

Probably not.

My point is that there are ten million other things we should be focused on. Ranting and raving about louder electric vehicles just makes us look even more fringe.

[Bruno]

Now that's an idea and selling point: a fully customizable warning sound.

That's discussed in the article.

One opportunity for automotive marketers and startups is the emerging business of supplying drivetones, the automotive equivalent of cell-phone ringtones. Want your green car to rev like a Ferrari or BMW? Just buy the right drivetone and crank up the exterior volume.

When is it going to be the fault of the person who doesn't look before walking out in traffic? I can see no reason an automobile should have to make any sound at all. Do deaf people get run over more than everyone else? I doubt it, they know to look both ways before walking out into the street. Heck, we learned that in grade school.

There are varying degrees of fault shared by both driver and pedestrian any time there is an accident. I'm not saying they should have to make any sounds either. The governement shouldn't be involved, and if car makers want to offer that technology, it should be up to them. And to the consumer to disable them.

[LibertyRevolution]

I think that cars should have the right of way...they are bigger, easyier to see, and harder to stop than a pedestrian.
If your deaf, blind, or dumb enough to walk in front of a car, I think they should just chalk it up to Darwinism and blame the pedestrian.

If roads were privatized I am sure there would be walk at your own risk signs.

[NYgs23]

I think they should make cars that emit foul odors, for the benefit of the deaf and blind.

[Aratus]

methinks some with bad mufflers already do!

[dannno]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R8mjIcTqLTk

[Brian4Liberty]

Maybe they should just put a whistle on them:


http://deerwhistle.com/

The Save-A-Deer whistle is an animal alert, deer warning device that aids in accident prevention with animals.

[Anti Federalist]

You know, I just can't be shocked by this stupidity anymore.

Yah, my WTF is all used up as well.

[acptulsa]

Now people who don't hear so well will be suing under the ADA to make them paint all hybrids chrome yellow.

Never thought I'd see the day when the federal government required woofers big enough to shake all the bolts loose.

[angelatc]

Now that's an idea and selling point: a fully customizable warning sound.

NOt that the government should be involved, but if they said all cars had to make a sound above a certain level, it would be more acceptable than what they will actually do: make all the manufacturers install a specific device, which will probably be owned by GM.