> We are all making a continual and ongoing grave error

> Blindly translating those centuries of laws into rigid, free enforcement is a terrible idea for everyone.

I understand your point that changing the enforcement changes how the law is "felt" even though on the paper the law has not changed. And I think it makes sense to review and potentially revise the laws when enforcement methods change. But in the specific case of the 55 mph limit, would the consequences really be grave and terrible if the enforcement was enforced by a robot, but the law remained the same?

▲

diacritical 2 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> would the consequences really be grave and terrible if the enforcement was enforced by a robot

The potential consequences of mass surveillance come to mind.

	▲	cuu508 22 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		OK, but that would be a consequence of the specific enforcement method, not a consequence the law becoming de facto stricter due to stricter enforcement.

▲

lupire 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For one thing, the speed limit is intentionally set 5-10mph too low, specifically to make it easier to prove guilt when someone breaks the "real" speed limit.

	▲	JoshTriplett 6 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Normalization_of_deviance While it is true that many people do speed, that doesn't make their speeding "the real speed limit".

▲

Ntrails 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Yeah, I'd have to go slower????

Anyway. I come from the UK where we've had camera based enforcement for aeons. This of course actually results in people speeding and braking down to the limit as they approach the camera (which is of course announced loudly by their sat nav). The driving quality is frankly worse because of this, not better, and it certainly doesn't reduce incidence of speeding.

Of course the inevitable car tracker (or average speed cameras) resolve this pretty well.