[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Solve speeding by limiting cars!
In article <randy-1411951810100001@philly48.voicenet.com>,
Randy <randy@omni.voicenet.com> wrote:
>In article <4893a6$oar@nntp.atlanta.com>, dwarner@atlanta.com wrote:
>> I can think of at least one case where limiters would endanger one's life.
>> Trying to drive someone to the hospital before they die, either in the car
>> of a friend or relative, or in an ambulance that can't get by a pack of
>> 65-limited cars that can't speed up to get out of the way.
>
>I must contradict this. Ambulance personnel should stabilize the patient
>PRIOR to transport. As a paramedic, I was bound by those rules. In PA,
>ambulances must obey ALL laws regardless of the emergency. No sense
>endangering more lives to save on life, whether transport by ambulance or
>personal vehicle.
It's always been my understanding that an ambulance can do whatever it wants
as long as it's not unreasonably dangerous. This is what they told us in
driver's ed, this is what I've observed, and it even happens to be what
Florida law says. (I tried to check NY (where I took driver's ed) and PA
laws, but couldn't find them on the net, though NY could have it buried a
dozen levels deep in one of their messy gopher systems).
>> Besides, If my car had a speed governor, I'd just disable it, as most everyone
>> else would.
>
>Which leads me to believe that you have no regard for law. Are you above
>the law?
When you've got as many stupid laws as we do now, you'll find that people
don't have much regard for law.
Follow-Ups:
References: