Is this the end of the Cannonball Run?
atlasobscura.com
atlasobscura.com
Most of these people share their stories on the youtube channel for Vinwiki. One of the record holders, Doug Tabbutt, has gone on record on that channel as saying he carries a PBA 'get out of jail free' card: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42780382
Reading the article, you might think they're lucky not to get pulled over. But they do get pulled over. They're lucky because they get away with it. There are multiple stories from this group of people on that youtube channel where they explain how.
Sometimes they cover the cars with pro-police political nods. Sometimes they race in cars that are deliberately made to look like foreign police cars: technically legal but the intention is clear. Sometimes, they participate in slower, legal rallies to raise money for police charities, which give away clothing that is convenient to wear for their illegal races.
The Cannonball Run is an exercise in using bias and privilege to avoid retribution for deadly crimes. These people are proud, unapologetic criminals who get away with it because they're in the right clique.
Another one of these people is Alex Roy. He works as a director for Argo AI, where they make autonomous vehicle technology.
Cannonball Run participants are behaving like sociopaths. It's a gross activity.
But if you get pulled over, can you still beat the current record? The recent record-breaking account that I read seemed to imply they did not get pulled over.
They might get you out of a minor ticket, in the state/area it's from, and that's less likely if you can't articulate why you have it/how you know the officer it was given to to distribute. (to my knowledge, they're only a particularly widespread thing in the NYC metro area, as well).
They're not likely to get you out of a ticket for the kinds of offenses Cannonball Run participants are committing, IMO.
The essence of hacking is seeing the world how it is to accomplish exceptional things. Yes American police are corrupt, as has been thoroughly covered in its own right pretty much everywhere. You can still appreciate the focused result while not condoning the adjacent culture of corruption.
"Proud, unapologetic criminals who get away with it because they're in the right clique" is more appropriate to describe the corrupt police themselves. The public fallout from a Cannonball is the possibility of a car crash that seemingly hasn't happened, whereas the fallout from the police corruption is (among other things) the routine murder of innocent people. The latter is infuriating, but dumping that anger onto adjacent topics is not a way to build consensus.
Do you have anything to support this? This isn't an officially monitored sport and participants aren't going to own up to getting non a participants injured or killed.
I've been spending a lot of time on highways this year and I've seen lots of near accidents caused by people driving way to fast. While some speeding doesn't automatically make you an dangerous criminal, this kind of of reckless speeding absolutely is quite dangerous, reprehensible, and should lead to criminal charges for anyone who has admitted to participating.
I personally see more near accidents caused by inattentive drivers than by speeding. Someone changing lanes without checking their mirror is dangerous even with a 10mph speed differential. It is also my understanding that while Cannonball drivers are doing 120mph+ in open stretches, they slow down when they hit traffic. You're not going to make it 3000 miles weaving between lanes with a high speed differential.
I'd imagine their behavior is similar to what what I routinely see from state police, who will come up on a bunch of traffic going 110+, and then slow down / tailgate until people in the left lane pull over and let them through (there's that culture of corruption again). I also generally see much more of this than of non-police speeding, so once again it feels a bit myopic to focus on a small contingent of people flouting social norms rather than routine harmful norms.
> I also generally see much more of this than of non-police speeding,
Ummm... This is a laughably false claim that leads me doubt all your other observations. I have driven all over the USA and in every single place there are more non-cop speeders than cop speeders, simply because there are far more non-cops than cops.
While I do agree that there are significant problems with police corruption, that in no way excuses these cannonball racers from engaging in this activity with reckless disregard for the safety of other road users.
You seem quite happy to excuse this behavior based on nothing more than your assumptions about how cautions people trying to set competive records are without any evidence to back up those assumptions.
Your guess is as a good as mine. I would expect that for a 2800 mile journey, the priority is avoiding interruptions - eg crashes or getting pulled over because you've attracted determined police attention from other motorists calling you in. Reading about it, the whole thing seems like a game of coordinated logistics rather than extreme piloting.
> every single place there are more non-cop speeders than cop speeders, simply because there are far more non-cops than cops.
