If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
In article >, Joe wrote:
> Using your own logic, wouldn't it be just dandy if someone decided > they had a great reason to hunt you down and blow you away? Of > course, it would be just fine because they didn't agree with the > concept that killing people is against the law. Try some courses at the local HS on reading comprehension and then some on actual US history, if any are still taught. Then maybe you'll understand what I wrote. Notice the tactic of top posting being used to avoid actually addressing my points. |
Ads |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Brent P wrote:
> In article >, Michael Johnson, PE wrote: > >>I remember talking to an old VDOT employee several years ago and he told >>me how they determined speed limits before the design of roadways became >>standardized. They observed the actual traffic speed, plugged those >>numbers into an equation (nothing complicated I'm sure), rounded to the >>nearest multiple of 5 mph and that number was the speed limit. Too bad >>this still isn't the way it is done. > > > 85th percentile method. It's been found to lead to the safest conditions > and best flows. It's oppsed by the insurance companies that surcharge on > speeding tickets, local governments that make money on speeding tickets, > state governments that get money from speeding tickets. Basically anyone > that profits from speed limits set lower than people actually drive. Unfortunately, there are multitudes fines and penalties that are basically revenue generation measures (i.e. another way to tax us) for the government. I live in Virginia and in 1995 the state legislature passed a law giving localities the right to install cameras at intersections to automatically photograph vehicles for speeding and red light violations. Trouble is they sent the ticket to the vehicle owner and not necessarily the driver who committed the violation. All these municipalities could care less if they ticketed the actual driver, it was the owners fault and responsibility to pay the fine. These cameras were cash cows for them to exploit. They would collaborate private companies that took a percentage of the ticket revenue in return for installing the devices and maintaining them. All they had to do was figure out how to spend all the money they made, of which, IMO, too much was illegitimate but they didn't seem to matter to them. The bill was written to expire in ten years unless the legislature renewed it. The public complained enough that they let it expire. You wouldn't believe the whining and complaining from police departments, etc. that used the cameras. You would have thought they were starving babies that had bottles yanked out of their mouths. I considered a small victory for the average Joe that at least deserves to have a ticket written in his presence by a law enforcement officer. > It's based on the simple principle that most people will choose a > reasonable speed. As it should be. It irritates me that the government assumes we all are reckless drivers and they know what is best for everyone. Unfortunately, they have this same attitude for far too many areas that effect our lives. |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
IMO, the real threat to drivers are those that feel the need to drive
either much slower or faster than the "pack". They will be there no matter what the speed limit may be. I bet the overwhelming majority of drivers would support a 75-80 mph speed limit on most rural interstate highways and be perfectly willing to accept whatever additional risk they may be exposed to as a result. I know I would for one. One other thing is that most new cars perform (brake, handle etc.) much better than the ones on the road when the interstate highway system was conceived and designed. This is further reason why raising the speed limit to 75-80 mph wouldn't cause profits for funeral homes to skyrocket. Joe wrote: > Within the last few years, they raised the speed limit on I-75 down > here to 70. It was 65, and everybody did 80-85, so they redid their > study and agreed that it was certainly safe to raise it to 70. So now > everybody does 80-90. > > > "Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote in > news > > >>I remember talking to an old VDOT employee several years ago and he >>told me how they determined speed limits before the design of >>roadways became standardized. They observed the actual traffic >>speed, plugged those numbers into an equation (nothing complicated >>I'm sure), rounded to the nearest multiple of 5 mph and that number >>was the speed limit. Too bad this still isn't the way it is done. >> >>Joe wrote: >> >>>"SVTKate" > wrote in rthlink.net: >>> >>> >>> >>>>"Joe" > wrote >>>>*snip* >>>>| Kate, I really thought you had more sense than this. What did >>>>| you tell your kids when they learned to drive? That going 5mph >>>>| over the limit is just fine because "everybody does it"? Did you >>>>| tell them that the law is only a "suggestion"? >>>> >>>>Well, Joe, thanks for the kind words. How much sense I have may be >>>>questionable at times. >>> >>> >>>I know the feeling. >>> >>> >>> >>>>You're right, about it being just a suggestion, and you have an >>>>valid point. It IS the law. There is no arguing with that >>>>whatsoever. >>> >>> >>>That's my only point. >>> >>> >>> >>>>But seriously, how many poeple do you know that do the exact speed >>>>limit? I mean that will admit to always going the limit. >>> >>> >>>None. Myself included. I've taught my son that it's his duty to >>>obey the laws. But when obeying the law puts him at risk, like >>>when everybody's doing 90 in a 70, then he should "blend in" with >>>the traffic so he doesn't pose a hazard to himself or anyone else. >>>I've also told him that while doing so, he (and everyone else) >>>risks getting a ticket with points. It's happened to me, and I'm >>>sure it's happened to others. >>> >>> >>> >>>>In town, school zones and places like that, I try my damnedest to >>>>drive the speed limit. >>>>I would say that 95% of the time I am successful. >>> >>> >>>In school zones, if you're doing 1 mph over the limit, you should >>>be strung up and shot. 2 cents. We're talking about _kids_ here. >>>Children, fercrissakes. >>> >>> >>> >>>>BUT, on the freeway? >>>>If I'm doing 5-7 mph over I'm still sitting still out there when >>>>everyone is wizzing past. I know that because everyone else does >>>>it, is not a good excuse, but dangit, I am not going to drive 65 >>>>while the rest of the world is driving 75-80. >>> >>> >>>Like I said above, if it poses a hazard to do the limit, then by >>>all means blend in. But by doing so, realize that you're also >>>putting yourself at risk for getting a ticket with points. Those >>>are the facts. >> > |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
"Brent P" > wrote in message ... | In article .net>, SVTKate wrote: | | > But seriously, how many poeple do you know that do the exact speed limit? I | > mean that will admit to always going the limit. | | The ISP has been threatening to use photo radar in construction zones. | I've been slowing to the posted 45mph speed instead of the customary | 55-65 depending on the road conditions. I keep to the right, and man have | I been ****ing people off. A few times I had to accelerate just to avoid | being crashed into. I how have to balance my safety vs. the law. There | should never be such a condition. | I have seen this situation so many times I cannot tell you. Since my husband worked heavy construction nearly all of his life we tend to be extremely contentious in construction zones. We KNOWwhat it's like for the guys working out there and we want to see each and every one of them make it home at the end of their shift. I have many times had people really angry at me for driving the posted limit, or big trucks drive rught up my tailpipe. There comes a point where you feel that you must go faster to avoid being rammed from behind. It's situations like this that can get very dangerous. I DO wish that they would require the construction speed signs be covered when the crews have gone home. So that normal traffic can flow. If the road conditions permit it of course. Even if a soul isn't on the site, if you exceed the speed limit in a construction zone, you can get popped with a double fine... for endangering no one. I think that is bull****. Kate |
#95
|
|||
|
|||
"Brent P" > wrote | | I even know that as an adult I cannot legally ride a bicycle on the | sidewalk. Numerous driver's insist on it however. The law states to use | the road and ride by the letter of the IL vehicle code. | When was the last time you tried to ride a bike on the street? We bought dirt bikes several years ago, decided to ride along the canals. The sheriff's department kicked us off. A couple of old folks, riding biked for exercise. The streets were't safe, so we sold the damn bikes and said ta-hell-with-it. Out here in Tennessee, there is no f-ing way I would try to ride a bike on the road. These people drive like idiots. Even worse than California. Kate |
#96
|
|||
|
|||
RichA > wrote in
: > On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 23:20:25 GMT, Joe > wrote: > >>RichA > wrote in m: >> >>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2005 14:44:11 GMT, Joe > >>wrote: >>> >>>>"SVTKate" > wrote in thlink.net: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> "Brent P" > wrote >>>>> >>>>> *snipped* >>>>> >>>>>| What is the purpose of having so many laws such that people >>cannot >>>>>| get through the day without breaking laws? What is the purpose of >>>>>| having laws that define common, reasonable behavior as illegal? >>>>>| Many laws in this nation are only enforced selectively. Against >>>>>| people who are not liked, or have a certain appearance, etc and >>so >>>>>| forth. >>>>> >>>>> Because without all of those laws, the jackasses in Washington >>>>> wouldn't have a job making more. >>>>> Your paragraph above Brent is, IMHO, right on the money. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>>| >>>>>| Emotional appeals. Even less. Do you obey 55 mph interstate speed >>>>>| limits? I'll wager in any give day you commit more moving >>>>>| violations than I do. >>>>>| >>>>> >>>>> Again I agree. I always push the interstate speed limits 5-9 mph >>>>> over. Out here, if the speed limit is 45, they drive 55-60. >>>>> If it's 70, they are driving 80-85. >>>>> I feel like an idiot allot of the time because everyone is passing >>>>> me. It's not as though I don't WANT to go that fast, BUT I just do >>>>> not want that ticket. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Kate >>>> >>>>Kate, I really thought you had more sense than this. What did you >>>>tell your kids when they learned to drive? That going 5mph over the >>>>limit is just fine because "everybody does it"? Did you tell them >>>>that the law is only a "suggestion"? >>> >>> Of course no one would, but then young people pay huge insurance >>rates >>> because they have no e-x-p-e-r-i-e-n-c-e. There is NO reason for an >>> experienced driver not to drive 70-80mph on an uncrowded, dry >>highway; >>> None. Yet our speed limits stay at 60mph, crowded, uncrowded, rain >>or >>> shine. >> >>You're simply wrong. The single reason is the law. Go above the >>limit and risk getting a ticket with points. >> >>> Some have said it is because people normally drive 10-15mph faster >>> that they keep them at 60mph, which is fine, at least it acknowleges >>> that people DO drive faster on average than the speed limit and >>there >>> is no major increase in danger from it. >> >>Don't mix apples and oranges. Driving dangerously had nothing to do >>with the speed limit. >> >>> And, even if there is, there has to be a point at which you say, we >>> are a car-driving society. We accept as a consequence that people >>> will be injured and hurt in car accidents because of this. We can >>> slow cars down to 40mph on highways and we know it "might" mitigate >>> some fatalities, but we've rationalized that the risk of faster >>speeds >>> is paid back in the rewards of faster speeds, namely, getting where >>> were going in a suitable period of time. There are some who think >>> the sheer tedium of travelling very slow makes drivers worse >>drivers. >> >>So what? If you're a bad driver, you shouldn't be on the road until >>you become a good driver. >> >>> I would personally like them to do this; Raise speed limits on >>> highways to 80mph, with the admonition that anyone caught going >>> over that limit would be fined far more heavily than they are now. >>> This is what they do in some countries in Europe. This would >>> legalize the higher speed, would not encourage people to go faster >>> than they already do, but, would mean someone going 80mph wouldn't >>> face the possibility of a ticket for doing so. I think it would >>also >>> encourage people to develop a more disciplined driving style than >>> they practice now. >> >>Then do something about it. Write your legistlators and try to get it >>enacted. Be empowered. Don't sit there and post drivel about how >>unfair things are and not do anything about it. >> >>> I'd keep speeds the same on city streets though and nail people's >>> asses to the wall if they did things like run red lights. IMO, >>> you should have your license suspended for things like that because >>> they have inherently higher risk than simply going faster on a >>highway >>> that can support it. >>> -Rich >> >>So change things. If the current laws bother you so much, do >>something to change them. Don't whine with the excuse that it's too >>hard and nobody listens - that's just a cop out. >> >>Bottom line - either abide by the law or do something to change it for >>the better. Simply breaking it and whining that it's not a fair law >>anyway is just plain lazy, cowardly bull****. > > I guess you have to believe the politicians as well? Good luck. > When the conservatives wanted in in Ontario Canada, the talked about > raising the speed limit to 70mph, which most supported. They got in, > the idea was never raised again. They talked about allowing stores > (other than official government run ones) to sell liquor) and nearly > everyone supported it, except for the overpaid employees in the gov > stores. They got in, they never mentioned it again. > The only thing with regard to traffic that ever got passed by > politicians in Ontario was the implementation of photo radar and > people finally went nuts with hatred of it, and the slimy socialists > who brought it in had to back down and remove it. > If people haven't figured out that North America is becomming a worse > and worse "nanny state" every year, they are MISSING something. > -Rich So either fix it or move to a better place. Whining about it doesn't accomplish a thing, except waste Brent's precious bandwidth. |
#97
|
|||
|
|||
|
#98
|
|||
|
|||
|
#100
|
|||
|
|||
I agree. Every day I commute to work and back, I see at least several
nut jobs weaving in and out of traffic (mostly in wannabe ricemobiles) doing 15-20mph above what everybody else is doing. These idiots will be doing their thing regardless of the speed limit. And of course, there are always the moron 2-wheelers who drive down the line in between lanes. The other day I almost saw one get taken out because a car changed lanes right in front of him. The bottom line though, is that I really don't care anymore what the speed limit is. Unless I'm speeding to blend in with everybody else, I'll obey it simply because I don't want any points. And so what if I get to my destination 10 minutes later? It certainly isn't going to kill me... "Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote in : > IMO, the real threat to drivers are those that feel the need to > drive either much slower or faster than the "pack". They will be > there no matter what the speed limit may be. I bet the overwhelming > majority of drivers would support a 75-80 mph speed limit on most > rural interstate highways and be perfectly willing to accept > whatever additional risk they may be exposed to as a result. I know > I would for one. One other thing is that most new cars perform > (brake, handle etc.) much better than the ones on the road when the > interstate highway system was conceived and designed. This is > further reason why raising the speed limit to 75-80 mph wouldn't > cause profits for funeral homes to skyrocket. > > Joe wrote: >> Within the last few years, they raised the speed limit on I-75 down >> here to 70. It was 65, and everybody did 80-85, so they redid >> their study and agreed that it was certainly safe to raise it to >> 70. So now everybody does 80-90. >> >> >> "Michael Johnson, PE" > wrote in >> news >> >> >>>I remember talking to an old VDOT employee several years ago and he >>>told me how they determined speed limits before the design of >>>roadways became standardized. They observed the actual traffic >>>speed, plugged those numbers into an equation (nothing complicated >>>I'm sure), rounded to the nearest multiple of 5 mph and that number >>>was the speed limit. Too bad this still isn't the way it is done. >>> >>>Joe wrote: >>> >>>>"SVTKate" > wrote in arthlink.net: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>"Joe" > wrote >>>>>*snip* >>>>>| Kate, I really thought you had more sense than this. What did >>>>>| you tell your kids when they learned to drive? That going 5mph >>>>>| over the limit is just fine because "everybody does it"? Did >>>>>| you tell them that the law is only a "suggestion"? >>>>> >>>>>Well, Joe, thanks for the kind words. How much sense I have may >>>>>be questionable at times. >>>> >>>> >>>>I know the feeling. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>You're right, about it being just a suggestion, and you have an >>>>>valid point. It IS the law. There is no arguing with that >>>>>whatsoever. >>>> >>>> >>>>That's my only point. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>But seriously, how many poeple do you know that do the exact >>>>>speed limit? I mean that will admit to always going the limit. >>>> >>>> >>>>None. Myself included. I've taught my son that it's his duty to >>>>obey the laws. But when obeying the law puts him at risk, like >>>>when everybody's doing 90 in a 70, then he should "blend in" with >>>>the traffic so he doesn't pose a hazard to himself or anyone else. >>>>I've also told him that while doing so, he (and everyone else) >>>>risks getting a ticket with points. It's happened to me, and I'm >>>>sure it's happened to others. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>In town, school zones and places like that, I try my damnedest to >>>>>drive the speed limit. >>>>>I would say that 95% of the time I am successful. >>>> >>>> >>>>In school zones, if you're doing 1 mph over the limit, you should >>>>be strung up and shot. 2 cents. We're talking about _kids_ here. >>>>Children, fercrissakes. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>>>BUT, on the freeway? >>>>>If I'm doing 5-7 mph over I'm still sitting still out there when >>>>>everyone is wizzing past. I know that because everyone else does >>>>>it, is not a good excuse, but dangit, I am not going to drive 65 >>>>>while the rest of the world is driving 75-80. >>>> >>>> >>>>Like I said above, if it poses a hazard to do the limit, then by >>>>all means blend in. But by doing so, realize that you're also >>>>putting yourself at risk for getting a ticket with points. Those >>>>are the facts. >>> >> > |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
[OT] eBay idiots | Neil | VW air cooled | 2 | January 22nd 05 03:42 AM |