iasia (11/19/82)
Possibly some of us who drive 55 are not the worlds greatest drivers. I for one know that I'm not perfect. On the other hand, I have seen enough fools weaving in and out of traffic at high speed to know that not those of you driving more than 55 are no perfect either. It doesn't matter if you are better drivers unless you are out there alone. The poor drivers who do alright at 55 don't need the opportunity to prove their incompetence at 70 or 80. Personally my motto is: Better to take longer to arrive than not to arrive at all. For those folks who drive at high speeds, 1. You are breaking the law. 2. If you do get caught its your own fault and you deserve what you get. 3. What is your justification for breaking this law. If the law means nothing to you what about the other laws like driving while intoxicated ( I can just see you drunk at 100 mph saying I drive safer when I'm drunk ). How about other laws like those prohibiting murder. Do they go out the window with the rest? 4. Just remember this next time someone runs a red light in front of you or cuts you of in traffic. They are just doing the same thing that you are doing. Selectively obeying the laws. 5. If you don't like the law get it changed. Direct all flames to iasia on machine ihuxt You know who I am.
wagner (11/20/82)
I think there is a major difference between weaving in and out of heavy traffic (something I dont think has been espoused here) and easing up beyond the speed limit on an empty road with good visibility and surface. You seem to make a big deal out of the fact that both are illegal - I think we all go through life breaking laws, unwittingly or not. In fact, libertarians tell me I probably dont go through a day without breaking a law I dont know about, and, of course, ignorance of the law is no defence. My upbringing taught me that we all go through life choosing between actions which are more or less gray in moral strength - very little is black and white. For instance, you concerned yourself with people running red lights. People may run red lights for various reasons; most of them we would all agree are illegal and wrong, but what if I am taking my father, a person with a history of heart failure, to the hospital. It would still be illegal to run the light, but I would do it without hesitation if I thought it was safe enough. I would also be willing to loose my licence for it if the judge did not find my actions defensable (that should have been lose ^ ). In a similar, but smaller way, I am often willing to pay a parking ticket if the police man should come by while I stop for 5 minutes to pick up one item from a store. It doesnt happen often, and the cost is smaller than trying to petition city hall for more parking by the corner hall. There is very little impetus to change the laws here. I have gone a long distance to get back to speeding. If I thought that society had decided to reduce the speed limits, I might feel bound by society to abide by those laws. I know that the major highways in Canada were designed for 80 and 90 MPH when the limit here was 70. I drove them at that speed, too, and they were very smooth and comfortable. They still are. Our government saw fit to extrapolate from US experience with a different road system and a different philosophy of driving, and reduced our speed limit to 60. I suffer from highway hypnosis at that speed. I am *more* dangerous when traveling that slowly. It takes me about twice as long to travel at legal speed, because I have to stop every hour for a rest and a walk of about 20 minutes in order to keep awake while being lulled to sleep. So, for me, the decision of what speed to drive at become a balance between how much of a hurry I am in, how much of a ticket I can afford without reluctance, and how boring the highway is. I *am* willing to take the legal consequences of speeding, and bleating from people who say "you got what you deserved" just gets under my skin. Guess that is why I was so long-winded about it. Until next time.... Michael Wagner, UTCS (decvax!utzoo!utcsstat!wagner)
doehring (11/22/82)
I too agree that the 55 mph limit on our highways is foolish. As was stated by a previous submission, the premise that you get better gas mileage at this speed is not supported by the experience of many people. With my 5 speed Fiat, I would get MUCH better mileage at 70-75 than at 55, since the engine was just loafing at ~2300 rpm at 55 which is not the most efficient speed for that engine. Not only that, since at 70-75 the engine was producing more torque, I did not have to do as much shifting to hold speed, thereby saving wear and tear on my transmission. As to the statement that "55 saves lives", the total NUMBER of accidents may have gone down, but check out the PERCENTAGE of accidents on the highways. There were simply FEWER people driving because they could not afford the gas. Also, don't most accidents occur within "5 miles of your home and at speeds under 45"? I seem to remember something like this, but am not sure so please correct me if not ( I am VERY sure someone will ). the martian decvax!yale-comix!doehring doehring@YALE
cbd (11/22/82)
s fast as they want on the highway: What's the hurry? If you need to get some place by a certain time, start early enough that you can make it at 55 mph. If you live far enough from your destination that you have to go that fast to keep from spending your life on the highway, either move closer to your destination, if it's your regular destination, or take an airplane, for which there is no speed limit. Whenever I travel the highways, I stick to the speed limit because it's safer and it saves gas. Whenever some macho clown goes whipping past me at 65-70 or better, I can't help but think that we'd all be better off if some male humans as well as most male horses were gelded. Carl Deitrick ihuxb!cbd
neil (11/22/82)
#R:utcsstat:-42400:hplabs:2500001:000:651
hplabs!neil Nov 22 09:44:00 1982
One other factor that affected the number of traffic fatalities
when the speed limit was lowered to 55 was an accounting change.
Previously a "traffic fatality" was chalked up if someone died
within three years of the accident. At about the same time that
the speed limit was lowered to 55, the time limit for an accident
death was moved to six months.
This change was independent of speed limit change (i.e. it was
planned independently of the speed change), but the statistics
were "conveniently" never adjusted for the difference, thereby
helping to support the fewer deaths result.
Neil Katin
...ucbvax!hplabs!neilavie (11/22/82)
If someone wants to travel at 55, fine. But there is no reason for this person to make me go 55 as well! A few years ago, the speed limit was 70. It was reduced to 55 to supposedly save gas. Well, this reduction just seems to be a step backwards to me. If I want to travel at 70, and I am competent of driving at 70, then why shouldn't I have the right to drive 70? The 55 mph speed limit is a joke. Anyone who *really* wants to travel faster does so (at the risk of a ticket, of course). The result is that those who "speed" (or perhaps, those who value their time) must pay a tax. This law was a *big* step backwards for our society. We should be finding ways to travel from one place to another faster, not slower. Why don't the auto manufacturers try and design cars that can get a reasonable gas mileage at 70 or over? If 10 years ago we could safely travel at 70, why can't we travel at 100+ now? As I said, we have simply gone backwards. Not afraid to go over 55 mph, Avadis Tevanian, Jr. seismo!rochester!avie
heliotis (11/23/82)
It's funny how people who speed say that "almost everbody on the road" is doing it. My impression, as a 55-er, is that lots of people go at <=55! In fact, when I drove cross-country last year, I kept wondering where all the speeders were on I-70 in Kansas and Colorado -- everyone was going right around the speed limit! In fact, I saw the most speeders in California, near the coast, and of course, I see a good number on the east coast as well. I think the desire to speed has a lot to do with one's lifestyle. Now, as for what most people actually do, I think people tend to notice drivers going their own speed, so who knows. Why do I go 55? My 4-speed Rabbit does get better mileage at 55, and also I've discovered that I'm much less stressed/tense at that slower speed. I learned to drive when the limits were 65/70, and I never would have tried 55 except I got a $10 ticket back in '75 for going 70, and I decided it was not worth it (I also had higher insurance premiums for several years). Yeah, you guys who want to speed have a few legitimate reasons. I just wish people could sit back and relax when they drive and enjoy the scenery. I also wish that, if people *were* in a hurry, there would be cheap high- speed trains or airplanes to satisfy their needs. Oh well.... Peace, Jim Heliotis
lsk (11/23/82)
I agree that driving 55 mph is less tense, but having spent a week in Colorado two weeks ago I heartily disagree that there are no speeders. There are plenty of speeders in the Denver/Boulder area. The neat thing is --- it works! When people see you coming up behind them, you are doing 78 and they are doing 70 they move right at the first opportunity. Even during rush hour this is pretty much true. It works just fine out there. ALso, during the whole week saw plenty of Colo state police but only ONE giving out a ticket on the interstate, and that was near the Wyoming border. L S Kaufman, WECo, NSC, Lisle
mark (11/24/82)
Re the accident on Illinois 5: You'll notice this is Illinois 5, not an interstate highway. The interstates have strict requirements, one of which is that the median has to be constructed in such a way as to prevent a car from crossing over. (Ever notice those "v" shaped medians? That's why.) Seems to me that a lot of toll roads are worse than the freeways anyway. The free highways of California are so much better than the Illinois Tollway or the Garden State Parkway or the Ohio Turnpike that it isn't funny. Then they force you to patronize HoJo's and get their crummy brand of food or else pay a penalty to get off and wait 50 miles for the next exit. Even here in Columbus, the freeways are excellent. If you REALLY want to see a bad toll road, check out the West Virginia Turnpike. (I've never been on it, but I've heard.) It's a 2 lane toll road they ought to be paying YOU to drive on. Boy, I feel better now that I've gotten that off my chest.
ignatz (11/25/82)
I just have to comment, and I swore I'd stay out of this stuff... but, driving 30,000 miles a year, I guess I have the right to make comments... re Mark Horton : (concerning great freeways out west, lousy ones in West Va, etc.) Mark, I hate to bring this up, but when was the last time Cally had to deal with a real snow-and-ice freezer? Compare Wisconsin and Illinois; yes. And Illinois is better than Indiana...but keep it in the same climate zone. Also, I'd much rather see toll roads than freeways *if they're maintained in a manner consonant with the cost.* What better example of the people who use a facility paying for it? And, with toll roads, you often have out-of-state drivers, who won't pay state taxes in that state, and truckers, who are the same and considerably harder on the roads. re 55: I live in Chicago and work in Naperville. (I'm a consultant, and Chicago is central to my potential work sites. However, I've been at BTL for about 2 years now...) This translates, for those in other parts of the universe, to about 30-40 miles round trip per day, mostly on the Eisenhower and I-5. Anything over 55 here would be useless. My parents now live in Houston, Texas. (A nice place, if it wasn't for the southerners...aw, c'mon, guys, I was just kiddin'...). A functional definition of eternity is driving through Texas at 55. The answer? As proposed here...interstates and limited-access highways could go back to their design speed. Others, stay where they are. Also, I think that mandatory auto inspections are long overdue. (Yes, some states have them...but not all, nor enough.) As a rather good (*ahem*) mechanic, I work on friends' cars that I'll never get in again, after seeing what they're like. Arf. Enough. I quit. Happy Turkey Day, Dave Ihnat ihuxx!ignatz
donn (11/27/82)
References: cbosgd.2839 ihuxt.133 Tough center dividers don't always help. I used to commute on Interstate 805 down here in sunny SoCal (but sunny SoCal is frequently foggy SoCal (sorry, folks)). Someone punched a hole through the massive concrete divider on 805. Drove straight through it. This was about 9 months or a year ago, when we were getting lots of pea soup atmosphere. It must have been an extremely large truck, or a drunken soldier in a stolen tank from Camp Pendleton. Those puny fences in the middle of the big dirt dividers take a lot of upkeep -- just drive up a freeway in a California urban area and watch the patchwork of shades of green... Tough center dividers sometimes hurt. California 101 between Morgan Hill and San Jose used to be known as "Blood Alley" because it was a place where the freeway narrowed down to a four lane expressway with stoplights and no center divider, just a double yellow line. Lots of hole-in-the-wall little bars on the shoulders near the stoplights. Eventually the state government caused to be built a low concrete center divider with a fence on top that prevents headlights on the other side from blinding you. This lowered the death rate considerably. However I happened to be tooling along at 55 one dark and lonely 4 AM, on a long trip north from San Diego and I saw something disturbing. I noticed a pair of white lights in the distance and after a moment had the shocking sensation that they were in my lane, and they were APPROACHING. Being a naturally conservative type (hence the 55) I decided I would swing off onto the shoulder and wait to see if was dreaming or not. I had just managed to get all four wheels onto the gravel when a large American car passed by in the lane I had been travelling, going south at about 70 MPH. (I still feel that if I had been going the same rate then I wouldn't have been able to react in time...) Evidently someone who had been serviced at one of the bars had been too impatient to go up to the next stoplight and make the U turn forced on them by the barrier... I was forced to stop my car and rest my head on the steering wheel for awhile till I stopped shaking. Donn Seeley UCSD Chemistry Dept. RRCF ucbvax!sdcsvax!sdchema!donn
garry (11/29/82)
I disagree with you assumption that the 55 MPH rule is classified the same e as driving on the left side of the road. Which side of the road you drive on is an issue dealing with conformity, while the 55 MPH speed limit deals with social and political issues. Driving 55 MPH is a POLITICAL issue not a safety issue. There are many drivers on the road who are unsafe at 25 MPH. Are they better drivers just because thay stay within a law that was designed around people who cant walk and chew bubble-gum at the same time ???? Driving fast with common sense Garry (decvax!genradbolton!grkermit!garry)
garry (12/03/82)
Jim, Sitting back and watching the scenery while relaxing is THE biggest cause of accidents on the highway. