^ Then set the limit to zero, braniac if your only goal is to minimize the number of car injuries. That's pretty much the only way I know of to get injuries down to an absolute minimum.

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:22 PM. Reason : ``]

6/5/2009 2:21:20 PM

The benefits of having cars around so we can commute easily outweigh the accidents that occur as a result. That being said, people can still have the benefit of commuting while keeping commuting relatively safe for everybody involved.

Contrary to popular opinion, it's not a fucking RIGHT to be able to barrel through a public space in a metal object at arbitrarily high speeds.

6/5/2009 2:22:41 PM

Quote :

"So prove to me how > 65 is safer than < 65. My understanding of physics and human anatomy conflict with this notion."

was it "unsafe" to go 65-70 back when the federal gov mandated the interstate speed limits of 55? Did it suddenly become "safe" to do these speeds when they raised the limits?

I'm curious to see all accidents that officials consider speeding to be the cause of in these statistics....for example, if you're going 80 weaving in and out of lanes and clip another car, you were speeding, but it was hardly the cause of the accident.

I believe higher/no speed limit autobahns in Germany have a lower per capita crash and fatality rate than our interstate system....which is largely a product of not handing out a license to just about any joe blow that wants one and common sense laws regarding operating procedure on said roadways.

6/5/2009 2:23:14 PM

Quote :

"^ I didn't say it was safer. But reducing the number of highway injuries/deaths is not our sole priority when formulating traffic policies. If it were, we could easily reduce the number of road injuries to almost zero by making it illegal to drive."

I'd say our trafficking policies *should* be designed to traffic people from place to place as safely as can be afforded. A reasonable speed limit and enforcement of said limit seems to be in alignment with this goal.

6/5/2009 2:24:13 PM

Str8Foolish,
THANK YOU. And you and the state are welcome to illustrate that a particular speed limit actually results in net benefits on a particular road. Until then, I will recognize this for what it is: a scam to raise revenue in the middle of a recession when raising taxes would be unpopular.


[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:27 PM. Reason : disco stu missed the point]

6/5/2009 2:26:15 PM

Quote :

" was it "unsafe" to go 65-70 back when the federal gov mandated the interstate speed limits of 55? Did it suddenly become "safe" to do these speeds when they raised the limits? I'm curious to see all accidents that officials consider speeding to be the cause of in these statistics....for example, if you're going 80 weaving in and out of lanes and clip another car, you were speeding, but it was hardly the cause of the accident. "

Going 80 was certainly the cause of how damaging the accident was, however. Speed makes crashes worse.

I'm going to give you the benefit of the doubt on your first point and assume you were not stupid enough to actually be making it.

Quote :

"^ THANK YOU. And you and the state are welcome to illustrate that a particular speed limit actually results in net benefits on a particular road. Until then, I will recognize this for what it is: a scam to raise revenue in the middle of a recession when raising taxes would be unpopular and unwise."

Clearly people at transportation always arbitrarily set speed limits. Fuck that shit I should be able to crank 90 on Hillsborough because I watched The Fast and the Furious.

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:27 PM. Reason : .]

6/5/2009 2:26:28 PM

Quote :

"You're guilty of letting your equipment be used in an unsafe and unlawful manner."

I hope you never drive 1mph on any road and conduct a criminal along with a traffic background check (or require a signed affadavit that
they have a clean record) to any friend or family member that may have to for some circumstance drive your car. Otherwise you a goddamn hypocrit.

Quote :

"I'm more interested in the amount of traffic that's caused by speeders trying to merge at the last second"

This problem is not just from speeders. Anyone can go the speed limit or less during rush hour and last minute try to merge into the lane
they need to be in with hopes of saving 30 seconds by being 4 cars up. The I40 Wade Ave fork is the absolute worse about this.

6/5/2009 2:27:53 PM

Quote :

"Clearly people at transportation always arbitrarily set speed limits. Fuck that shit I should be able to crank 90 on Hillsborough because I watched The Fast and the Furious."

And clearly people would not be able to judge for themselves which speed is safe for a given road without the help of the government. Why? because people are not only unconcerned about the safety of others, but they are also too dumb to realize that they may also put themselves in jeopardy.

This game is fun.

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM. Reason : ``]

6/5/2009 2:31:37 PM

Quote :

"I hope you never drive 1mph on any road and conduct a criminal along with a traffic background check (or require a signed affadavit that they have a clean record) to any friend or family member that may have to for some circumstance drive your car. Otherwise you a goddamn hypocrit."

Of course I'm a hypocrite -- I probably speed between 1-5 over at any given point in time. If somebody driving my car went through an EZ-pass on the highway and nailed me with a 20 dollar fine, though, I'd be pissed but that's what happens when you let people drive your car.

The reason I speed the amount I do is because typically it's not safe to drive the speed limit due to the prevalence of speeding.

Quote :

"And clearly people would not be able to judge for themselves what a speed is safe without the help of the government."

You're clearly trolling me as no human capable of turning on a computer is this stupid. Of course the average schmoe should not be able to "determine the safe speed you can travel" on any given road. Why don't we let Joe Plumber set the police code of conduct while we're at it.

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:32 PM. Reason : .]

6/5/2009 2:31:44 PM

Quote :

"You're clearly trolling me as no human capable of turning on a computer is this stupid. Of course the average schmoe should not be able to "determine the safe speed you can travel" on any given road. Why don't we let Joe Plumber set the police code of conduct while we're at it."

Hahah wow. How could someone be so arrogant without any thing to back it up?

How are speeding laws analogous to police conduct rules? Hahah jeez.

6/5/2009 2:37:32 PM

Quote :

"Hahah wow. How could someone be so arrogant without any thing to back it up?"

I accomplish more in any given day than you just by rolling out of bed.

Quote :

"How are speeding laws analogous to police conduct rules? Hahah jeez."

Quite similar in that you don't want random hucklebucks making ad hoc calls about them.

6/5/2009 2:39:10 PM

Quote :

"was it "unsafe" to go 65-70 back when the federal gov mandated the interstate speed limits of 55? Did it suddenly become "safe" to do these speeds when they raised the limits?"

Quote :

"After the NMSL was established in 1974, highway fatalities dropped by almost 16 percent, a reduction of about 9,000 lives from the prior year. During this energy crisis, miles traveled decreased only two percent. Although we cannot attribute the entire decrease to the reduced speed limit, the NMSL was a major factor in the reduction, the largest since World War II. The NMSL only applied to highways on which about one-third of the total travel and one-half of all motor vehicle fatalities occurred."

http://www.nhtsa.dot.gov/people/injury/enforce/pub/speed96.pdf

And no, it didn't get magically more safe when they raised the limits. It inherently got less safe. Guess the lawmakers decided that votes were more important than safety to an extent.

Quote :

"This problem is not just from speeders. Anyone can go the speed limit or less during rush hour and last minute try to merge into the lane they need to be in with hopes of saving 30 seconds by being 4 cars up. The I40 Wade Ave fork is the absolute worse about this."

I'll concede that technically you don't have to speed to be a dick. However, the culture of speeding is also the culture of cutting people off, entitlement, and driving impatiently. That's the real problem, and speeding is a characteristic of that.

Quote :

"And clearly people would not be able to judge for themselves which speed is safe for a given road without the help of the government. Why? because people are not only unconcerned about the safety of others, but they are also too dumb to realize that they may also put themselves in jeopardy. "

My observation. People do not slow down when it rains. This tells me that they are not judging the speed based on their observations. They're picking an arbitrary number above the speed limit and driving this number regardless of road conditions.

Also, people do not look far enough ahead of them to see traffic patterns or traffic signs and merge early. Either they are not looking or they are purposely ignoring things that they need to determine the speed at which they should go. I honestly don't trust people to determine the speed that they should drive. When you're driving, you don't have a view of the entire road, you can't see the cars behind you well, you can't see around curves. EVEN IF it's a route you commonly take, this can cause you to become complacent and not react to changes in the road or hazards.

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:43 PM. Reason : .]

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:46 PM. Reason : .]

6/5/2009 2:42:51 PM

Quote :

"And no, it didn't get magically more safe when they raised the limits. It inherently got less safe. Guess the lawmakers decided that votes were more important than safety to an extent."

Less safe huh? Then I wonder, after speed limits were allowed to go back up, why did the fatality rate continue to DROP???

There are several areas in the US Interstate system where it'd be perfectly safe to have a 100mph speed limit. Speed limits through towns and residential areas are for mainly safety reasons. Out on highways and interstates? Its all about the money.


Back before all of us (I presume) were born the federal gov't decided we should have a national speed limit of 55mph. Was it to keep us safe? No, it was to reduce the consumption of oil and make money off tickets.

It's bullshit.

The current system isn't great, but given how easy it is to obtain a license (without proper training) and that people can drive around in automobiles that are literally falling apart I'd say the current system of only (occasionally) ticketing excessive speeders is a good compromise.


[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:48 PM. Reason : d]

6/5/2009 2:46:03 PM

disco_stu

Quote :

"My observation. People do not slow down when it rains. This tells me that they are not judging the speed based on their observations. They're picking an arbitrary number above the speed limit and driving this number regardless of road conditions."

So are you saying that the speed limit changes when its raining? I've never seen a speed limit sign change based on weather conditions. Maybe i'm missing something?

Or are you saying that speed limits are set to take into account these situations? If so, does that mean I can always drive the speed limit no matter how hard it is raining?

PS* When you say "people", I assume you are excluding yourself? Have you ever met anyone that admits to being a bad driver or is it always other "people" that are ignorant assholes?

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:49 PM. Reason : ``]

6/5/2009 2:47:38 PM

Quote :

"The current system isn't great, but given how easy it is to obtain a license (without proper training) and that people can drive around in automobiles that are literally falling apart I'd say the current system of only (occasionally) ticketing excessive speeders is a good compromise."

Bingo.

6/5/2009 2:48:56 PM

Quote :

"There are several areas in the US Interstate system where it'd be perfectly safe to have a 100mph speed limit. Speed limits through towns and residential areas are for mainly safety reasons. Out on highways and interstates? Its all about the money."

This is true depending on the highway. WV absolutely needs reasonable speed limits set, especially on 79.

6/5/2009 2:49:17 PM

The NJ Turnpike has speed limits that change given conditions.

In my experience most people do drive slower when its raining (raining hard enough to make a difference).

6/5/2009 2:49:30 PM

Quote :

"fucking RIGHT to be able to barrel through a public space in a metal object at arbitrarily high speeds. "

Who the FUCK is barrelling through a public space. I am safely driving down I40 in the middle of nowhere halfway to Wilmigton in my well maintained A4, that is engineered btw for
German citizens to travel at +100 mph on the autobahn, at 85 mph in a 70 mph zone. Passing on the left otherwise driving on the right,
decreasing speed when warranted as approaching traffic or interchanges.

A cop on speed duty may let me fly by and wait for bigger fish like billy Rae flooring it down I40 105 mph in his Super Duty Pickup.

On the other hand why do I deserve an arbitrary ticket for "speeding" meanwhile real hazards like Jill driving all teh way to Wilmington
at 70mph with a donut spare tire or Cindy eating an ice cream cone while driving down Western Blvd 45mph blabbing with her 5 girlfriends is supposedly a safe driver?


Since supposedly we are so concerned about OBEYING the law and being SAFE! Here is a great idea.

Why not put a new regulation where automobiles are required to possess a speed govenor that is 5mph above the national speed limit.
This way nobody has to worry about breaking the Law or being unsafe! Since the law is the law there would never be a reason to travel
above this limit AM I RIGHT Str8Foolish!!

Quote :

"speeding is also the culture of cutting people off, entitlement,"

Think u are stretching here.....

I may speed at times while on the highway but I try to not cut people off nor in no way do i expect any sort of entitlement resenting those that think so in life.

6/5/2009 2:50:36 PM

^good example. Driving down I-40 to Wilmington could safely be done going 110mph, easy.

I'm all for higher speed limits and maybe even a multi-tiered license system. Of course that would cost money but damn it'd be worth it. But given that most people think that letting any fucking moron get a license for under $100 and a shitbox car for less than $1000 it won't happen.

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:54 PM. Reason : probably 120-130 for most "sporting" cars]

6/5/2009 2:52:29 PM

Quote :

"Who the FUCK is barrelling through a public space."

Anybody driving a car on a road.

Quote :

"On the other hand why do I deserve an arbitrary ticket for "speeding" meanwhile real hazards like Jill driving all teh way to Wilmington at 70mph with a donut spare tire or Cindy eating an ice cream cone while driving down Western Blvd 45mph blabbing with her 5 girlfriends is supposedly a safe driver? "

The best way to tell somebody's an unsafe driver (on a split second call) is to see how egregiously they're breaking the speed limit.

Quote :

"This way nobody has to worry about breaking the Law or being unsafe! Since the law is the law there would never be a reason to travel above this limit AM I RIGHT Str8Foolish!!"

Of course not, you fucking idiot. But we have to make a decision at some point -- just where we set the limit is up for debate. Clearly people can exceed the limit in the case of emergencies (Just like right now!).

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 2:54 PM. Reason : .]

6/5/2009 2:53:12 PM

Quote :

"The best way to tell somebody's an unsafe driver (on a split second call) is to see how egregiously they're breaking the speed limit."

I'd argue that it would be what their level of attention is.

6/5/2009 2:56:48 PM

Here's the point in every thread when I'm forced to tell everyone how I drive. Here are the rules I follow in order of priority:

1)Always drive at least 3 seconds behind the person in front of me, even if they're not going the speed limit.
2)Always drive at or under the speed limit if no one is in front of me.
3)Always drive in the furthest right hand lane that is available if that lane is not an exit lane.

I drive this way day in and day out. I take Wade Avenue from Capital to 40 East, then I get off at Chapel Hill road and drive into Cary. Look for me in the right hand lane. I'm probably being tailgated. Silver VW Passat Wagon. Throw up the horns, or wolf if you prefer.

So yes Socks. Based on my experience driving in this manner, I feel I can put myself in a different group than most people because I observe most people speeding. Although admittedly some of the people not speeding just never caught up to me.

My point about road conditions prove to me that people (by which I mean most people) aren't spending ANY thought to determine what speed they should be driving because if they were they would recognize that the maximum safe speed of a road decreases when the road is wet or icy.
For example, if you determined that dry, 75 was the best speed to go, when it was raining you would obviously want to go slower than 75 on that road.

Since most people continue to go the same speed when the roads are wet (and we have many many more accidents on those days) it shows me that people generally aren't responsible enough to determine their speed.

HUR, ok. You're right. My problem is that the speeders I encounter are the ones tailgating me and passing me on the median and honking and such. I think if they drove slower in general they would be less irritated.

TKE, I actually agree with the licensing system. Obviously people with better skills would be able to drive faster safely. I'd be all for way more stringent licensing process.

6/5/2009 2:58:43 PM

Quote :

"For example, if you determined that dry, 75 was the best speed to go, when it was raining you would obviously want to go slower than 75 on that road. Since most people continue to go the same speed when the roads are wet (and we have many many more accidents on those days) it shows me that people generally aren't responsible enough to determine their speed."

1) this seems like an unbelievable argument to me. If people were really this irrational, why do you think a speeding ticket will make them slow down? If people are driving unsafely, they risk getting into accident that may cost the driver their life, someone else's life, or thousands of dollars in damages. Yet, we're suppose to believe that the same irrational people that ignore these costs will slow down because there is an off chance that they will get a $130 speeding ticket and maybe an increase in their insurance????? Unbelieveable.

2) speed limits do not change with road conditions. So how would they solve this problem at all anyways?????

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 3:09 PM. Reason : ``]

6/5/2009 3:07:04 PM

Quote :

"2) speed limits do not change with road conditions. So how would they solve this problem at all anyways????? "

From what I understand, an officer may determine that you are driving excessively fast, even when at or under the speed limit, if conditions are unfavorable.

6/5/2009 3:12:51 PM

Socks, I don't think that an individual speeding ticket will make a difference. If the law is more effectively enforced then more people will be persuaded to slow down. There will still be assholes that feel entitled and they will break the law. But there would be less people doing this overall.

2)I don't get where your disconnect is. We're talking about people's ability to determine the maximum safe speed they should drive. You say they don't need a sign to do this. I say they need something because their actions display that they can't do this on their own. (or are unwilling to, in which enforcement of the law is necessary).

