[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]

Re: Comments from Mr. Traffic



In article <3u6s98$7kt@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
   kennystar@aol.com (KENNY MORSE) wrote:

>#1: Although the Senate & house WILL probably pass the bill, the 
>administration has already indicated they are against it because of the 
>increase in lives lost  

Speed limits aren't a deciding voting-booth issue for a lot of people.  
BUT, vetoing the bill would be yet another irritant in those parts
of the country (the west) most resentful of federal mandates,
nannying, etc.

>In America, the #1 factor involved in auto fatalities is SPEED. 
>(Strangely 
>enough, the #1 cause of accidents here in CA is NOT speeding.....it's 
>TAILGAITING....SPEEDING is #2).  [deleted] I wish this was like the 
>Autobahn.  

Well, that's the problem.  On the autobahn/motorways slower traffic
voluntarily moves to the slower side.  People don't have to tailgate
to intimidate (or just wake up) fast-lane hogs.  People don't
have to pass on the off-side (right here, left in the UK).  This
eliminates a whole category of chaotic traffic patterns that 
obviously contribute to accidents.  

>I LOVE going fast as much as anyone (my first 5 cars were 
>Vettes).  But since the education of drivers SUCKS, and people think 
>they own the road, and courtesy is a long lost thing. we NEED laws to 
protect us from others, and speed limits are the #1 laws we need.  

The authorities here have long known that the aforementioned passing 
and lane-ordering principles work.   They have either failed to put
them on the books or enforce them if they are already there.  Though
they have found the time to address such important safety issues
as the tethering of dogs in the backs of pick-up trucks....


John Reece
Not an Intel spokesman


John Reece
Not an Intel spokesman



Follow-Ups: References: