The other drivers are the ones being unsafe in that scenario, not you.
Furthermore, consider that the 5% drop in fuel efficiency you get from 60mph to 65mph only nets you an increased travel rate of one minute for every 11 miles you travel.
:rolleyes:
Have you ever actually used cruise control before? It exceeds the set speed all the time. Generally not by enough to get you a ticket, but certainly by a few MPH. And unless you’ve got a really fancy car it won’t slow you down on hills at all.
It’s also not any more possible to “simultaneously” watch the road and the gauges than it is the watch the road and text, despite the all too common belief to the contrary. An occasional glance down at the speedo is all you should be doing. Occasionally going an MPH or two (or five) over the limit is much preferable to the constant attention required to hold the exact numeric speed limit.
The only real way to absolutely never speed is to always drive several MPH under the limit. If the prevailing driving culture were avoiding speeding at all costs, that’s what everyone would do and the engineers would set the limits higher. But in the real world, they assume everyone is driving close to the speed limit and so people are going to go over a bit every now and then. Unilaterally deciding you’re going to drive slow enough to never exceed the speed limit maybe isn’t dangerous but it’s certainly obnoxious in a lot of situations.
I never realized my Hyundai was so “fancy”, because that’s exactly what it does.
And yet, speeding is a crime and maintaining the speed limit isn’t. Why do you suppose that is?
I consider the people who absolutely positively have to get where they’re going fifteen seconds earlier than everyone else the obnoxious ones.
It can slow the car down by letting off the throttle, but most cruise control systems can’t apply the brakes or downshift to control speed.
In some states, exceeding the speed limit isn’t necessarily a crime. (cite)
The rationale behind presumed speed laws is that the numerical speed limit doesn’t reflect how people actually drive or necessarily the best safety outcome. The drawback to them is that it makes the whole legal infrastructure of traffic enforcement more difficult since the state has to fight people arguing whether a speed is reasonable or not whereas in an absolute speed law state it’s just “he was going over the limit, he’s guilty.”
The lawmakers in most states have gone to absolute speed laws because it makes things easier, but it’s very clearly with the understanding that the police will enforce the laws in a reasonable manner consistent with how people actually drive. If somehow the cops in an absolute speed law state were able to wave a magic wand and ticket every driver who exceeded the limit by an MPH or two you can bet the absolute speed law would get thrown out pretty quick.
Gee, why not drive at half the speed limit everywhere then? You’d be saving so much gas and only adding seconds to your commute! A quarter would be even better.
Speeding is not a crime in the State of California.
If he ever does, he needs to be sentenced to being put to the rack, burned at the stake, and beheaded.
[Damn wrong thread, time for my punishment it would seem…:(]
The CORRECT answer is because these things are all done for public safety, not what Monopoly Money-Bags thinks he’s paid in taxes. That random safety checks are industry standard in ALL areas
where potentially dangerous mechanical devices are used in public on a regular basis.
That cruise control isn’t an automatic pilot and that the driver needs to take PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY for the control of their OWN vehicle for every moment that it is in motion.
(…and cruise control shouldn’t ever be used on hilly terrain anyway, Jack. PSA)
The correct answer is that the point system is in place to remind the driver of their training, motivate the driver to become a better and more responsible driver, and as a last resort
remove the license of any driver who is just too incapable of controlling an automobile to a level within societal limits. (Its a License, not a Right. Look it up.)
That’s right, Societal limits… not the engineering specs limit of the road but the the societal limits on what is acceptable within an orderly society for public safety as enacted by elected government officials,
recommended by appointed safety experts, enforced by well-trained employees, and overseen by due process.
Should (now be very careful, I just said “should” and I don’t want what I’m about to say to be hard to understand) a member of society object to the specific point of the framework of the societal limits
placed on a particular road, the route to enact civic change Does Not include posting on a message board, but Does include getting involved within your own local government.
Its a bigger job than you give them credit for, and I’m pretty sure that they’d appreciate you volunteering your time to help.
Ever seen a dozen cars pulled over for doing 5 over the limit? There’s the ideal world where the speed limit is realistic and everyone follows it. Then there’s the real world where 60 on a highway is so far below what everyone can safely drive that 99% of drivers ignore it. The 1% in that case are making things worse for themselves and others.
You should know this because if you drive the way you claim, I guarantee you’ve been the slow guy in the right lane with cars zipping past your left and others riding your rear bumper waiting for an opening to get around you. If you’d just go with the flow, everybody wins. (except the out of state guy…)