I'm sure we're defining speeding differently. On a road with average traffic of 75mph, I would only consider significantly over 80mph to be speeding in its own right. I see very few non-cops doing these speeds, whereas every moving state cop I see is cruising at 110mph+ or tailgating waiting to pass. You can tell based on how quickly they close distance from way behind you to passing you.
> You seem quite happy to excuse this behavior
It's literally the only way to have an interesting conversation about it. If cannonball run attempts become common enough where they create a statistical danger, then I'll be concerned about it. Until then, I'll stay concerned with the mundane-and-bad rather than getting worked up about the exceptional.
This all has to be coordinated ahead of time. I think the runs are also planned out so you don’t go through areas of high traffic. 150+ on an empty desert road is relatively safe.
And I'm really struggling to come up with a definition of hacking that would imply everyone should be able to do the same hack? Hacking is individualistic and mutually-exclusive by its very nature. Once enough people start doing something, it's just called routine.
Its actually just social engineering.
In California, there was a spate of people who decorated their cars to look like PLA military police. At least one of them got arrested for "impersonating an officer" and "misusing a public seal". It was somewhat novel because those laws hadn't been used to "protect" the symbols of foreign institutions before.
Bruce Springsteen (he of the mighty virtue signaling) showed how it was done last year, making a DUI vanish into thin air.
https://www.whichcar.com.au/features/how-the-cannonball-crum...
Formula1 used to have one or two victims almost every year, now thankfully it's more one every 15-20 years - the last one was Jules Bianchi in 2015.
Motorsport is motorsport, and men risk the uncertain prospect of death for the uncertain prospect of glory, not because they are mad, but because they are men. Let it be.
I think the Ed Bolin guy, mentioned in the article, has been pulled over but the cops thought they were drug mules. When they realized they were trying to go cross country he let them go. Not 100% sure if that was Ed or another guy.
You can't even spell the mans name right.
But I don't really speed anymore. I don't even own a radar detector. It wasn't a big choice or come-to-Jesus moment; rather, it was the fact that the pace I would drive at on an open highway (a max of 85 - 90 MPH, conditions permitting) was VERY illegal in 1995, when the highway limit was still 55 in some places, has become only BARELY illegal.
I still drive at 80ish on an Interstate, but speed limits now are 70 or 75 or higher. The world changed around me, while my habits only moderated slightly.
Modern cars are safe, clean, and amazing.
Got it.
A 2022 Kia Optima -- ie, a fairly bland sedan -- his more horsepower than that.
By the 90s the numbers were getting higher. The Porsche I had the longest was a base model 1995 911 (so a 993; last version of the air-cooled cars). It had something like 270hp, which was reasonably serious for the era.
The current base-model 911 is something like 380hp if I'm not mistaken.
My car was loud, rattly, and smelled like oil much of the time. The interior "domestication" that eventually came to the car was still a generation away, so my car was more like a VW Bug inside than a modern luxury sports car. Driving it was a MUCH more visceral experience than driving a newer car, though. I stopped driving it regularly and ended up selling it when I realized what it was worth (damn near what I paid for it), but it was a great car.
The new owner put some money into it and is having some success at autocross. I get visitation rights. :)
Driving my Lotus Elise... I'd regularly get my ass handed to me by a V6 Camry or Odyssey.
It's not even just engines anymore. A Camry will probably not just be faster in a straight line due to power, but it's probably also going to smoke a good number of vintage sports cars around a track. All that tech really has trickled down into regular cars.
When I took my old '86 944 Turbo up to that speed, the visceral vibration and sound feedback, barebones interior, and visible lack of airbags, made it impossible to forget the reality that you were taking your life into your own hands. Not something to do on public roads.
They're lovely, and it's the only V8 I ever really wanted (that sound!), but it was a fairly brief moment for Porsche and not terribly many were made vs. the other two engine platforms of the era: the 911, obviously, and the series of front-engine 4-cylinder cars (924/944/968).
Any shitbox car made in the last 30 years can do 100mph.
Hopefully we've both satisfied the urge to be obnoxiously condescending for no reason. Moving right along...
Assuming SPE0111 is what I should be looking at, UK motorway speeds seem very similar to what I've experienced on US interstates.
------------
1. SPE0111 and the "Average free flow speed (mph)" for motorways, from the following:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/vehicle-...
Be careful in Virginia, where 85 is reckless driving, regardless of the posted speed limit. (Reckless driving is also 20+ over the posted speed limit, if you're driving less than 65.)
The East Texas set of DFW / SA / Austin / Houston is mostly connected by highways that stay busy. 45 between Houston and DFW is thinner, but I-10 is almost urban levels of busy from the Louisiana state line until you get well past San Antonio.
West of San Antonio or DFW? Oh yeah, it gets thin FAST.
Long, empty, straight roads with great clarity thanks to no hills.
It's probably about as good a place as possible to do it on public roads (at least anywhere close to my part of the country) - long straightaway through the desert with miles of visibility. He got it out of his system and got back down to saner speeds for the rest of the trip.
You just have to watch out around Del Rio and such because Border Patrol and a bunch of other Federal LE enjoy hanging around random places and hassling people.
As others have mentioned there's long stretches of many roads out west that can be run at those speeds.
Edit to brag: I have done 100mph+ down Lake Shore Drive at least once, but that was special circumstances and an extra helping of st00pit.
I don't drive more than 80, usually, but, I mean, you gotta open it up at least once.
Margin of error vanishes at speeds like that, but yeah, you could do 120 fairly safely in a well-maintained car on good tires in those places.
I may have tested a couple cars to limits up there.
I've since discovered that it's actually a lot less stressful, you use less petrol and I don't seem to get places that much slower. I'm also happier with cars with cars with much smaller engines - which saves even more money.
Having a map with real time info when I'm going someplace helps me ... calm down some. I can see if there's a known accident, I can get automatically rerouted if I take a wrong turn or miss an exit, and if I know I'm going to be vastly late, I just call or message the party I'm meeting. I understand that some of that may contribute to 'distracted' driving, but when I used to miss turns or get delayed 20 years ago, I was still 'distracted', and probably just as much a danger, because of the anxiety/stress. Overall, I think it's been a net win for me - less speeding and no tickets in years, a bit less stress while driving, less fuel consumption, etc.
Maybe buying an expensive fast car makes you want to speed - could easily be something as daft as that.
Now I am perfectly happy with my 1L 3-cylinder Skoda :-)
If you are the slow guy the area in front of you is the area in which everybody elects to make their move. You get cut off 100x (pulled that number out of my ass) as much as if you're just doing what everyone else is doing. If you are going really slow then cars are cutting each other off to get out from behind you all the time. The whole situation benefits nobody and is just as stressful as trying be the fast guy.
Source: spent way too much time in the cab of equipment that was only "highway capable" in the context of the sales brochure.
I'd estimate at those speeds I am about average - I overtake some traffic and get overtaken by others.
We now have average speed cameras on some roads I drive on a lot (such as the notoriously dangerous A9) so speeding really isn't a good idea.
It is weird to place the blame of the speed differential on the people not breaking the law, but I get the feeling it's a practical reality of US highways that everyone speeds.
In California, a car on a two-lane road with five or more vehicles behind it is required to pull into a designated turnout area to alleviate the jam. Failure to do so can result in a citation and fine.
45 in a 70 with the lane on your left and right barreling down at you at 75 is a nightmare scenario. Driving too slow is just as dangerous as driving too fast.
I wish US had stricter license requirements (like Germany) and car upkeep requirements (like Japan). Would keep the roads to people who knew what they were doing and cars that could do what they needed to do.
In fact, the “cannot” category is worse. I cannot fault the driver for being only able to afford a 1989 Previa with a engine held together by duct tape to get to their minimum wage job. So now I’m in a dangerous situation of no one’s fault and pray that my decision to get a sportier car will let me get out safely.
Amdahl's Law can be applied to stretches of road
I have the "which lane you want to be in and when" thing absolutely dialed for my commute. On a light by light basis I only move up a few slots as a result of picking the lanes that people will get out of as they make rights or move into dedicated left lanes approaching a light. That inevitably converts into getting through the lights in less cycles than if I had just picked a lane and stuck to it. Over the course of my commute that adds up to 20+min, close to 25%, difference.
While I don't necessarily agree with their methodology I think the weaving through traffic people are on to something.
It's utter insanity out there.
On the highway, if you are leaving 2 seconds following distance, and everyone else does too (obviously more than reality), every car you pass on the highway buys you a grand total of: 2 seconds.
Not impossible for you to save 20 minutes if you have a peculiar commute, but I have a competing theory: beating a light or getting in front of a couple of cars is the way you game-ify your commute. You get a dopamine rush from it, and you aren't flipping a coin in the morning to A/B test your behavior and using a stopwatch to verify the results.
Nothing wrong with that, but just try to be safe about it.
>On the highway, if you are leaving 2 seconds following distance, and everyone else does too (obviously more than reality), every car you pass on the highway buys you a grand total of: 2 seconds.
Right, but now imagine that working you ass off to pass dozens of cars means four less cars in front of you at the end of your really crappy exit ramp that takes ~30sec/car because of cross traffic. You've just saved two minutes.
RACING TO NOWHERE!
The rate at which I collect speeding tickets has definitely diminished over time, though my driving speed certainly hasn't; I'm not sure whether that's because enforcement activity has been reduced where I live, or because advancing age and different choice of vehicles have made me a less appealing target. (I actually had a cop thank me for letting him pull me over once, when I was out on my bike; he knew perfectly well I could have outrun his cruiser...)
You still had to keep an eye out for even faster cars coming up, but it's much easier to mentally keep track of the "state" of the road around you when you're passing everything.
It's also far easier to stay awake & alert driving at night, when speeding.
Fundamental core functions of government is roads, borders, preventing of violence(military and police), justice, and refereeing the economy.
Roads as you say are in disrepair.
Borders are wide open.
Military has been at war for how many decades? War exhaustion can't be higher.
Violent crime is vastly under reported. Police brutality seems to be at historic highs. Victim of violent crime? Dont call the police because when they show up, the situation gets worse. Antifa is burning cities down, in part due to police brutality.
Where's the justice? If your car or property is stolen, there's a ~90% chance you never see it again and nobody is caught. Arson is worse than that. Murder is the only violent crime which has a clearance rate above 50% but only barely. There is no justice.
Ref for economy? If financial crisis proved anything, they clearly dont.
The core function of government is clearly failed. Lets say we form the HN political party and we're going to fix this. We can't. Government debt to GDP is over 100%. The budget isn't in balance. The central bank is bankrupt; https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/central-bank-bala...
Talk to anybody working in this space and you'll learn this is simply not true. CBP is still chasing people down and turning them away. ICE is still deporting people by the planeful.
"Anybody working in this space' seems vague. Let's look for a more official position.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/30/immigration-us-will-no-longe...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/06/politics/immigration-arrests-...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/new-biden-rules-for-...
Quite clear borders are wide open.
The better discussion, why?
https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/workforce-cris...
Baby boomers will have retired by 2030, there is simply not enough people to replace the boomers. Birth rates were too low for decades. This shortage is set in stone unless we drop the whole 'child labour laws' which will never happen.
There is no denying the borders are wide open, it seems clear to me why they are doing it.
If you make it into this country it becomes mostly catch and release.
And then comical stuff like this happens: TSA reveals illegal migrants flying without proper ID can use an ARREST WARRANT as identification
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10418877/TSA-reveal...
I think you might want to moderate and adjust your media consumption. I don't think the information you're getting is benefiting you.
Hmm? What makes you say that?
>I think you might want to moderate and adjust your media consumption. I don't think the information you're getting is benefiting you.
Is there something you disagree with?
Wow, key infrastructure declining like that must be depressing. Is this a widespread thing or just in your area?
Lots and lots of suburban decay is scheduled for the next 2-3 decades. This stuff has a working lifetime and with no money to replace it it's just going to sit there and rust.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munkkivuori#Huopalahdentie_acc...
Either way, I'm interested to see where it goes from here.
https://smile.amazon.com/Cannonball-Americas-Greatest-Outlaw...
Yates was a writer at Car and Driver (my favorite automotive magazine), and the idea for Cannonball was a protest of speed limits. Yates's argument is that the speed you're allowed to drive should not be generalized, as a great driver in a great auto can safely do far greater speeds.
I don't agree with his argument - individual enforcement of rules doesn't scale to society, but it is a very good read.
1. Death Race 2000 (1975), same director & lead actor as #3
2. The Gumball Rally (1976)
3. Cannonball (1976)
4. Smokey and the Bandit (1977), same director and lead actor as #5
5. The Cannonball Run (1981)
When being pursued by law enforcement or encountering traffic, elevate to 100 feet for a few miles, then land again and carry on ones way after the threat has been eliminated
Something like this.
https://www.yankodesign.com/2019/01/15/this-car-sized-two-se...
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/rented-tesla-model-s-sets...
Now that's a ridiculous movie.
If you're going for that kind of money, it probably makes more sense to make the race "official", close the roads down for a few hours and cross-finance it with viewership and sponsors.
- six months of community service at hospital emergency services
- confiscation of vehicle
- confiscation of other vehicles owned if legally possible
- financial fine that hurts, Finnish style, according to income/net worth
- driving license repeal
- heavy discount on insurance policies at any and all insurance companies - a heavy negative one
Any more ideas?
It applies here.
And this, in a nutshell, is the reason why the traffic accidents and deaths statistics didn't really improve during the pandemic, despite reduced traffic.
> While Americans drove less in 2020 due to the pandemic, NHTSA’s early estimates show that an estimated 38,680 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes—the largest projected number of fatalities since 2007. This represents an increase of about 7.2 percent as compared to the 36,096 fatalities reported in 2019.
> 2,780 people died in 2020 on French roads, in mainland France or overseas territories. This figure, 21% lower than in 2019, is historically low. This evolution is largely explained by the effects of the global epidemic of Covid-19. Accidents are down -19% and injuries are down -20%.
+7% in the US, -20% in France. I wonder what is driving this large difference
https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-show... https://www.onisr.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/en/road-safety-p...
It was like they just didn't care anymore.
Anecdotally, whenever I'd mention this to someone they would say they noticed the very same thing, although I realize that data point could be meaningless.
Still, let me know if you noticed it where you are too.
You pretty much[1] NEVER see anyone just blow a light in the northeast. Ignore a no right on red sign or squeak a few extra cars through as a yellow turns red, sure. But I've never seen anybody ever just barrel through an established red like a truck that's lost its brakes in a Russian dash-cam video. Not during the pandemic, not ever.
[1] By "pretty much" I mean "literally, but I'm covering my ass lest everyone chime in with that anecdote from a police chase in downtown Boston that you saw on the news in 1998".
For one thing, this counts as blowing through a red light. Secondly, I've seen plenty of this in Philly - people blowing blowing through stop lights and stop signs
I'm in southern Mississippi, and that's the socially accepted way to go through an intersection. I'm only partially joking.
I don't know that it happens more often here now, because it wasn't enforced to begin with. I saw someone run a red light to make a left turn, in front of a police car who had a green light and had to slam on the brakes to let the guy run the red light in front of him. The police officer simply continued down the road afterwards. That kind of stuff happens all the time here. There's a few police that might give you a speeding ticket but mostly they only care if you have drugs, alcohol, or cash.
Those sorts of laws in the USA vary a lot. Out West, especially on the long flats, speed limits end up more a suggestion than a hard-and-fast. USA's got more distance between places, makes sense. Plus it's no secret that the car's a way of life in the USA a bit more than over in Europe, and comparatively we hand our licenses out like child's candy and we're a bit more hesitant to revoke 'em for misbehavior that doesn't involve the bottle.
Not saying one way of life is better or anything, don't think that's a thing I'd be qualified to say, but there's plenty to suggest why things are different in one place compared to the other.
I used to feel the same way, until some combination of experience with traffic cameras in other countries and maturity changed my mind.
Traffic-stops are dangerous for all concerned, expensive, don't scale, and are rife with the opportunity for profiling/abuse.
To the extent that we can agree on speed limits that delineate the difference between safe and unsafe behavior, average-speed cameras are a great way to ensure that those limits aren't radically exceeded.
There are places, like Highway 20 in Washington State, where the privacy risk is limited. If you pass through Newhalem, you're either going to the mountains or you're going to Mazama, 60 miles away. On that stretch of road, if a car arrives >10% earlier than can possibly be safe, why can't we fine the car's owner?
That's what's happened in NYC. All the drivers who go out intending to blatantly violate the law just started making it so their plates can't be read (or are outright missing) and don't care about the cameras at all.
As someone much further north, unless I just came out of the car wash, my plates are basically illegible 4-6 months a year because of the heavy level of salt/sand/crap on the road in winter.
I don't think you're getting away from requiring a high level of traffic stops to influence driver behavior significantly.
That's the rub, in many places. You can't fine the owner unless you can prove that the owner was in control of the vehicle. I know some identical twins, one was driving a car and got caught by a red light camera with a clear picture of the driver. Both twins show up to court, claim that they share the car, and the photo can't distinguish between them. They got out of the ticket.
Personally, I'd be in favor of turning speed camera pings into an "excessive use fee" on the car's registration (pay on renewal, or no renewal).
Edit: the notion of moving speed infractions to an administrative fee does have some issues -- in cases of dangerously excessive speeding, it seems like a good idea for a cop to intervene. A sloppy implementation would result in double-jeopardy. If a car is stolen and used to commit a crime, but the thief isn't identified, that could result in significant legal difficulty for the owner.
That can’t be the case though? If the posted limit is the boundary between safe and unsafe, drivers will be close to the limit all the time, and really in danger should they exceed it. The limits have to be set well away from that boundary, and the boundary itself has to assume the lowest common denominator of driver and vehicle.
I think that's why average speed cameras feel especially unsporting. A reasonable driver in a modern car could beat a posted limit by 10% while remaining so far inside their safety envelope they wouldn't even notice.
For an extreme example, see: School Zones.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/former-redflex-ceo-liai... https://ww2.motorists.org/blog/6-cities-that-were-caught-sho...
I mean, I could literally find 100000 links to various stories. These were just the first two that came up with a quick search.
The highway was open to the public, but you had to check in at both ends as you entered and left the site. You were given a pass with time written on it, and if you took too long to pass through the site, you could be subject to additional interrogations and searches.
As far as I know, it was the only highway where taking to long to cover distance could get you into trouble.
US (2018 figures): 12.4
France: (2019): 5
Of course this neglects many confounding variables, but a factor of nearly 2.5 is quite large.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
Figure that it's the bit about traveling in the vehicle that bears the risk, not just being a person in the country.
I can't get over the idea that its illegal possess devices sensitive to certain types of RF like radar detectors. I don't use radar detectors, I don't see the logic of paying hundreds to attempt to avoid paying a ticket instead of just following speed limits and save hundreds overall. However, the basic concept of outlawing a machine sensitive to certain EM waves seems absurd. Imagine if IR cameras were made illegal or it was illegal to own a SDR.
I can own a blue flashing light. I can operate it in my house. I can't operate it attached to my vehicle on a public road. There is a very high chance this is also true in your country/state. Context is king.
Your blue flashing light example makes sense to prohibit because it is misleading other people. Whereas a radar detector is increasing your own senses. Should there be aspects of your personal physical reality that you are legally prohibited from finding out?
Or alternatively, what basic tort would using a radar detector be similar to?
Operating a blue flashing light on a car on a public road is partially impersonating an emergency vehicle or police officer. You're directly affecting the people around you with that.
A radar detector is a fancy radio receiver that beeps when it sees certain wavelengths. Its not directly affecting anyone else. I do agree things like radar jammers should be illegal to operate in public spaces, which they are already separate from anything about attaching them to your car, as that's directly affecting other people especially with modern car safety features utilizing radar and laser systems. Public radar jammer operation is illegal though under FCC rules, so there's already things in place to punish those operating such equipment.
FWIW in Virginia and D.C. it really is illegal to possess a radar detector. The police will confiscate them. I imagine there are other places in the world which have similar rules.
So while e.g. in Switzerland listening to air traffic control is legal and Zurich airport's official plane spotter info page even provides a direct link to liveatc.net, in Germany it's officially illegal unless you're a pilot (and even then it might possibly be technically illegal if you're listening in not directly in conjunction with flying, i.e. while not wearing your pilot hat figuratively speaking).
Would operating a general SDR would be illegal in Germany? How would they even begin to know you're listening to those frequencies as opposed to something else? I've got a hand-held amateur radio which easily tunes into the air bands, would such a radio be illegal to operate in Germany?
FWIW, this is one place in US laws which is like this. There's a section of frequency ranges which analog cell phones operated on, and supposedly radios which are designed to tune to those frequencies aren't allowed. I'm not entirely sure how SDRs work in such a legal system, but they seem generally legal despite physically being able to tune in to those frequencies easily. Its kind of a moot law these days anyways, there are no analog radios susceptible to this basic "attack".
> How would they even begin to know you're listening to those frequencies as opposed to something else?
Or course the can't know that – what it effectively means is you can't do in public and shouldn't talk about it too loudly (hence e.g. liveatc.net doesn't have any coverage in Germany).
You can actually have it in your vehicle, as long as it's not accessible to the driver/passengers and not connected to a power source. They cannot be sold in Virginia.
Here in the US, people are too busy doing everything but driving. Mind wandering, waiting for their Wall-e chairs to be developed to take them to McDonalds. Surfing Facebook, reading their iPads car wandering all over the lane, bouncing off the lane reflectors. People in the US can't even be bothered to use their turn signals for fucks sake. We have the absolute shittiest driving habits in the world, the worlds slowest, least attentive drivers. The driving exams are a joke in every state. We let anybody behind the wheel.
US has a much higher driving culture, and we also had much less restrictions in most of the nation, so I suspect the reduction in number of miles driven in the US was not really that much outside the say CA and NY
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1110584/fines-controls-o...
I'd bet good money that a huge part of the equation is booze or pills. As a former paramedic, booze or drugs accounted for like 80% of accidents I dealt with. Why so high compared to official stats? I think because I live in a relatively rural area whereas most people live in high density cities. Also, sometimes booze doesn't get counted in the official accident statistics if people don't get charged for whatever reason. People don't generally crash unless they're drunk, high, inexperienced, or something unexpected happens like they hit a deer or something.
In this case, I'd venture to guess there's less demand to drive in France, and they have a better safety net, and we probably had a lot more drunks.
This is like a batting practice pitch straight over home plate for the biases of HN.
I propose a different theory: All the older and statistically safer white collar workers were at home leaving the younger, poorer, "monster energy is my sleep" essential workers crowd on the roads.
That left risk takers on the road with no "safe driver" buffers between them.
It's also the one time I went by a cop and got a "slow down" gesture instead of a ticket. Just the local speed trap, so it wasn't crazy fast, like 65 in a 45. For a highway, with ramps! Don't ask me why the speed limit is 45. I'm sure if I had been going legitimately fast he'd have overcome his desire to avoid the covid plague.
There were some protests about it, if you didn't notice.
speed isn’t the sole problem imo.
Now if you tell me that accident counts went up in EU as well, then ok my reasoning is wrong.
OK I found https://wjes.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13017-021-0... which breaks it down. I didn't read it in detail but most of the increase (but not the single greatest increase) was in the US. For the rest of world, for the most part things got better with reduced traffic.
> Overall, the number of annual road death dropped significantly in most countries. However, few had the opposite. There was an overall reduction in the annual absolute number of road deaths in most of the 27 European countries by 17% [24], six Balkan countries by 11% [117], in Saudi Arabia by 20% [118], and in Japan by 12% [119, 120]. In contrast, the absolute number of road deaths increased in some countries like Luxembourg by18%, Ireland by 6%, Finland by 4%, and Switzerland by 21% [24, 117]. Similarly, it generally increased in the USA by 7% [110] with major variations in different states [121].
The study is detailed and they go more into it than just "deaths". Although I very much doubt that they get into studying driver skill.