6/5/2009 3:14:21 PM

Speed limits exist so people who are too stupid to recognize their actual safe speed can have driver's licenses. If it weren't completely impractical from an enforcement standpoint, every driver could have their own individual speed limits.

Thus, I have no qualms about exceeding a speed limit that only applies to me for practicality's sake. I can go 9mph over in my little sporty car and still be less of a danger than most drivers; less even than someone going under the speed limit, who's almost certainly not keeping up with traffic.

6/5/2009 4:00:50 PM

Quote :

"Speed limits exist so people who are too stupid to recognize their actual safe speed can have driver's licenses."

See: most drivers.

6/5/2009 4:01:45 PM

^Possibly. I'm rather inclined to believe most people can drive (marginally) over the speed limit their whole lives and not get into any more accidents than they would going the speed limit.

6/5/2009 4:06:00 PM

The likelihood of accident is important, but the severity of the accident is a factor. Yes, going 9 mph faster you may not be any more likely at a given time, but the severity of the accident will be greater. It's physics.

Also physics, you have less time to respond to some idiot/deer/falling object when you're going 9 mph faster. Yes, you may be an expert driver, but there are limitations to your reaction time (and stopping/turning distance). It's a mitigated risk due to infrequency of having to respond quickly, but still driving faster reduces that mitigation.

I guess my big question is "why not obey the speed limit laws?" It's the only speed that's posted, meaning it's predictable. There's no easy way for me to communicate the speed I'm going to go to you, but there it is in big bold letters for everyone to see. Do you really need to drive that fast when commuting? Why is everyone in such a hurry anyway?

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 4:21 PM. Reason : .]

6/5/2009 4:17:28 PM

Quote :

"From what I understand, an officer may determine that you are driving excessively fast, even when at or under the speed limit, if conditions are unfavorable."

I'm pretty sure that's the case as well.

I consider myself a great driver. However I admit that sometimes when I'm dicking around town I'll txt someone while driving or will yack on the phone. Not the most prudent move. But I'm usually not speeding around town (pointless). When I'm driving on the interstate taking trips I'm focused on the task at hand. I usually go 10-15 over the limit (no faster b/c my car's a cop magnet) and I'm constantly aware of who's ahead and behind me, and whether someone's in my blind spot. If I stop to grab some food and am going to eat it while driving (to save time) I usually pull into the middle or right lane and drive 0-5 over the limit till I've finished eating.

I'm also convinced that having a manual transmission car requires that you pay more attention to what you're doing. And along that theme, all these new technologies trouble me. Lane Departure warnings, radar controlled cruise control, brake warning systems, etc. I mean how many people say fuck it and pay attention just enough to get their asses down the road, and leave too much to these systems to tell them they're doing okay?

6/5/2009 4:24:48 PM

Quote :

"But I'm usually not speeding around town (pointless)."

I honestly wish more people realized this. This also applies to highways around town like 440 and 40, actually.

6/5/2009 4:26:35 PM

Quote :

"2)I don't get where your disconnect is. We're talking about people's ability to determine the maximum safe speed they should drive. You say they don't need a sign to do this. I say they need something because their actions display that they can't do this on their own. (or are unwilling to, in which enforcement of the law is necessary)."

The disconnect comes from the fact that you say that the safest speed is determined by road conditions. These road conditions change constantly based on a variety of factors including weather and congestion. However, speed limits are static. They are the same regardless of what the weather is or how congested the road is.

Therefore I wonder how useful speed limits are as guides to what the appropriate speed should be at any given moment.

6/5/2009 4:36:45 PM

I tend to speed more when i'm travelling to other cities. I live Wilmington and either drive 185 miles on US74 to Charlotte or 120 miles on I40 to Raleigh.

Usually to hasten my trip I speed to get to Raleigh quicker on
I40 the speed limit is 70mph most the trip. Therefore from an absolute view at 85mph i'm moving pretty damn fast but relatively i'm not really speeding much at only 15mph.

On US74 though really until you hit Wadesboro the drive is nothing but swamps, trees, with your ocassional house or gas station. Some of the highway has been upgraded to 70mph restricted freeway but some of this is even 55; and a majority of the highway is 55mph 4 lane divided highway with your occasional side road at some point 4 miles apart.

Strictly obeying the speed limit the drive is probably around 3 hr 45 min. Going 75 though *gasp in some of the 'middle of nowhere' open road shaves nearly 45 mins off the drive.
Unless some car approaching an intersection, that i can probably see 1 mile ahead on the flat straight coastal plains, decides to blow through a stop sign whats the inherent danger? Much of the route that is now 70mph is no different than the road that existed before teh change except some engineer and politician
sat down deciding to call this part of the road "The New I74" instead of just US74. Although they have actually upgraded other segments that
are labelled I74.

To be fair though in the city I do not often exceed +10 of the limit espicially in resdential areas.

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 4:42 PM. Reason : as]

6/5/2009 4:38:26 PM

Quote :

"If this goes through, I might have to start wearing my Bill Clinton mask again!"

haha...jeremy clarkson did that on top gear when he was racing the GTR across Japan. Except he had some celebrities face cutout on a popsicle stick with two holes punched out for his eyes. hahaha.


My big thing about raising the speed limits is that the road quality is not even 1/100 of the quality of highways in Germany. So it would be unsafe regardless. I'm all for speeding but hitting those damn pot holes that magically appear in the road 5 minutes after they're done paving it is dangerous at higher speeds. It's almost as though pot holes and uneven roads is in the plans for new roads

[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 4:53 PM. Reason : .]

6/5/2009 4:43:05 PM

Remember, driving is a privilege not a right. Local governments or states can put up the systems if they want. Is it fucked up? Sure is.

And yes, you can be issued a ticket for driving under the speed limit if at a speed greater than is reasonable and prudent under the conditions then existing GS 20-141(a)

I speed. My limit when driving my personal car is 15 over, anything over that and you are just putting yourself at undue risk.

For me, red lights, stop signs, getting people who are DWLR or uninsured, DWI are more of concern than speeders.



[Edited on June 5, 2009 at 7:01 PM. Reason : ...]

6/5/2009 7:00:20 PM

Quote :

"For me, red lights, stop signs, getting people who are DWLR or uninsured, DWI are more of concern than speeders. "

Exactly. Putting up cameras for "our safety" is at best a cop out, no pun intended, at worse just vailed attempt to put together a new revenue stream by the gov't.

6/5/2009 7:21:48 PM

^^ This is a democracy. The people are the state. The fact that you view the relationship of people to the state as a servile one tells a lot about you.

6/5/2009 8:29:33 PM

Q: How would Hitler stop Smelling?

A: Hold his nose.

IT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN HERE

WE'RE ALL GLUED TO OUR COMPUTERS MAKING SURE OUR VOICES ARE MET WITH ACTION

6/5/2009 8:57:08 PM

The people might be the state, but in the real world, the one most of us live in, the state runs shit and we just have to deal with it.

6/5/2009 9:00:56 PM

speed swastika bumps.

6/5/2009 9:02:56 PM

^^

allegedly the people who run the state are supposed to keep on their representatives' asses

i'd like to think that it's due to a HUGE introduction of distractions... constituents have paid less attention to their governing representatives due to the influx of crap... and in turn representatives can ignore their constituents through the information super highway mumbo jumbo of horsehockey

but then i remembered that back "when america was morally right," even less constituents were able to reach their representatives; through lack of electricity, race, gender, privilege and simple geographic location

so now we arrive at the most communicative motherfucking age we've ever had

and we STILL can't get anything done?

oh i know...

Hitler
i'll be an idiot like marko and post non sequiturs on the internet

6/5/2009 9:13:04 PM

Our founding fathers are probably rolling in their grave at the state of liberty and freedom in this country.

6/5/2009 9:20:00 PM

you fool

they'd be LOLing and bttting themselves

6/5/2009 9:50:44 PM

Quote :

"I hear that, but take it to the race track. I don't hear you complaining that you can't just fire off rounds in public areas. Our highways and streets are for commuting, getting from A to B safely. I'm very interested in see a citation of all the studies proving that you're safer when you go faster."

Agree with the track part, but there are times when it's perfectly fine to speed on a public road (notice I didn't say drive at 10/10ths).

and no, driving faster won't make you safer, but it can be a worthwhile tradeoff. If it wasn't, we'd idle around everywhere at 10 mph and be super safe.

Quote :

"I believe higher/no speed limit autobahns in Germany have a lower per capita crash and fatality rate than our interstate system....which is largely a product of not handing out a license to just about any joe blow that wants one and common sense laws regarding operating procedure on said roadways. "

Yep. We, as a society, are WOEFULLY inept behind the wheel.

Quote :

"You're clearly trolling me as no human capable of turning on a computer is this stupid. Of course the average schmoe should not be able to "determine the safe speed you can travel" on any given road."

Why not?

That's pretty much what I do, and the only real ill effect is that taking that liberty for myself costs me some money.

Quote :

"My observation. People do not slow down when it rains. This tells me that they are not judging the speed based on their observations. They're picking an arbitrary number above the speed limit and driving this number regardless of road conditions. "

I have 2 things to say to this. Neither is to argue that that your observation is wrong--just to explain what I think the causes are:

1. People do sometimes just drive "x"-number of mph over the speed limit, because they're pretty much conditioned to do so. If we didn't have such draconian speed enforcement***, and allowed people to exercise some judgement, maybe they'd, well, exercise some judgement.

2. Our speed limits are so damned low that there often isn't any need to slow down when it's raining. In other words, let's say someone is driving 10-over in the rain. That's likely a pretty reasonable speed (and in some cases/situations, is STILL conservative). He might not drive any faster in good conditions, but that isn't because he isn't slowing down for rain--it's because he's just not driving as fast as he reasonably could in the dry due to his desire to avoid speeding tickets.

Quote :

"Also, people do not look far enough ahead of them to see traffic patterns or traffic signs and merge early. Either they are not looking or they are purposely ignoring things that they need to determine the speed at which they should go."

True. Our drivers' licensing (and education) system needs big help.

Quote :

"The best way to tell somebody's an unsafe driver (on a split second call) is to see how egregiously they're breaking the speed limit."

That is hands-down the stupidest thing in this thread. It's probably the stupidest thing I've heard in a week or two.

Quote :

"For me, red lights, stop signs, getting people who are DWLR or uninsured, DWI are more of concern than speeders. "

Absolutely. Add "inattentive and/or generally oblivious" to the list, too. As someone who's driven many tens of thousands of miles on motorcycles and small sports cars, I've had plenty of cases of clenched-ass when some retard has nearly killed me. The number of times it's been due to them speeding is pretty much zero. It's because they're oblivious and/or incompetant. The solution is to fix our training and licensing system...not have a bunch of idiots driving around marginally slower.

Quote :

"Our founding fathers are probably rolling in their grave at the state of liberty and freedom in this country."

Oh, there's no "probably" about it. They'd be dualing with or otherwise taking violent action against some motherfuckers if they were alive today.

6/5/2009 10:12:13 PM

lol dude

"alive today?"

they'd be dueling?

some would be so shocked so shocked that black women could vote, they'd poop themselves and turn the dueling guns on their cranium

others would be amazed and pleased the american dream finally started to play out

and some would simply rethink the stuff they thought about

6/5/2009 10:15:37 PM

Ben Franklin would be down with most of all "modern culture"

6/5/2009 10:18:29 PM

Ben Franklin might not agree ideologically with a lot of stuff in politics today, but he would be so busy reading Wikipedia, Howthingswork.com, Google...watching internet porn...and frequenting Flying Saucer that he wouldn't care.

6/5/2009 10:47:18 PM

^ lol

6/5/2009 10:48:22 PM

Quote :

"From what I understand, an officer may determine that you are driving excessively fast, even when at or under the speed limit, if conditions are unfavorable."

i've heard the same thing. for example, if you're in a 65 zone in a heavy rainstorm, and you're driving 65 or 60, a cop can still pull you over if he feels you are being dangerous or reckless.
Hell, maybe even can just give you a reckless driving ticket, instead of a speeding ticket, which are always left up to the cop's discretion anyways, even in good weather and driving conditions.

6/5/2009 10:49:49 PM

Quote :

"That is hands-down the stupidest thing in this thread. It's probably the stupidest thing I've heard in a week or two."

Yes we all know you're a fucking race-car allstar, but the majority of people who speed aren't. See: every fucking day on a major highway.

6/6/2009 12:13:30 AM