wfi@rti-sel.UUCP (William Ingogly) (09/23/85)
Most states in the U.S.A. have cracked down on drunk driving with a
vengeance in response to public outcry. As a consequence, most people
are changing their behavior in response to the severe penalties that
result from a DUI or DWI conviction. I've been noticing a related
phenomenon lately, however, that has me puzzled.
We've had a nationwide maximum speed limit of 55 miles per hour since
1973. As you'll recall, that speed limit was instituted in response to
the so-called 'energy crisis.' Various arguments supporting the 55 MPH
speed limit were offered over the years; most of them pointed to
reduced traffic fatalities as a result of lower highway speeds.
Many Americans seem unhappy with the 55 MPH speed limit. Sammy Hagar,
who seems to be a right-wing rock and roller of the 'populist' stripe,
had a hit last year with his song "I Can't Drive 55." As I recall,
Ronald Reagan promised that he would do away with the 55 MPH speed limit
when he became president. Since then, I've heard precious little about
doing away with this law.
All this suggest several questions that net.politics people might want
to batter about (whoops, I meant banter, really I did ;-):
1. Why has Ronald Reagan abandoned his promised destruction
of the 55 MPH speed limit? Why is no one calling him on it?
2. Automobiles can be engineered to get good gas mileage at
higher speeds, so the original motive behind the limit
is not as important as it once was. True or false?
3. Are fewer lives REALLY lost on our highways due to the
lower speed limit? What about interstate highways as
opposed to secondary roads?
4. Finally, it seems to me that Americans are by and large
IGNORING the 55 MPH limit and driving as fast as they want
to on our interstate highways. This is a fairly recent
phenomenon. The 'virtual' speed limit on many highways
seems to be about 65 MPH, and a sizeable minority seems to
be driving at 70 MPH or higher. You're a genuine HAZARD if
you attempt to obey the law. When people spot a speed trap,
they typically slow down to 60 MPH but I've even seen
situations where the cops would only bust people travelling
at 65 MPH+. Why haven't I seen this commented on by the
media? Has anyone else noticed this phenomenon? If Mr. and
Mrs. Joe Average are so keen on law and order, how do they
rationalize their selective breaking of this law? And most
importantly, doesn't anyone else think the near-hysteria
regarding drunk driving is a little hypocritical when NO
ONE SEEMS TO CARE ABOUT THE DAMNED SPEEDERS??
-- Cheers, Bill Ingoglyashby@uiucdcsp.CS.UIUC.EDU (09/25/85)
I agree with your observation: few people seem to drive 55 mph. I certainly don't, unless circumstances demand it (like the presence of a cop). However, I strongly disagree with your implication that drunk driving and speeding are on the same level. Given the choice, I would rather deal with 100 cars traveling 80mph all about me than face a single drunk - a drunk whose actions are likely to be unpredicatable. Also, let's not raise a stink about no one complying. That is the surest way to get the cops to clamp down for a while, and no one wants that (:-).
bottom@katadn.DEC (09/26/85)
RE: Bill Ingogly's posting Here in New England, particularly Maine and NH the FEDS thru federal highway funding have been ensuring that the 55mph limit gets enforced. They have taken speed surveys on the Interstate highways and found that people really don't observe the limit. We were then given the ultimatum; enforce the limit or face having your funds withheld. So now the highway is full of State police handing out tickets to anyone traveling in excess of what appears to be 62mph. As they always did. Personally I think the Federal government has no right to interfere with the speed linits on any highway. They are misusing highway funding, which was brought under their contol only to ensure that it was fairly distributed. If Reagan didn't deliver on a campaign promise well, all I can say is it's not the only one. Dave Bottom DEC Augusta Maine !dec-rhea!dec-katadn!bottom
tw8023@pyuxii.UUCP (T Wheeler) (09/26/85)
Just one point about your article. In the first item, you say that Reagan promised to do away with the 55 speed limit. Not so. Reagan never promised to do away with the 55 limit. He was asked this question in a news conference and he replied that he would look into it. That does not constitute a promise to do away with the limit. You may question whether he looked into the problem, but since there was no promise implied, he wouldn't really have to follow up. It would be nice if he did, but, politics being what they are, don't hold your breath. T. C. Wheeler
alan@sun.uucp (Alan Marr) (09/27/85)
> 3. Are fewer lives REALLY lost on our highways due to the > lower speed limit? Car and Driver magazine had an excellent article a few years ago where they showed one of the graphs that "demonstrated" that traffic fatalities had gone down as a result of the 55 limit. They then showed the same graph in a larger 60 year context, which showed that there has been a long-term downward trend. They then showed that the number of miles driven is more highly correlated with fatalities than speed limits. The 55 limit was introduced at the time of the oil crisis, a time when people naturally drove less. Commerce and industry are being restrained by artificially low limits, not to mention freedoms. --- {ucbvax,decwrl}!sun!alan "Extraordinary how potent cheap music is." Noel Coward
nyssa@abnji.UUCP (nyssa of traken) (09/28/85)
>Just one point about your article. In the first item, >you say that Reagan promised to do away with the 55 >speed limit. Not so. Reagan never promised to do >away with the 55 limit. He was asked this question >in a news conference and he replied that he would look >into it. That does not constitute a promise to do away >with the limit. You may question whether he looked into >the problem, but since there was no promise implied, >he wouldn't really have to follow up. It would be nice if >he did, but, politics being what they are, don't hold >your breath. While strictly true, it ought to be pointed out that in the Republican Party Platform in 1980 there was a statement to the fact that a Republican government would abolish the 55 MPH speed limit in order to allow the trucking industry to move goods from one location to another faster, thereby increasing productivity and lowering costs. -- James C. Armstrong, Jnr. {ihnp4,cbosgd,akgua}!abnji!nyssa I'll keep an eye on the old man, he seems to have a knack for getting himself into trouble! -who said it, what story?
mikel@codas.UUCP (Mikel Manitius) (10/02/85)
> > > 3. Are fewer lives REALLY lost on our highways due to the > > lower speed limit? > > Car and Driver magazine had an excellent article a few years ago > where they showed one of the graphs that "demonstrated" that > traffic fatalities had gone down as a result of the 55 limit. > They then showed the same graph in a larger 60 year context, > which showed that there has been a long-term downward trend. > They then showed that the number of miles driven is more highly > correlated with fatalities than speed limits. The 55 limit was > introduced at the time of the oil crisis, a time when people > naturally drove less. > > Commerce and industry are being restrained by artificially low > limits, not to mention freedoms. > > --- > {ucbvax,decwrl}!sun!alan > > "Extraordinary how potent cheap music is." Noel Coward I would be interrested in finding out how many people can actually drive 55 (or below 65 for that matter) for over an hour at night, without falling asleep, I cannot and will not drive under 70 for long drives because It's dangerous, not enough stimulation to keep me awake. Has anyone heard of studies reflecting this? Mikel Manitius AT&T Information Systems {ihnp4!}codas!mikel 151 Wymore Rd. Rm: 420 (305) 869-2462 Altamonte Springs, FL AT&T-IS ETN: 755 32714
berman@psuvax1.UUCP (Piotr Berman) (10/03/85)
> Most states in the U.S.A. have cracked down on drunk driving with a > vengeance in response to public outcry. As a consequence, most people > are changing their behavior in response to the severe penalties that > result from a DUI or DWI conviction. I've been noticing a related > phenomenon lately, however, that has me puzzled. > > We've had a nationwide maximum speed limit of 55 miles per hour since > 1973. As you'll recall, that speed limit was instituted in response to > the so-called 'energy crisis.' Various arguments supporting the 55 MPH > speed limit were offered over the years; most of them pointed to > reduced traffic fatalities as a result of lower highway speeds. > > Many Americans seem unhappy with the 55 MPH speed limit............ > Ronald Reagan promised that he would do away with the 55 MPH speed limit > when he became president...................... > > All this suggest several questions ................ > > 1. Why has Ronald Reagan abandoned his promised destruction > of the 55 MPH speed limit? Why is no one calling him on it? > He does not drive a car anymore: he uses either helicopter, or a horse. > 2. Automobiles can be engineered to get good gas mileage at > higher speeds, so the original motive behind the limit > is not as important as it once was. True or false? > > 3. Are fewer lives REALLY lost on our highways due to the > lower speed limit? What about interstate highways as > opposed to secondary roads? > > 4. Finally, it seems to me that Americans are by and large > IGNORING the 55 MPH limit and driving as fast as they want > to on our interstate highways. This is a fairly recent > phenomenon. The 'virtual' speed limit on many highways > seems to be about 65 MPH, and a sizeable minority seems to > be driving at 70 MPH or higher. You're a genuine HAZARD if > you attempt to obey the law. When people spot a speed trap, > they typically slow down to 60 MPH but I've even seen > situations where the cops would only bust people travelling > at 65 MPH+. Why haven't I seen this commented on by the > media? Has anyone else noticed this phenomenon? If Mr. and > Mrs. Joe Average are so keen on law and order, how do they > rationalize their selective breaking of this law? And most > importantly, doesn't anyone else think the near-hysteria > regarding drunk driving is a little hypocritical when NO > ONE SEEMS TO CARE ABOUT THE DAMNED SPEEDERS?? > > -- Cheers, Bill Ingogly I am in this country 5 years and I never noticed to many people on interstates driving below 60 MPH. Experience shows that you can afford doing that in "rural" area, where you are not passed all the time. 65 MPH is 105 kmPH, the speed limit in "metric" countries is usually 100 kmPH or 110 kmPH, so it would make a reasonable speed limit. Currently, I would suggest: do not drive above 55 MPH without your seatbelts on if you are drunk.