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

Re: Need Help Bad speeding ticket



In article <bpita.815072918@toon>, bpita@ctp.com (Bob Pitas) wrote:

> randy@omni.voicenet.com (Randy) writes:
> 
> >In article <46lf6q$meo@apakabar.cc.columbia.edu>,
> >adr5@aloha.cc.columbia.edu (Alex D Rodriguez) wrote:
> 
> >> Randy <randy@omni.voicenet.com> wrote:
> 
> >> >highway, and would count the cars coming through the radar screen. Even
> >> >though motorists were warned by other motorists going the opposite
> >> >direction, or even by radar detectors, the average speed on the 55 MPH
> >> >highway was 65. 
> >> >
> >> >People tend to do approx. 10 MPH over the speed limit. Regardless wether
> >> >it is a 35 MPH, 45 MPH, or 55MPH zone. I have seen this first hand.
> >> 
> >> No, that is wrong.  People will drive at whatever speed they feel
comfortable
> >> for the conditions.  If the speedlimit were 100MPH people would not drive
> >> 110.  All you have to do is look at any highway during a snow storm
and even
> >> though it is legal to drive 55, very few if any are going that fast. 
People
> >> do slow down when the conditions warrant it.  Not all people are as stupid
> >> as you make them out to be.  Almost every single highway has a speed limit
> >> that is well below the speeds it was designed to handle.  That is why your
> >> idea of a study is flawed to begin with.
> 
> >No, you are wrong. People will drive at what they think they can get away
> >with. This is usually 10 MPH over the speed limit as long as it is safe.
> 
> This is bullshit.  There are particular situations that make 10MPH over the
> limit a "magic number", but it only applies *up to* the speed that people
> would travel if there weren't any speed limits at all.

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.

> For instance, in alot of places (like Massachusetts) you get $50 for the first
> 10MPH over the limit, and $1/MPH over that.  Up until 10MPH over, it's not
> that expensive, but it gets expensive FAST after that.  In addition, alot
> of LEOs will not pull someone over on a highway unless they're going >10MPH
> over the limit.  In fact on the Mass Pike, someone high up in the State
> Police hierarchy once stated outright that officers will not pull anyone over
> if they are going <10MPH over the limit...

In this paragraph you just proved my point. You agree that people will not
do more than 10 MPH due to officers not pulling them over. So what is your
argument?

> But, if there were no limits, people would travel at whatever speed they 
> were comfortable.  

And if they are comfortable at 55 MPH, this makes for a dangerous
situation when others drive faster.

> If the limit were 75MPH, people who are comfortable 
> going 65 would not go 75MPH, which is faster then they are
> comfortable.

Mostly, but in high volume situations where the flow is about 75 MPH, the
person may feel that s/he needs to drive faster.

> That makes no sense.  I think the problem is that we still
> haven't raised the limit high enough to get to the point where people
> are comfortable.  

Some people are comfortable with the 55 MPH, some are comfortable with 65 MPH. 

> I think somewhere around 85MPH would be nice...  

You would. That is too fast. 65 MPH speed limits are good.
> That's
> the speed that I travel when the conditions are perfect.  

Until you get into that unavoidable accident and kill yourself or someone else.

> When it rains
> or snows, I slow way down, usually slower than prevailing traffic, just
> because I know that my car (with wide tires and crappy brakes) doesn't
> handle well in either of these conditions.  

Even cars with the best tires and brakes can have a bad driver behind the
wheel. If you are driving on ice, 1 MPH could be too fast. Ever see how
far a car slides when you lock the brakes up on ice at 1 MPH?

> Of course when I slow down,
> I stay in the rightmost lane 

All traffic should stay in the right lane except when PASSING. That is
what the left lane is for. PASSING.
> except to pass (which I always do anyways,
> even if I'm going 85MPH) 

Glad you stay in the left lane.

> and make sure that I don't impede anyone else's
> progress.  

I seriously doubt you are impeding anyone else's progress when you are
driving 85 MPH.

> It would be nice if people would extend the same courtesy
> to me when conditions are perfect!

Wishful thinking.
> >100 MPH is not safe. 
> 
> You cannot make a generalization like this.  100MPH is most definitely safe
> on certain roads in the US.  Hell, there were no night-time speed limits
> in certain places in the western US for years, since it was so flat and
> straight that it was *really* hard to be suprised by anything, short of
> a mechanical failure, which will probably screw you up whether you're 
> going 55MPH or 155MPH...

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.

I forget what state it was in, but there was multiple accidents with
multiple fatalities due to sudden fog. I think 11 people died. You cannot
predict what will happen. Due to the original accident, more accidents
occurred due to motorists not being able to stop in time. This was on a 55
MPH highway in which most cars were travelling 65 MPH. What do you think
your car bolting at 100 MPH would have done? Don't forget, you may be able
to drive 100 MPH, but there are other people on the road that can't/won't
drive 100 MPH. Don't jeopardize their lives just because you want to shave
some travel time off of your trip. Slow down and enjoy the scenery. 

> >                       Most people will never break the 100 MPH mark. I am
> >referring to the 55 and 65 MPH speed limits that most people drive 10
> >over. 
> 
> As I said above, that's only because the 55MPH and 65MPH limits still haven't
> gotten us into a comfort zone.  

Who's comfort zone? Yours? 

> Maybe if they were 75MPH, then people would
> be comfortable and stop breaking the (ludicrous) speed limit laws.  

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

> Until
> people can travel at a speed at which they're comfortable, though, they
> will never observe the law 100% of the time...

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.

> >        As far as driving in inclement weather, most drivers slow down for
> >conditions. That is plain common sense. But we are not talking about
> >inclement weather, so why did you even bring this up? 
> 
> And going 85MPH is just as much a matter of common sense when the conditions
> are perfect as slowing down is when conditions aren't perfect.  The other
> person was trying to make a point with the inclement weather point, which
> you evidently don't comprehend.  

No, I comprehend just fine what he was trying to convey. The fact is, we
were talking about reasonable speed limits during inclement weather. Speed
limits in bad weather would be a whole new thread.

> If you trust motorists to use their "common
> sense" (your words here) to slow down in inclement weather, which I agree
> with, why do you suddenly not trust them when conditions are perfect???

I trust MOST motorists to use common sense. But even though they slow
down, they are not necessarily driving slow enough for existing
conditions.

> Are people not qualified to determine what speed their cars are capable of
> safely travelling in perfect conditions, which I would say they drive far
> more often than inclement conditions?  

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.

> 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.
> Do you see why the
> writer made the inclement weather point now???

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.

> >                                                       As far as every
> >single highway having a speed limit lower than what it was designed for,
> >where did you get this? Did you go to every department and ask them what
> >speed each of the millions of roads were designed for? And how do you know
> >the speed limits are "well below the speeds it was designed to handle"? 
> 
> Maybe you're not aware of this, but the highway infrastructure of the
> United States was a very carefully planned, nationally standardized
> project to meet certain criteria.  

Find this and show it to me.

> I'm not sure of the exact specifications,
> but one of them was for 50's technology military vehicles to be able to
> safely travel non-stop at some speed, which I'm pretty sure was around
> 80MPH for vehicles that were capable of achieving that speed.  
> All the
> highways were designed and built with these guidelines in mind.  
> If you
> do a strict engineering study on the roads, they are actually designed
> (as far as turn radius, rate of climb/descent, width, smoothness, etc)
> for 50's technology vehicles to go between 75MPH and 90MPH.  These
> are vehicles with drum brakes, bias-ply tires, old-tech suspensions, no
> anti-lock brakes or traction control, and in most cases not even
> *seat belts*!  Don't you think that even if the people driving the
> cars didn't change (which is not, in itself, a given) the performance
> of the cars has improved enough to warrant even higher speed limits???
> I'm saying limits higher then the were in the 60s, not higher then
> they are now, since they are now *far* to low...

Are you talking about interstate/intrastate highways? State highways? Many
highways have curves with a critical speed less than 80 MPH now.

> >                                                                         My
> >idea of a study was not flawed. My study was to determing what speeds
> >people were travelling at in my jurisdiction. How is that flawed?
> 
> >> What you see is not always the way things are.  Remember the first time
> >> you saw a magician and were so impressed.  After all the tricks were
pointed
> >> out you weren't wquite as impressed.  I think you are missing alot.  What
> >> do you know about road design and safety?  Are you a traffic engineer?
> 
> >I know more about road design and safety than you obviously do. But of
> >course what I was taught must be wrong since it contradicts you. You the
> >all knowing traffic guru. Why bring magic into this? Magic is based on
> >illusion, traffic accidents are not illusions. 
> 
> I wouldn't say you know *that* much about road design considering the fact
> that you made such a blanket statement about safety, which you don't seem
> to know much about either...  

Talk about making a blanket statement. You do not know what my
qualifications are. I may or may not know more about traffic safety than
you, but I am willing to be that my training and experience makes me more
knowledgeable than you.

> 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. 

> Some major highways in New England (like I95) have fences on the sides
> of the roads to keep animals off the roads, so you don't have to worry
> about that.  

If the fences are high enough, then no worries. But remember that animals
can get on the highway at the same location that vehicles enter.

> 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.

> failures happen, to be sure, but there's really no way to minimize that
> besides not driving at all.  If you snap an axle and a wheel comes off,
> the wreck is going to be just as bad whether you're going 65 or 85MPH...

WRONG! The wreck is going to be far worse at a faster speed. Common sense
(my words) here.

> >> Reasonable is what is determined after a study by road and traffic
engineers.
> >> As a starting point most of the interstates that were around before 1974
> >> were posted at 75mph.  That should be a minimum starting point.  In the
> >> 20 year that have gone by both roads and cars have improved alot so the 
> >> more realistic limit would be higher than that.  You don't have to have all
> >> the answers as long as you know how get the right answers the right way
> >> based on unbiased facts.
> 
> >75 MPH as a minimum starting point? Why not just go all out and make it
> >125 MPH? Just because roads and cars have improved, does not mean that
> >drivers have improved. Not to mention the unexpected pot hole, deer
> >jumping out in front of you, disabled motorist in the road, rubber from a
> >truck tractor trailer laying in the road, etc... Technically, all roads
> >could handle a car doing 150 MPH, but how long to stop that car? How far
> >does the car travel during the reaction time? 
> 
> And they didn't have pot holes, deer, disabled motorists and retreads back
> before '74?

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.

> Back before '74 it was scientifically determined that the cars of that
> time (with their drum brakes, shitty tires, sub-standard lighting systems)
> could handle 75MPH.  

I would love to see this study. I have yet to see how a lighting system
effects the speed of a vehicle.

> It should be obvious to anyone that far more 
> technologically advanced cars will be able to safely travel faster then
> that, so why are the speed limits still way below what they were 25 years
> ago? 

Because not everyone can drive at faster speeds. COMMON SENSE! It does not
matter how fast the car can go when you have someone that can not drive it
safely.

> This is a retorical question, obviously, because the reason is so
> that the insurance companies can get rich and certain municipalities can
> use speed limits as a road-use tax.

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. 

> >>
-----------------                                                            

> >> Alex     __O    '86 Dodge Omni GLH
Turbo                                    
> >>        _-\<,_   '87 Alfa Romeo
Milano                                       
> >>       (_)/ (_)  '88 Vitus/Dura-Ace
> >-- 
> >Randy
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>        / _ \         "Now I've found some understanding            Bob Pitas
>       /    /USH       of the only world that we see"           bpita@ctp.com
>      / /| \                             - Neil Peart         (Cambridge, MA)
-- 
Randy


Follow-Ups: