To Tame the Fastest Drivers, States Deploy Speed-Limiting Devices on Cars

FREDERICKSBURG, Va.—We’ve all seen them: cars flying down the highway at breakneck speed, weaving through traffic as if the rules of the road don’t exist. State officials even have a name for such drivers: super speeders.

Now there’s a growing push to harness GPS technology to slow them down. Virginia is pioneering the use of speed-limiters as an enforcement tool. Other states have similar plans to tackle a roadway scourge that the government says contributes to more than 10,000 deaths a year nationwide.

Since Virginia’s program began in July, about 100 speed-limiters have been installed in cars. Most users were charged with or convicted of reckless driving, often for topping 100 mph; installing the device was an alternative to license suspension.

Think of it as speeding’s version of ignition-interlock devices, which force people convicted of DUI to pass a breathalyzer test to start the engine. One aims to stop drunken driving, the other egregious speeding.

Virginia’s devices use GPS and a map database to determine speed limits—then prevent drivers from surpassing those limits even if they hit the gas. Limited overrides are permitted for merging or emergency maneuvers.

“We are talking about a small subset of drivers who are disproportionately causing harm on our roadways, and we finally have a tool that works,” said Amy Cohen, president of advocacy group Families for Safe Streets. “The big game-changer is that now all the roads are mapped for what their speed limits are.”

Virginia’s first-in-the-nation program has hit some early bumps. One driver said a device inexplicably cut his car’s top speed to 35 mph on a highway, forcing him to pull over, according to the person’s lawyer. Another reported that the car’s device wrongly applied a cross street’s speed limit when passing through an intersection.

State officials and a device supplier acknowledge some glitches caused by “GPS drift,” in which the device picks up lower speed limits on nearby roads. They say a fix will be in place soon.

One driver tried tampering with the device, a potential crime; that person later complied and is no longer in the program, officials said.

Even ardent advocates of the devices, called Intelligent Speed Assistance, say they know capping a car’s speed can raise concerns.

“At the end of the day, we’re American, right?” said Michael Travars, president of LifeSafer, one of two device makers used by Virginia. “The open road is a very, very important part of our culture, which means we do not want to take away any of that experience.”

Travars said the aim is to help super speeders break their habit so they don’t revert to their lead-foot ways after the device’s removal. “If we can slow cars down a little bit on those dangerous drivers,” he said, “we can save lives.”

On a recent morning in Fredericksburg, a Wall Street Journal reporter test drove Travars’s Lexus sedan equipped with one of his company’s devices. A small screen next to the dashboard showed the speed limit and the car’s speed.

Just before hitting the limit, the engine’s power noticeably waned. Tapping the red “override” button let the Lexus accelerate. Drivers in Virginia’s program are allowed to exceed the speed limit twice between turning the car on and off, for 30 seconds each time and by 5 mph.

On the drive, the device closely tracked roadside speed limit signs, though in one case it took a few seconds to switch from a 65 mph to a 45 mph zone. It doesn’t apply brakes, and downhill momentum sometimes took the car over the limit.

Washington, D.C., recently launched a similar effort, enrolling five drivers as of Oct. 21. To date, D.C. and eight states have passed laws allowing the devices for problem speeders, with rollouts planned from Hawaii to Georgia over the next couple of years.

“Folks on both sides of the aisle are rallying behind this,” said Lexi Elio, a transportation-policy specialist with the nonpartisan National Conference of State Legislatures. Privacy guardrails control access to individuals’ driving data, she said.

One practical benefit of speed-limiters, supporters say, is that motorists can keep driving wherever they want, whereas some license suspensions allow only a work commute, if at all. Researchers have found that up to 75% of people with suspended licenses get behind the wheel anyway.

It is rare to find a policy approach like this, said Patrick Hope, a Democratic state delegate who spearheaded Virginia’s law. “Sometimes the problems are complex, sometimes the solutions are complex. This is very easy. This solves a problem.”

Device users pay for the program unless they are indigent. Installation costs up to $100, and monthly fees total $180. Any car a participant owns or drives must have a device. Enrollment periods so far have ranged from 60 days to six months, according to state officials.

Speed-limiters are increasingly common in commercial and government fleets; New York City is expanding their use in city-owned vehicles. And under a newly passed state law, the city can require speed-limiters for motorists who accumulate 16 or more speed-camera tickets in a year. The program is pending approval by the City Council.

In Virginia, Hope said he initially sought speed-limiters for all reckless driving convictions in lieu of suspension. At Republican lawmakers’ request, GOP then-Gov. Glenn Youngkin narrowed it to 100-plus mph convictions, though drivers clocked going slower can still wind up with a speed-limiting device, as can motorists convicted of racing. Drivers who amass too many demerit points can also face speed-limiting restrictions.

“I use it as a tool to give a judge a way to consider not jailing my client,” or fully suspending their driving rights, said defense lawyer Garrett Green.

Several drivers represented by lawyer Andrew Flusche chose a device over a commuting-only license suspension. “You can go to the grocery store,” he said. “You can go to visit your friends.”

Public defender Brianna Cox said speed-limiters can bring financial hardship and remove her ability to argue against a suspension so that a client can drive. “Now the default argument is going to be ‘he can drive, he just has to do this program,’” she said.