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

Re: Solve speeding by limiting cars!

On Mon, 13 Nov 1995, Mark Spencer wrote:

>         Since there is no place in the US where 65 mph can be legally
> exceeded, I don't see why cars are being sold that can go faster than this.
> Especially with speedometers that read well over 100 mph, enticing drivers
> to drive at dangerous speeds.

Since congress seems about to remove the federal thumbscrew from the 
States' regulation of speeds on their own turf... And since at least two 
states have never seriously enforced the 55mph joke your first sentence 
is invalid nonesense.

And, just because a car has a 100 mph speedometer doesn't make it a 100 
mph car...And even it that were the case, big numbers on a guage do not 
initiate a speed lust in drivers.

 
>         Cars are already being sold with speed limiters to keep from
> exceeding the limits of the tires and suspension. Why aren't cars sold with
> speed limiters at 65 mph to keep from exceeding the limits of the law?

Great! just like France about 1960. People in Deux Chevaux trying to use 
their 1 mph advantage to pass a line of trucks, only to get pasted onto 
the front of an oncoming truck like a bug on a windshield. When you have 
to pass it's a good idea to spend as little time as possible in the 
oncoming lane...the same way you wouldn't stand around naked in a 
shooting gallery.

>	 The majority of all accidents are due to speed. Thosands of lives 
>would be saved every year if cars were unable to exceed a safe speed. 

There's a statement *straight* out of the back end of the bull. That's an 
old whine that's been around longer than dirt with absolutely no 
corroborative evidence. Sure speed may be a factor, but only in 
relativity to the total picture. What were the driving conditions? what 
was the traffic density? what condition was the vehicle in? were alcohol 
or drugs involved? Those are the things that cause accidents. Speed is 
simply a relative factor, and most times of little actual consequence.

I drive well over 50,000 miles per year in the U.S. and Canada. Speeders 
are the *least* of my worries. Oh sure there's the occasional weenie who 
drives way above his abilities, or gunshots and darts through heavy 
traffic, but idiots like that would do the same if you restricted them to 
a tricycle. The real troublemakers drive 35/40 mph on the freeway. They 
pace other slowpokes to build huge packs so that a moment of innatention 
or frustration can take out 20 cars. They're the guys that make non-stop, 
non-look free right turns as you bear down on them at mid-intersection. 
They're the jerks who think the yellow light means accelerate. They're 
the folks who don't signal for turns...or who drive for miles with them 
on. they're the ones who won't stay out of the car when they've been 
drinking.

Friends in the State Patrol and RCMP tell me that they target speeders 
more because most are highly focused, paying attention to the road ahead, 
and are much easier to slip up on.


>What is wrong with our government that they would ignore such a simple 
>way to enforce a law and save lives?

I think your use of the adjective *simple* is probably the answer to the
question you ask here.The world is full of people who toss simple 
solutions up to fix complex problems...Usually the solutions are aimed at 
problems the proposee is completely unqualified to address, kinda like 
what happened here.

But I'll tell you what Mark. Since you like concepts that have no 
particular bearing on reality let's try this Idea. Leave your parents' 
names and address at the front desk and as soon as the retroactive birth 
control pill is developed we'll see that they get a good supply

John
Follow-Ups: