Hmm. Let me find them again. This might take a while (I’m currently working) so be patient. I might not have time to find them until this evening.
I guess the National Motorists Association has changed its web address in the two years since I’ve last been there.
I think you’ve identified an important point here. Back in the day, there was a fifteen mph difference between minimum acceptable speed (40 mph) and the “max” (55 mph). Realistically, there was really a 25-30 mph difference. Now however, with the “max” at 70 you’ve got that 30 mph as a minimum and a realistic difference of 40-45 mph. That’s too much. I think the minimum speed should be Speed Limit - 15mph.
Depends. What’s the additional risk? I can’t do a risk/benefit without a good idea of the cost. For a reasonable risk, sure it is. Why should I spend 7 extra minutes in the car because some people can’t drive responsibly? I need that time to warm up before I tee off.
Well stated.
Airman Doors, USAF is partially right that the drivers have “voted with their right foot”. However, those votes go unoticed without a first class stamp attached to them. It’s the proverbial tree falling in the woods. How does a politician know about it unless someone alerts them by mail.
The general principle of collecting fine revenue to pay for roads and such is still valid. Setting up such traps to snare unwaring drivers, however, is unethical.
Hey too fucking bad. Leave 7 minutes earlier. First of all, driving 40 mph over the speed limit does not make you the responsible one. Second the point is that for moderate distances, the actual time you save by driving nearly twice as fast as the other cars is insignificant.
Your point is valid about speed diferentials. However, even if everyone is going the same speed ±10 mph, I do not believe that the majority of drivers can or ever will be able to safely drive at professional race car speeds, baring some form of computerized control.
Again, why should I have to give up my 7 minutes? Why not set the speed limit at 30? That will only take 40 minutes after all? Surely you can leave 20 minutes earlier.
I was in a driving class (speeding ticket, natch) and the instructor offered the argument of “you’re not really saving any time”. My counter was the following:
At the time I drove 180 miles home on Friday and 180 miles back to my work on Sunday. I traveled approximately 15 mph over the speed limit. I went 1 year between tickets during which I made approx. 40 round trips. I estimated the time cost of the ticket at 5 hrs (.25 to get it, .25 to arrange the class, a total of .5 to get there and back, 4 hours in the class). Over that year, I saved 43 hours by speeding. The actual cost of the ticket & class was $125. 125/43 = $2.91/hour. I make money by speeding and working the difference (even at minimum wage).
Granted, I was driving more than normal, but even at 12K per year the time saved is 40 hours.
But we’re not talking about professional race car speeds, are we?
According to the Founders:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, –That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
I kind of like the speed limits. Staties never pick on me in my crappy early-90s Honda. They go after people in flashy sports cars and expensive SUVs. Hell, I’ll pass the sporty coup going 85, but cops are drawn to the red paint and spoiler like flies to shit, while I sail on my merry way.
::snicker::
Ok, here’s a SafeSpeed site that has a version of the graph… I’ll try to find a more scientific version of it.
120 MPH is hardly “professional race car speed”. It is, among other things, the prevailing speed in the left and (sometimes) middle lanes on German, Italian, and French motorways.
It is also a cruise speed appropriate for only a few conditions. These conditions include (but aren’t limited to) dry highways, on days without fog, outside of major urban areas, in a car that is competent at these speeds, with a skilled, experienced driver paying absolutely total attention to the road and his driving. A skilled driver is one who adjusts his driving to the circumstances : a stretch of road that was perfectly fine for 97 miles per hour at dawn might not even be safe at 29 two hours later in the pouring rain during rush-hour.
Speed limits take away a lot of the driver’s discretion by encouraging uniformity and a “pack mentality”. I’ve seen the sheer insanity of a pack of cars proceeding at 55 MPH on an Interstate on the way to a football game. The cars were nearly touching - and it was SNOWING. I’ve also had the pleasure of moving over to the right on that same road to let a Porsche 928S4 pass me - and I had the loud pedal all the way against the stop myself.
With a very low speed limit, you get “left-lane campers” who forget that they should move to the right if they aren’t passing. You also get “enforcers” who drive at 3 MPH over the limit in the left lane figuring that they’re going quite fast enough and holding up everyone behind them. You also get road rage directed at the few drivers who sort through all the mess and make decent progress - the last time I drove on a highway, I was forced to use the hard-shoulder when a soccer-mom in an SUV drove straight into my lane cursing with rage.
I’ve driven in parts of the MidWest where most drivers obeyed the speed limits. It was a bit of a shock for me. I’m usually the slow driver in the right lane, driving close to the speed limit, while most of the other drivers are exceeding the speed limit by substantial amounts.
Though I don’t have the desire nor the bandwidth to provide your cites (I have done this in the past and there are plenty, far more then you claim if you just look), I wish to comment on your inquiry. It is the speed differencial that causes the hazard, not the speed. (since you mentioned laws of physics you should know there is no such thing as absolute speed, just relative speed).
You must also consider human nature, humans will travel, if left alone, at a speed that they personally feel safe at - this is the natural speed of a road. Then you have some who will obey the speed limit - this sets up the differential of speed which is so deadly.
I hope you start to see the issue here and the need, if we really care to limit accidents to have the speed limit set in such a way that mimimized the differencial of speeds. This includes enforcing a maximum speed and a minimum speed and making those speeds reasonable for that road.
1st of all you don’t make any sense, 2nd higher speed limits will mean drivers will arive sooner and will not be so subject to drifting off to sleepy land behind the wheel. meanign a safer trip, 3nd of all the longer the trip the more time saved far exceedign your 7 minute example (which when multiplied by all the motorists subject to it would mean years or decades of non-productive time by people)