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

Re: Need Help Bad speeding ticket



In article <randy-0111950034210001@philly36.voicenet.com>,
Randy <randy@omni.voicenet.com> wrote:

>This is not bull shit. People tell me all the time they will not drive
>MORE than 10 MPH over the SPEED LIMIT in fear of getting cited. Hence,
>speed limits do work to keep MOST traffic from going too fast. I think 75
>MPH on most highways may be more than adequate, but if you make the speed
>limit 75 MPH, you will have people driving 85 MPH. That is why I think 65
>MPH is a good speed limit.

I love your (lack of) reasoning.  The law should allow a maximum of 65
mph, so that people can do 75.  Let's apply this stupid reasoning to
other laws as well... the laws against murdering a person will now
allow you to kill one, just so long as you don't kill a second.  You
will be allowed to break and enter one residence, but we'll throw the
book at you if you try a second one.

Your line of reasoning is just plain stupid.  The law should be the
law, period.  What has happened is that people don't respect speed
limits because "55 means 65" has been practiced (by clowns like you)
too long.  This makes local roads more dangerous, because people don't
respect the speed limits on them either-- places where speed limits
are more in tune with safety, like near parks, schools, and heavily
populated areas.

>Sure I can. 100 MPH is not safe! PERIOD! Unless you are on an oval track
>with other race car drivers. Even then the get into accidents. And they
>are pros with the best equipment. But the difference between going 55 MPH,
>and 155 MPH is the amount of distance you travel when switching your foot
>from the gas to the brake, the distance it takes you to stop that vehicle,
>and the amount of force when you hit the object.

Physics is physics.  That is not debatable.  Then again, that isn't
the point.  There is nothing to say that you WILL hit an object.
That's the problem with people like you-- you always say "yeah, but
when you hit something...".  The solution is simple-- don't hit
anything.  You act like it's inevitable that someone driving faster
than you would like will hit something.  Prediction of doom and gloom.
All the while, there is no proof that the driver will hit anything.

>Or travel 10 MPH over the 75 MPH limit to do 85 MPH.

Once again, you are pitting anecdotal evidence which flys in the face
of almost all known research on the subject.  You can't prove your
point, or disprove the research, using your evidence.

>There will always be people out there who break the speed limit law
>regardless of what it is set at. Go sit at any school zone. Watch how
>people blow through without care of a kid running out into traffic.
>Happens everyday in the good old USA.

That's YOUR fault.  Your "55 means 65" bullshit has led to a complete
disregard for speed limits.  People know that 55 is unreasonably slow,
and the fact that your "speed limit + 10" rule is pretty much given
hard and fast by every police agency in the country, is it any wonder?

>I think most people can determine what is safe for them. But not everyone
>can agree on the same speed. Ever get behind someone driving so slow it
>pissed you off? This was comfortable for them.

So we set the speed limit based on the lowest speed on the road?  We
don't want to piss off old farts who can't see very well, so let's
make the maximum speed limit 55 on the highway.  Let's inconvenience
94% of the public to coddle the other 6%.  That's really sensible!

>> If they aren't capable of determining
>> this, you're saying that the bureaucrats that make the speed limits up
>> (by pulling them from their assholes) *are* capable?  
>
>Most speed limits are determined by traffic studies. People still break
>those speed limits.

Bullshit.  The 55 limit was done for energy savings alone.  It has
been kept for political reasons.  The move to repeal of the NMSL has
politicians uptight, since they won't be able to control people's
actions any more (all Democrats shudder at the thought!).

>Forget about the inclement weather point. You are trying to argue that 55
>MPH speed limits are too slow. I can agree. You argue that 85 MPH is a
>good speed limit. I disagree. When weather is inclement, drive slower. The
>speed limits posted are for good weather, not inclement weather.

No shit Dick Tracy.  Every state in the US has a "reasonable and
prudent" clause which makes speed limits non-absolute.  Each and every
state realizes that speed limits are subject to "conditions
permitting."  You cannot argue that 85 wouldn't be a good limit based
on the fact that there can be inclement weather-- it is baseless.

>> The Germans do just fine with their speed 
>> limits because they have a more educated driving population, and they
>> also have some engineering in their roads that we don't have everywhere.
>
>This isn't Germany, and we do not have the Autobahn. 

No, instead we have many wide-open, straight highways that make the
autobahns look like goat trails.  And we have just about the lowest
speed limit in the world.

>> There are State Troupers travelling the roads constantly,
>> so any debris will be spotted and taken care of promptly. 

>WRONG! The debris may be taken care, but not always promptly. In some
>areas, it may be as short/long as an hour before a Trooper drives down a
>stretch of road. You think there are Troopers every mile? I am a Trooper
>and can honestly say that it can take a long time before debris is
>removed. I am sure you have seen rubber from a blown tire on the road
>before. Most people have. The rubber usually comes from a truck tractor.
>Not only that, but you may be driving behind the truck tractor when the
>tire blows. No Trooper in the world could clean up that debris before you
>hit it.

This is not suprising-- they most often are too busy shooting radar to
worry about highway safety.

>Sure they did. But the point is, the chances of losing control of your
>vehicle is less at lower speeds. I know when I drive over a pothole at
>higher speeds, my car has a tendecy to bounce, shake, swerve, etc... more
>than at lower speeds. Again, common sense.

Extrapolating your point, we find that not travelling at all reduces
the chances of losing control.  There is always a risk, but you seem
to think that there is a magic number somewhere, based on how you
feel.  Traffic engineers attempt to find that point using sound
engineering principles, and you say they are wrong.

>It is not a tax. You do not have to pay a speeding fine unless you speed.
>If you don't speed, you don't get fined. Nice try. 

Unreasonably low limits caused 94% of all New Yorkers to exceed the
speed limit.  It may not be a tax, but speed limits are, without a
doubt, set with revenue enhancement in mind, not safety.

-JPC

-- 
=============================================================================
John P. Curcio  jpc@philabs.philips.com  Philips Labs  Briarcliff Manor, NY
                "FOSTERS:  Australian for Bud, mate!!"
   "No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'"  -BH


References: