Speed limits...

[lightspeed]

I'm not sure if this has been discussed in here before...but do you guys and gals think speed limits are actually needed, functional...and if so why. I'm going to be writing a persuasion paper on this and some opinions would be great. Thanks in advance.

BTW.... we are all doing over the speed limit even when we are standing still (the earth rotates at approx. 1038 mph at the equator)...:shocked:

[YZFRydn]

Speed limits I think do some good for most people. For me psychologically, if I am in a 55 and doing 65 in the car I am not going too fast but at exactly the right speed. If for say, there were no speed limits, I would probably do 80-90 in the cage and faster on the bike. I'll write a better opinion once I get home from the bar.

[PhL0aTeR]

http://forums.coloradoracing.net/html/emoticons/popcorn.gif

[WidowmakerDutch]

I'm not sure if this has been discussed in here before...but do you guys and gals think speed limits are actually needed, functional...and if so why. I'm going to be writing a persuasion paper on this and some opinions would be great. Thanks in advance.

BTW.... we are all doing over the speed limit even when we are standing still (the earth rotates at approx. 1038 mph at the equator)...:shocked:

Yes I do believe there are a need for speed limits. We all know people can't do 55 or even 75 half the time. Whether we are two wheeling it or caging it. We all go a little over the limit. The only reason I say we need it is because we all know the 45mph driver that is in the left lane on the highway SLOWING everyone down to them. Now can you imagine someone coming up from the rear at over 200mph. Not only is that going to put both drivers involved in the accident, but many more people in danger from the aftermath. Speed limits are needed for that reason, someone will always push the limits :), and will take chacnes. But I would chose it be pushed at 75 than no limit at all.
That's just my two cents, I could be wrong, I could be right.

[Tipys]

I for one am all for the Germany driving training. 2000plus hours of driving and class work to get DL. You lose it have to start all over, lose it for DUI never get it back. I think we would have to improve are vehicles made by the USA. But that would only make no speed limits ok in some places. You would still have to have something in areas of schools, businesses, and houses. For the simple fact of kids and other unknow things. Now for it to even be a thought the driving training and improving the vehicals is beyone a must. Now if those things were to change then yes I could go for no speed limit in certian areas. Simple thing is people cant control there vehicals with speed limits. So if these ever came up to a vote of any kind it would never pass. One so many people agesnt the idea and safety. Even if the safety was upped like I stated before there are even more people would be agesnt having to go back for driving training. Just my 2 cents

[lightspeed]

Now can you imagine someone coming up from the rear at over 200mph. .

Yes, I CAN imagine that...:twisted:..lol

[Mental]

Another key to the need for speed limits would involve the lack of any real road worthiness inspection here in the US. Even in states where they have them, they are a joke. Combine that with the ridiculous age we allow peaple to drive, the legal and social perception that driving is a right rather than a privledge, a total lack of proper driver training and the abilites of even the most mondane of cars availible to anyone these days, and you have a huge prescription for disatser.

[lightspeed]

I for one am all for the Germany driving training. 2000plus hours of driving and class work to get DL. You lose it have to start all over, lose it for DUI never get it back. I think we would have to improve are vehicles made by the USA. But that would only make no speed limits ok in some places. You would still have to have something in areas of schools, businesses, and houses. For the simple fact of kids and other unknow things. Now for it to even be a thought the driving training and improving the vehicals is beyone a must. Now if those things were to change then yes I could go for no speed limit in certian areas. Simple thing is people cant control there vehicals with speed limits. So if these ever came up to a vote of any kind it would never pass. One so many people agesnt the idea and safety. Even if the safety was upped like I stated before there are even more people would be agesnt having to go back for driving training. Just my 2 cents

So...you're saying that more training=possible no or higher speed limits?

And..does speed kill or do people kill?

[Tipys]

Lots and lots of more training, improving USA made cars, upping safety standards, improving roads, better public transportation, min speed limits so there will still be a limit, and truly making driving a privilege . If all that happens then maybe. But you still have to many people that see it as a right.

[= Buckeye Jess =]

Another key to the need for speed limits would involve the lack of any real road worthiness inspection here in the US. Even in states where they have them, they are a joke. Combine that with the ridiculous age we allow peaple to drive, the legal and social perception that driving is a right rather than a privledge, a total lack of proper driver training and the abilites of even the most mondane of cars availible to anyone these days, and you have a huge prescription for disatser.
I absolutely agree that there is a perception of right vs. privilege. I understand what you are getting at with the age remark - but I think we can take that one step further. This also goes in line with what Trevor was saying. Our licensing is a bit goofy if you ask me. Yes, you have to take the tests initially, but after that.... you fill out paperwork and take a vision test. THAT is ridiculous to me! I think we need to increase the requirements for license renewal and this will help take care of the age issue that I think Mental was getting at.

Having said as much, we currently need the speed limit where it is at (IMO) to almost protect us from ourselves and everybody else out there. If we were to improve the roads, cars and assure that there is a better quality of driver out there - then heck yes, increase it! I'm not sure I'd be comfortable with having NO limit...except perhaps in certain freeway situations.

It comes down to the fact that the faster you are going, the quicker your response time has to be. There comes a point where reaction time just cannot keep up with the speed of the vehicle. The hard part is finding that delicate balance.

[BigE]

My two cents...In populated areas there is a need for speed limits, i.e. the dumbass who I yelled at going down our very narrow residential street (which is 30mph and too fast), we had a chit chat when he stopped because I called him a dumbass. I told him he was indeed a dumbass for doing 70 down our street. He rebutted that he was only doing 50! (BTW, he was accellerating when I yelled at him :rolleyes:)
On the other hand, I dream of the day when there would be no limit for daylight hours going on highways like I-80 across Utah and Nevada. Those are the land of eternal mtn. ranges...as in, I've been driving for two hours at 80mph and those mtns sure don't look any closer! Basically, if it's a hundred miles or more between towns/exits with no cross traffic...why do we need a speed limit during the day?

[= Buckeye Jess =]

I thought I was told once that there are parts of the Nevada freeways with no limits during daylight hours....was someone just blowing smoke up my keester?

[Zach929rr]

You got it coming out your ears!

[Mental]

So...you're saying that more training=possible no or higher speed limits?

And..does speed kill or do people kill?

I know you're talking to Tipysis, but I have a response.

Years ago I got a tickett in Nebraks and went to a "class" to dodge the pionts. The cop actually walked in and asked how many peaple were there for speeding, most of the hands went up. Then he asked who was there for running a light, failure to stop etc, and the rest of the hands went up. Then he asked who had been involved in an at fault accidnt in the last year, almost all the same hands stayed up, with almost no speeders.

His piont was speed doesn;t kill, inattetive driving does. This was long before texting was all the rage. He pionted out that peaple who don't pay attention are dangerous. What does this have to do with speeding? Well a little.

Do a quick search on the safest and most dangerous countries to drive. You will find most of the industrailised "1st world" couyntries are safe. Germany isn;t the safest, but its up there. Finalnd is also pretty high. You most dangerous places actually dont; even have that many cars, but huge problems with DUIs etc. I want to say its south america, but I'm not sure.

Here in the US, we are headed down that road. We do not traing our drivers, they have many devices in the cockpit to distract them and cars are more powerful. When I was in high school, the car to have wasa Mustang GT or an IROC (yes i am old, bite me) Both of these cars were fast, and put our about 200 HP. Today a Honda Odessy makes 240. I mean hell, a dam Hyundai Genesis is over 300. Each od these cars have satillette radio, and the drivers are chatting a way on phones, or texting, or Spongebob blaring in the back. We all know this becuase they try to kill us on a daily basis.

So to that end, a speed limit is a viable measure of attemting to control safety. Its not the most efficient, but until we get serious about driving in the US (and we won't), we do need to have some measure of control.

[= Buckeye Jess =]

You got it coming out your ears!

LMAO...I'm not surprised! I was told that quite some time ago and frankly forgot all about it until I read this thread.

[longrider]

LMAO...I'm not surprised! I was told that quite some time ago and frankly forgot all about it until I read this thread.

Actually it was true a long time ago. In the 60s and early 70s Nevada had no speed limit and Montana had a 'reasonable and prudent' limit. These were on open roads inthe daytime only. They both went away with the 55 limit in the late 70s. Montana reinstated the 'reasonable and prudent' limit sometime after 55 was repealed but it was challenged in court as being too vague so now they have a limit

[haelo]

Most people drive safely on the autobahn.

Consider using autobahn examples in your paper. They have relatively low accident and fatality rates in the sections that are speed limitless.

[= Buckeye Jess =]

Actually it was true a long time ago. In the 60s and early 70s Nevada had no speed limit and Montana had a 'reasonable and prudent' limit. These were on open roads inthe daytime only. They both went away with the 55 limit in the late 70s. Montana reinstated the 'reasonable and prudent' limit sometime after 55 was repealed but it was challenged in court as being too vague so now they have a limit
Well there you go, I'm not as nutty as I think I am!
There's a thought for you lightspeed - try to pull records on accidents and such from those areas while there were no limits. Naturally the data will be a bit skewed in view of the different challenges facing drivers nowadays, but it should be interesting nonetheless.

[Mental]

Most people drive safely on the autobahn.

Consider using autobahn examples in your paper. They have relatively low accident and fatality rates in the sections that are speed limitless.

Actually no, the autobahn has a limit of 120 kph. Now you are allowed to exceed that in the stretches outside of metro areas, but the high court back in the late 80's early 90's decided that in doing so you assume total liability for any accidents. This was the result of a case where a car was moving at very high speeds when another pulled out to pass a truck. The high speed car basically obliterated the little car.

I was in Germany in the 90s and it didn't slow anyone down, it just adopted a big boy appraoch to enforcement. But Germany took pains to make sure peaple knew the bahn had a limit. Today as the urban areas have expanded just like the rest of the world, there are very few un-enforced areas of the autoboahn. It is still avery efficient way to get around and the speeds are still high, but its not the glory it once was.

[Captain Obvious]

Autobahn also has restrictions on passing on the left side. And it is enforceable. Be nice if we enforced our "slow traffic move right" rules.

My .02 We need limits for several reasons.
1) there is a portion of the driving population who doesn't have enough sense to keep their vehicle at a reasonable and prudent speed without a restriction (obviously still not followed by many)
2) We have some of the worst and most untrained drivers in developed nations so any 'tard can get behind the controls of a 3000 lb missile with little knowledge of what there are doing
3) Since reasonable and prudent is variable by ability and vehicle in discussion, a certain legal vs illegal point has to be set
4) Some people need to be directed on where to go, how to get there, etc, etc. This includes the rate at which they proceed

That said, speed limits are silly. (but I always follow them if any El Paso Sheriff's are reading). And I fully agree with a major issue is driving being a right vs. a privilege. In the US, in my experience, we would be better served to enforce and punish many other laws that exist rather than speeding limits. IMO, speaking on the cell phone while driving is more dangerous than speeding.

[Matt]

In crowded areas, they are needed to keep pedestrians safe (imagine a 75 MPH limit in downtown Denver). Away from town where traffic is lighter, I don't think they are needed.

Imagine the back roads without speed limits (or perhaps 100 MPH limits to keep things from getting completely out of control). Imagine they also had plenty of passing zones. Yellow signs like "35 MPH turn ahead" could warn people of tighter turns. That would allow people who know the roads the ability to get around.

How about tiered licensing. Give people who want to get additional training more freedoms on the open road. Suppose you get pulled over for 100 in a 65. The officer sees you have a higher tier license and lets you go.

I'm not advocating recklessness, I'm talking about people speeding safely when road and traffic conditions allow. Its a nice thought, but the government is more about taking away freedoms than enhancing them.

[lightspeed]

I know you're talking to Tipysis, but I have a response.

Years ago I got a tickett in Nebraks and went to a "class" to dodge the pionts. The cop actually walked in and asked how many peaple were there for speeding, most of the hands went up. Then he asked who was there for running a light, failure to stop etc, and the rest of the hands went up. Then he asked who had been involved in an at fault accidnt in the last year, almost all the same hands stayed up, with almost no speeders.

His piont was speed doesn;t kill, inattetive driving does. This was long before texting was all the rage. He pionted out that peaple who don't pay attention are dangerous. What does this have to do with speeding? Well a little.

Do a quick search on the safest and most dangerous countries to drive. You will find most of the industrailised "1st world" couyntries are safe. Germany isn;t the safest, but its up there. Finalnd is also pretty high. You most dangerous places actually dont; even have that many cars, but huge problems with DUIs etc. I want to say its south america, but I'm not sure.

Here in the US, we are headed down that road. We do not traing our drivers, they have many devices in the cockpit to distract them and cars are more powerful. When I was in high school, the car to have wasa Mustang GT or an IROC (yes i am old, bite me) Both of these cars were fast, and put our about 200 HP. Today a Honda Odessy makes 240. I mean hell, a dam Hyundai Genesis is over 300. Each od these cars have satillette radio, and the drivers are chatting a way on phones, or texting, or Spongebob blaring in the back. We all know this becuase they try to kill us on a daily basis.

So to that end, a speed limit is a viable measure of attemting to control safety. Its not the most efficient, but until we get serious about driving in the US (and we won't), we do need to have some measure of control.

So, basically speed limits are like child proof tops. They protect children (in their ignorance) from something they are too little experience to know what to do with.

Do you think it's fair that those who have developed the skills/ability/wisdom to drive without speed limits should have to suffer with speed limits and subsequent tickets b/c of joe blow who refuses to gain said skills etc.?

[lightspeed]

Well there you go, I'm not as nutty as I think I am!
There's a thought for you lightspeed - try to pull records on accidents and such from those areas while there were no limits. Naturally the data will be a bit skewed in view of the different challenges facing drivers nowadays, but it should be interesting nonetheless.

Yes, good idea!..I haven't gathered a bag full of data...but from what I've read, in places where the limits are higher...there are fewer accidents.

[Devaclis]

The speed limits are fine. The people who get caught speeding and refuse to admit they were doing wrong are idiots. The people who think the street is a racetrack are idiots. Those who want a 200 MPH limit on highways are delusional. The roads are made for the masses, not the asses.

I have sped. I have been caught doing it. I never argued with the fact that I was speeding or that the speed limit was wrong for the stretch of road I was on. It is fun. Some people can do it safely. You know what is cheaper than a $350 ticket? a track day, or two.

If you want to change the laws do us ALL a favor and save the "I have a bike capable of 187 miles per hour, you need to make a speed limit to reflect that" or "I have take training classes and I am certified to ride as fast as I can" argument because you are an idiot and you make the rest of us look bad. Do you think a fat old dude who likes single malt scotch, expensive hookers, politics AND power is going to listen to 1 word you have to say? Your training or "qualifications" have no bearing on how fast you should be able to drive/ride on a public road.

BTW: I am an idiot too so save you direct attacks.

[MetaLord 9]

I'm waaaaay too ADD to read through all these posts this morning, but I will say that we need speed limits, but speed "limit" is more of a misnomer. If you're going under the "limit," most people deem you as going too slow, thus making it more of a recommended, or targeted, speed than anything else. On straight, flat roads like those in the plains states & parts of the mid-west (Ohio... ) speed limits are there basically to make sure someone getting on the road & getting up to speed isn't gonna get blown up by someone else already going a buck fiddy.
However, here in twisty land, I think the limits are very important. I use the speed limit & recommended speed signs to judge the severity of upcomming turns & twists. If I'm blowing through a section of wide sweepers at 80 then come around blind corner that isn't rated but would be rated at a 30 mph corner then I'm gonna have way too many adjustments to make in that short a period of time.

[dirkterrell]

BTW.... we are all doing over the speed limit even when we are standing still (the earth rotates at approx. 1038 mph at the equator)...:shocked:

Well, everything depends on the frame of reference. :)

Yes, speed limits are necessary when you have vehicles interacting with one another and the value depends on the local conditions. With a long flat stretch of highway, you can set them higher. A car pulling into the flow of traffic can see oncoming traffic well enough to decide whether it's safe to go. If they are pulling out with a blind corner upstream, the speed limit needs to be lower so that they know they have enough time to pull out and get up to speed without being rear-ended.

On limited access highways what's critical is speed differential. You need to also ensure that people are going fast enough so that someone doesn't fly up on them unexpectedly (and you do see minimum speed limits on some of these roads).

Now, with that said, I think a lot of speed limits are set for generating ticket revenue rather than safety. One example is comparing the speed limit along 287 near Baseline. It's 55-60 mph there with stop lights and all sorts of cross streets. It's 55 on parts of 36 with no cross traffic. Those two places have very different traffic patterns and yet they have the same speed limit. I don't see any reason why 36 needs to have a 55mph limit.

Dirk

[lightspeed]

However, here in twisty land, I think the limits are very important. I use the speed limit & recommended speed signs to judge the severity of upcomming turns & twists. If I'm blowing through a section of wide sweepers at 80 then come around blind corner that isn't rated but would be rated at a 30 mph corner then I'm gonna have way too many adjustments to make in that short a period of time.

Excellent point..never thought of this

[lightspeed]

Well, everything depends on the frame of reference. :)

Yes, speed limits are necessary when you have vehicles interacting with one another and the value depends on the local conditions. With a long flat stretch of highway, you can set them higher. A car pulling into the flow of traffic can see oncoming traffic well enough to decide whether it's safe to go. If they are pulling out with a blind corner upstream, the speed limit needs to be lower so that they know they have enough time to pull out and get up to speed without being rear-ended.

On limited access highways what's critical is speed differential. You need to also ensure that people are going fast enough so that someone doesn't fly up on them unexpectedly (and you do see minimum speed limits on some of these roads).

Now, with that said, I think a lot of speed limits are set for generating ticket revenue rather than safety. One example is comparing the speed limit along 287 near Baseline. It's 55-60 mph there with stop lights and all sorts of cross streets. It's 55 on parts of 36 with no cross traffic. Those two places have very different traffic patterns and yet they have the same speed limit. I don't see any reason why 36 needs to have a 55mph limit.

Dirk

So the question becomes in my mind... Why build and sell cars in the US that have the ability to far exceed speed limits posted anywhere in the country. It's like telling a child to walk when they have the ability to fly.

[Devaclis]

So the question becomes in my mind... Why build and sell cars in the US that have the ability to far exceed speed limits posted anywhere in the country. It's like telling a child to walk when they have the ability to fly.

We make a lot of products that can do things illegal.

Guns have the ability to end a persons life. Let's make ending a persons life with a gun legal.

Gasoline will set an animal on fire when ignited. We should legalize that.

My dirtbike can wheelie over someone, that should be legal too.

Maybe we should stop treating people like children and let them wheelie on our faces while lighting our cats on fire until the adrenaline rush of offing our neighbor with a 12 gauge fades out. Because we are obviously not children, we should be able to to whatever we want.

Really? Because my bike can go fast, I should legally be allowed to do it? You will have to do better than that.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/devaclis/Funny/hairisabird.jpg

[MetaLord 9]

Don't mind Dana, he's just pissed there's no "St. Pollock's Day."

[lightspeed]

We make a lot of products that can do things illegal.

Guns have the ability to end a persons life. Let's make ending a persons life with a gun legal.

Gasoline will set an animal on fire when ignited. We should legalize that.

My dirtbike can wheelie over someone, that should be legal too.

Maybe we should stop treating people like children and let them wheelie on our faces while lighting our cats on fire until the adrenaline rush of offing our neighbor with a 12 gauge fades out. Because we are obviously not children, we should be able to to whatever we want.

Really? Because my bike can go fast, I should legally be allowed to do it? You will have to do better than that.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/devaclis/Funny/hairisabird.jpg

lol...funny man. I really don't have an argument one way or the other.... But...let's look at what you said..

And actually it is legal to end someones life using a gun in some circumstances. Also...those who eat meat and are not vegan...do...on a regular basis light animals on fire...:) Ever heard of a barbeque?

So, if the intent of the law is safety...then shouldn't this saftey be implemented into motorized vehicles depending on their use? Stirring the pot for your internet personality...:siesta:

[Devaclis]

No, I just want to hear a valid argument FOR raising the speed limit that does not involve "I have a 10k MPH vehicle so you should raise the speed limit."

I work for a company that does the research for and recommendations TO the state for speeds on our roads. They have very good reasons why the speed limits are exactly what they are.

We have methods of legal travel to get you where you want to go faster than the legal road speed limit. If you just want to go fast, because your vehicle is fast, go to the track. If your skills are so amazing that the mere mortals on the highway cannot comprehend them and they should be shot for even looking at you and your supafastmotorcycle then make money at the track, with your awesome skills.

Here, let me put it this way, because I can relate, as can a lot of people here:

I am allowed to buy beer and drink it. I am allowed to drive a car. I should be able to do both at the same time!! As fast as my car will go! Because I have raced, I have more advanced car driving skills than most. I have a really high tolerance for alcohol too. AND, I live close to the bar. Plus, I am not a child. It should be legal. Hell, I may be over qualified.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/devaclis/Funny/godfuckingdamnit.jpg

[lightspeed]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v470/devaclis/Funny/godfuckingdamnit.jpg

lol...yes, I see your point, however why not implement these saftey standards directly into the vehicles used on the streets? Why not limit them to approx the speed limit if the intent is safety? Just as we have seat belts...air bags...and breathalizers in cars...

[Ricky]

Oh boy, do I ever have a lot of opinion on this subject.

Recently I was in Guatemala, where I've traveled often for the last 15 years. For the second time, I rented a car, and got to experience Guatemalan driving style. While they have speed limits, and lane guides, and traffic lights, and all those things, they really don't give a shit what you do. You won't get pulled over for speeding, you can pass cars whenever it's safe to do so. Even if it's not safe, most cars will work together to quickly turn a 2 lane road with a small shoulder, into a 3 lane road. Speed limits are often followed, but there are many people who greatly exceed them. Now, the difference is, their roads cannot support the speeds ours can. Going 80mph on a road down there, feels like driving 110 on a road here. Most roads won't even support half that speed. However, there are plenty of long stretches of highway that people could get in trouble on, but they don't.

As for the United States, it's definitely not Guatemala. IMO, the majority of people who drive here, are WAY too uneducated about driving. They don't know the rules well enough, and don't know how to handle a car at speeds, and how to get out of situations like overcorrection, or dirt on pavement, or how to drive on snow. Some people are so clueless about driving, they ignore things like pulling out into the intersection to make a left turn and be the last car when the light turns yellow. Instead they sit at the line and wait for the opportunity when there are no cars. Even if the light doesn't have a left turn only green... Some people just don't pay enough attention in this country. Texting, women applying makeup, cell phones, gps, stereos, kids... Just a few examples of why we need speed limits for those who don't pay attention.

As for removing speed limits, I think what is important to get past our problems in this country, is getting people (especially stupid as fuck semi drivers) to understand that the left lanes go faster than the right lanes. If we could establish speed limits for lanes on a highway that had different speed limits, it would get people to better respect the speeds of those lanes. Right lanes 45-55, middle lanes 55-70, left lane 70-85+. Something like that. Also, make the police start enforcing the passing on the right law, and also enforce a law that would make people move the fuck over when there are people behind them going too slowly. (similar to a new law passed for one lane mountain roads that requires large vehicles to pull over when 5 or more vehicles stack up behind).

The one thing that is more important than anything, is that I think people should be required to take advanced drivers courses, if they are going to be allowed to exceed any sort of set limits. There's more to driving than actually driving a car. Just as there is on a bike. "Rider radar" is something from the MSF class that needs to be taught to every driver. People absolutely do not understand this concept, for the most part. I've been driving a car since I was 10 (lucky enough to live in a ranch in the boonies), so I started learning early to watch out for all kinds of situations. My dad used to throw situations at me (while driving) like a flight instructor does during training flights (like suddenly pulling the power and saying "engine failure"). "What if a kid ran out in front of your car right now?" he would say... He always had many good points. He taught me to control a car by getting it out of control. We would take cars out in the snow and he would make me drive erratically, just to get control again. He used to make me drive through big puddles of water with only one wheel, just so I'd know what it does to the car. What hydroplaning is, overcorrection, all that great stuff to learn. So because of that, when I turned 16, I sorta knew how to drive. But my point being, I think education and experience are key to being able to change any sort of speed limit law.

I would think that speed limits in certain areas of cities should still be strictly enforced. School zones, residential areas, etc.

My last point is, it's great and all that we have all these awesome recommendations for speeds in our country on our roads, but why is it that Hitler was able to establish something we're incapable of handling? (The autobahn) They have no speed limits there, and while things are quite different, they show that we, as humans, are capable of it.

[Ricky]

And..does speed kill or do people kill?

Interesting answer to this question:

People kill... because if you were to take both people out of the equation, and replace them with (non-failing, lol) computers, then speed would never be an issue...

[Devaclis]

The Autobahn is 1 road, an expressway. 99.9% of the roads in Germany have posted speed limits. Oh, people die on the Autobahn all the time. If it were a road in the US then MADD, DAMN, PETA, OSHA, and the NAACP would have had it shut down years ago.

[Ricky]

If it were a road in the US then MADD, DAMN, PETA, OSHA, and the NAACP would have had it shut down years ago.

hahahahahha, that's a great point

[asp_125]

The Autobahn is 1 road, an expressway. 99.9% of the roads in Germany have posted speed limits. Oh, people die on the Autobahn all the time. If it were a road in the US then MADD, DAMN, PETA, OSHA, and the NAACP would have had it shut down years ago.

Anyone remember the "Montana-bahn"? Ahh the good old days.. ;) FYI anyone who's been on the autobahn knows that the unlimited stretches are getting fewer and more congested. Aside from politcal pressure, something like that here will never happen, because US drivers are incapable of understanding "keep right except to pass".

The thing is, even though cars today technologically can go way faster and safely over the posted limit, drivers have not improved one bit. Reflexes have not genetically gotten any faster, eyesight has not gone superhuman, and we are more and more preoccupied with texting and cell phones. The amount of information processing needed to drive safely at high speeds is somewhat limited by our own evolution.

[puckstr]

So the question becomes in my mind... Why build and sell cars in the US that have the ability to far exceed speed limits posted anywhere in the country. It's like telling a child to walk when they have the ability to fly.


Like anyone would ever buy a sportbike that was limited to the speed limit.

Defeats the purpose of the "Sport"bike

Ride as fast as you want...but be prepared to pay if ya get caught.:hump:

[lightspeed]

Like anyone would ever buy a sportbike that was limited to the speed limit.

Defeats the purpose of the "Sport"bike

Ride as fast as you want...but be prepared to pay if ya get caught.:hump:


My sentiments exactly!

[dirkterrell]

Actually, I think the whole idea of a monetary fine for speeding is what leads to trouble. The politicians claim that it is about "public safety." If so, why not just eliminate the monetary part of the fine and make it points only? If you get enough points for violations, you can't drive. If you drive and have exceeded the points limit, you go to jail. That would address the public safety issues.

But they'll never do that because it's a revenue source that they count on in their budgets. If it were a public safety issue, a 10 mph over ticket would be $5000. Many, many fewer people would speed and the public safety issues would be addressed. But it's not really about public safety. They set the fines so that people will just pay them for the most part and they maximize their revenue source.

Dirk

[OUTLAWD]

Maybe this is my old age showing...but I think we need speed limits...

this doesn't mean that I haven't spent any time behind the wheel doing 150+ running from the cops, but it does mean that I was fucking stupid...I was young and had a car that was too fast for my own good, and while I spent alot of time at the racetrack, and thought I was a decent driver...nothing can appropriately prepare someone to drive/ride SAFELY at those speeds on public roads. Between other drivers, or non-drivers as the case may be, shit on the road, potholes, wildlife running astray, other cars/bike in disrepair, cell phones, there are just too many variables that no one can control or predict...

Some people have track experience, and training, etc, but most of the people you see on the road do not (myself included), and IMO the majority of those people should not be on the road period.

for some reason when I think of roads without speed limits...I just picture the world turning into a Mad Max scene...haha

[puckstr]

Maybe this is my old age showing...but I think we need speed limits...

this doesn't mean that I haven't spent any time behind the wheel doing 150+ running from the cops, but it does mean that I was fucking stupid...I was young and had a car that was too fast for my own good, and while I spent alot of time at the racetrack, and thought I was a decent driver...nothing can appropriately prepare someone to drive/ride SAFELY at those speeds on public roads. Between other drivers, or non-drivers as the case may be, shit on the road, potholes, wildlife running astray, other cars/bike in disrepair, cell phones, there are just too many variables that no one can control or predict...

Some people have track experience, and training, etc, but most of the people you see on the road do not (myself included), and IMO the majority of those people should not be on the road period.

for some reason when I think of roads without speed limits...I just picture the world turning into a Mad Max scene...haha



Fuckin A Mad Max society....Yes Yes Yes

[Ricky]

Actually, I think the whole idea of a monetary fine for speeding is what leads to trouble. The politicians claim that it is about "public safety." If so, why not just eliminate the monetary part of the fine and make it points only? If you get enough points for violations, you can't drive. If you drive and have exceeded the points limit, you go to jail. That would address the public safety issues.

This is so true. I have noticed this as of late. I've been working up here on 120th & I25 for 3.5 years. Same commute from 84th to 120th EVERY day. And often, I do the trip twice a day. About a year ago, the norm was that in the morning and afternoon you would never ever see a cop catching speeders. However, at lunch they would have one or two in each direction clocking all kinds of people. I got used to this routine of theirs and I started figuring out their hiding spots, and times when they are out.

Then, all of a sudden, the economy starts to go to shit. 4 months ago I notice that every single morning there are cops sitting between 104th & 120th catching all kinds of people where it goes from 55 to 65. Then it became a 50/50 routine.

However, in the last 2 months, there are ALWAYS cops on that stretch of road, no matter what time of day (except somewhat rare in the afternoon rush hour). And there's almost always someone pulled over.

A week ago I saw them do something I had never seen them do before. THere is a pedestrian crossover just north of 104th, and there was a cop up on it clocking people, and 5 cop cars below being radioed information about the speeders. People would cross under 104th, and be caught instantly...

Here's what I fathom is going down at the Thornton Police station: Revenues are down, and they're having a hard time paying for that nice new Thornton municipal court building, as well as the new big screen fucking tv they won't be able to afford for their little break room. So hey, let's have a "fundraiser". Sit on I25 at opportune times and pick people off. We spend a day or two out there, that will undoubtedly pay for our TV. (or something like that :lol)

Meanwhile some single mom making minimum wage, got a ticket for 10 over and can't afford to pay the ticket, let alone the gas she needs to get to work...

Definitely about revenue.

[puckstr]

It has never been about safety, only Revenue.

[asp_125]

Slight threadjack, ever notice who you write the check out to on tickets? "dept of revenue or county clerk's office"... now how much of that do you suppose gets funneled towards "public safety" vs the general operations of the county? Hmmmm.....

[lightspeed]

Then, all of a sudden, the economy starts to go to shit. 4 months ago I notice that every single morning there are cops sitting between 104th & 120th catching all kinds of people where it goes from 55 to 65. Then it became a 50/50 routine.

However, in the last 2 months, there are ALWAYS cops on that stretch of road, no matter what time of day (except somewhat rare in the afternoon rush hour). And there's almost always someone pulled over.

A week ago I saw them do something I had never seen them do before. THere is a pedestrian crossover just north of 104th, and there was a cop up on it clocking people, and 5 cop cars below being radioed information about the speeders. People would cross under 104th, and be caught instantly...

Here's what I fathom is going down at the Thornton Police station: Revenues are down, and they're having a hard time paying for that nice new Thornton municipal court building, as well as the new big screen fucking tv they won't be able to afford for their little break room. So hey, let's have a "fundraiser". Sit on I25 at opportune times and pick people off. We spend a day or two out there, that will undoubtedly pay for our TV. (or something like that :lol)

Meanwhile some single mom making minimum wage, got a ticket for 10 over and can't afford to pay the ticket, let alone the gas she needs to get to work...

Definitely about revenue.

:yes:

[ChrisCBX]

Interesting front page story in our local paper. There were 70 tickets handed out recently on main street in Longmont. I can't remember ever reading about so many tickets on one "operation".

Interesting story (read the posted comments as well)...........

http://www.timescall.com/News_Story.asp?ID=14973

[dirkterrell]

Interesting that they use the word "customers" instead of "citizens."

Dirk

[Ricky]

Slight threadjack, ever notice who you write the check out to on tickets? "dept of revenue or county clerk's office"... now how much of that do you suppose gets funneled towards "public safety" vs the general operations of the county? Hmmmm.....

I'd love to know. That was my point in the "officers need a new big screen TV in the station" story. Where is my ticket money going? The officer's banquet? or to fix motherfucking potholes in the roads?

[TFOGGuys]

We make a lot of products that can do things illegal.

Guns have the ability to end a persons life. Let's make ending a persons life with a gun legal.

Gasoline will set an animal on fire when ignited. We should legalize that.

My dirtbike can wheelie over someone, that should be legal too.

Maybe we should stop treating people like children and let them wheelie on our faces while lighting our cats on fire until the adrenaline rush of offing our neighbor with a 12 gauge fades out. Because we are obviously not children, we should be able to to whatever we want.

Really? Because my bike can go fast, I should legally be allowed to do it? You will have to do better than that.



In reality, you can do any or all of those things. There may be unpleasant or even fatal consequences, but hey, that's life....

[Devaclis]

But they are all currently illegal to do, like speeding :)

[Speedwagon]

I'm not sure if this has been discussed in here before...but do you guys and gals think speed limits are actually needed, functional...and if so why. I'm going to be writing a persuasion paper on this and some opinions would be great. Thanks in advance.

BTW.... we are all doing over the speed limit even when we are standing still (the earth rotates at approx. 1038 mph at the equator)...:shocked:

I think you need to have an understanding of how speed limits are made in the first place, to begin to understand if they are necessary or not. Many use the 85% rule to set the limit.

Stolen from Wiki:

[edit] 85th percentile rule
Traffic engineers may rely on the 85th percentile rule[12][13] to establish speed limits. The speed limit should be set to the speed that separates the bottom 85% of vehicle speeds from the top 15%. The 85th percentile is slightly greater than a speed that is one standard deviation above the mean of a normal distribution.

The theory is that traffic laws that reflect the behavior of the majority of motorists may have better compliance than laws that arbitrarily criminalize the majority of motorists and encourage violations. The latter kinds of laws lack public support and often fail to bring about desirable changes in driving behavior. An example is United States's old 55 mph (88 km/h) speed limit that was removed in part because of notoriously low compliance.

Most U.S. jurisdictions report using the 85th percentile speed as the basis for their speed limits, so the 85th-percentile speed and speed limits should be closely matched. However, a review of available speed studies demonstrates that the posted speed limit is almost always set well below the 85th-percentile speed by as much as 8 to 12 mph (13 to 19 km/h). Some reasons for this include:

Political or bureaucratic resistance to higher limits.
Statutes that restrict jurisdictions from posting higher limits.

I'm sure Colorado is the same/similar as Illinois, and in Illinois you have the right to get a copy of the speed survey for any public road you want. All you have to do is request it at the appropriate place, in person or by mail, usually free of charge(sometimes they make you pay per page for a copy). And according to IL law, the speed limit needs a speed survey done to reflect the appropriate limit posted, for that limit to be valid. So if the limit is 45, and the survey says it should be 55, and you get a ticket for going 55 in said 45, with the speed survey you *should* be able to get out of the ticket, depending on how the laws are written.

[YZFRydn]

This is so true. I have noticed this as of late. I've been working up here on 120th & I25 for 3.5 years. Same commute from 84th to 120th EVERY day. And often, I do the trip twice a day. About a year ago, the norm was that in the morning and afternoon you would never ever see a cop catching speeders. However, at lunch they would have one or two in each direction clocking all kinds of people. I got used to this routine of theirs and I started figuring out their hiding spots, and times when they are out.

Then, all of a sudden, the economy starts to go to shit. 4 months ago I notice that every single morning there are cops sitting between 104th & 120th catching all kinds of people where it goes from 55 to 65. Then it became a 50/50 routine.

However, in the last 2 months, there are ALWAYS cops on that stretch of road, no matter what time of day (except somewhat rare in the afternoon rush hour). And there's almost always someone pulled over.

A week ago I saw them do something I had never seen them do before. THere is a pedestrian crossover just north of 104th, and there was a cop up on it clocking people, and 5 cop cars below being radioed information about the speeders. People would cross under 104th, and be caught instantly...

Here's what I fathom is going down at the Thornton Police station: Revenues are down, and they're having a hard time paying for that nice new Thornton municipal court building, as well as the new big screen fucking tv they won't be able to afford for their little break room. So hey, let's have a "fundraiser". Sit on I25 at opportune times and pick people off. We spend a day or two out there, that will undoubtedly pay for our TV. (or something like that :lol)

Meanwhile some single mom making minimum wage, got a ticket for 10 over and can't afford to pay the ticket, let alone the gas she needs to get to work...

Definitely about revenue.''

QFT

I have never seen more motor cops and traffic cops on I25 as I have in the past month. The one that is similar to that 104th bullshit is further down, just north of 20th st. One cop sits in the HOV lane facing oncoming traffic as you come up and over a small hill, he nails you as you come over it, then about half a mile down the road 6-8 police cars are sitting there waiting for you to pass.

What do you think they'd do if I went and held a sign in front of their speed traps warning people? I'll have another buddy past the speedtrap with a sign that says TIPS for avoiding that speeding ticket

[Tipys]

LOL I like the sign idea lets go try it one day.

[Speedwagon]

''

QFT

I have never seen more motor cops and traffic cops on I25 as I have in the past month. The one that is similar to that 104th bullshit is further down, just north of 20th st. One cop sits in the HOV lane facing oncoming traffic as you come up and over a small hill, he nails you as you come over it, then about half a mile down the road 6-8 police cars are sitting there waiting for you to pass.

What do you think they'd do if I went and held a sign in front of their speed traps warning people? I'll have another buddy past the speedtrap with a sign that says TIPS for avoiding that speeding ticket

I have heard, so take it as you wish, that some states say you can't interfere with speedtraps by notifying other drivers in advance. Signs, or flashing of lights to oncoming cars, blah blah... but I don't know how true it is, never looked into it.

http://img164.imageshack.us/img164/7116/speedtrap1of.jpg