Considering most traffic laws, how is it legal to sell/own a vehicle that can far surpass legal limitations?(Details.)

If you’re going to compare vehicles to firearms, the argument you are going to get, is vehicles were not designed to kill like firearms are, but I get what you are saying why is it legal to own a vehicle that can easily do more than twice the legal posted speed limit.
Transport trucks can be governed to a set speed limit with the computer (ECM) maybe governing small vehicles speed limit isn’t that far off?

Most cars can go well in excess of the speed limit. I once had a Cutlass Ciera, had a little 4 cylinder engine. The speedometer went up to 85 mph. Once when driving across Nevada, I was in the middle of nowhere. I hadn’t seen a speed limit sign in a long, long time. I looked down to see how fast I was going and didn’t see a speedometer needle. I did a double and triple take and found it down between the D and the N on the gear shift display. I slowly let off the gas and watched it just drift back onto scale. When it said I was doing 85 mph, it felt like I was crawling. I was doing at least 120 mph and possibly more. And I still had gas pedal left…I could have gone faster.

The point is that just because the car CAN go that fast, a responsible driver does not drive it that fast. Nor do they race each other through traffic. If you were going to outlaw cars that can go that fast you’d be getting rid of most cars on the road. And really, if you drive like a dick, you can kill somebody as easily at 80 mph. The bigger problem is the owner/driver.

If I won a lottery tomorrow, I’d still not rush out to get a Lamborghini or Ferrari. I don’t need that much power…ever.

I tend to agree with you on this issue simply because exotics perform so well you’re over 100mph and not out of second gear.
But then again America is known for our long highways and fast cars and police have helicopters and spike strips so they aren’t powerless. Interesting to consider.

This was not intended to be a “guns vs fast stuff” thread.

I was just trying to think of similar examples.

One of my cars, if the governor is stuff-off, will do twice the posted speed limit in any US state.

I don’t drive it that fast . . . but it does get 28 MPG at state speed limit.

Car industry lobbying, most probably.

You’re right – we should abolish the speed laws.

Of course it’s legal.

WTF is it with the unrelenting escalation of legal-minded nonsense? Outlaw this, outlaw that. X can’t exist if it might be used in an illegal way! As if a human can’t/won’t ever kill someone else with any object at hand, from a rock to a stick to a carrot to a long sock, and extra laws will help.

This question has been asked and answered on this site before, IIRC.

Apart from it being nanny-state BS . . . some other reasons:

* It’s legal to own things but not use them in illegal ways.
* It’s only illegal to exceed speed limits, places where there ARE speed limits.
* e.g. There are tracks, private roads, and other places with no speed limits.
* Speed limits are ridiculously low in many cases, and almost any car CAN exceed the highest legal limits of 80 MPH or so.
* Even very fast cars are often artificially limited to some speed around 130 MPH or so, because there’s already too much insurance-industry-dominated nanny state BS laws on the books, etc.
* A fast car has OTHER desirable, and legal, properties, like good acceleration and handling, and ability to maintain control in bad conditions. (e.g. My BMW saved me from serious accidents at least twice.)
* Sometimes there might be situations more important that stupid safety laws. (e.g. During the attack on Israel by Hamas that started the latest war there, a man in a Tesla was shot by a machinegun, and his car heavily damaged, but he was still able to get it to drive him to a hospital where his life was barely saved. If the car had been designed for super safe 55 MPH max speed and other bullshit, that probably would not have been possible.)

^I was NOT suggesting fast things be illegal.

Fast things ARE, an ever evolving technology.

As with most technology, oversight has not kept up with capability.

I am aware of the concept being discussed in various formats.

I suppose I was curious if anyone would recommend vehicles driven by a AI.

Driving is a “privilege,” not a right.

At any rate, rights cannot infringe on other’s rights.
Arguably, if one has the right to own a vehicle that can far surpass legal limitations in place for overall safety, then one also has the right, to travel without worrying about someone rear-ending them at 130…

By the way, asking the same question in different ways, can be quite revealing…

We have super fast cars because people want them and are willing to pay for them despite how impractical and wasteful they may be. Manufacturers push them because they are more profitable than the economy car that is affordable and gets good gas mileage. I’m not kidding when I say they probably need to make five to ten economy cars to achieve the same profit as a single high-end vehicle. I get the “love going fast thing.” Nothing makes me grin from ear to ear more than being on a motorcycle and rolling on the throttle. I don’t do that much anymore because…statistics are brutally honest.
People are going to push back on laws that put limits on things they consider part of their identity. Also playing devil’s advocate, a good portion of the technology that came out of making cars faster has made making economical cars more economical also. All the little tweaks that give a car more HP often scale down to make more economical cars better as well. That said, I find it hard to believe there is not a little collusion between the Auto and oil industries. I had a sporty but practical car in the 90s that still got 42 MPG. That’s not even a thing now, (30 years later) unless you go hybrid.

^That’s a good point about tech.
The same could be said for aerospace, and defense research.

There is no reason the death is allowed to be dealt so broadly and with such malice besides politics. It would be easy to write a safety regulation requiring speed limiters on new cars. Maybe include an override feature for emergencies that signals police automatically, but there is no good reason for any of it. The politics is the politics of people not wanting to be denied the ability to break the law, and car sellers not being able to sell the idea of breaking the law. It should be simple, but the fact is that this form of deadly lawlessness is embedded in American culture. It should, by all logic, be rooted out, and wouldn’t even be that hard, technically, but it is such a non-starter politically that AI will be allowed to take over before cars are speed limited. We will earn our robo-takeover, because statistically we are worse drivers than a robot that occasionally throws you off a bridge or into a wall.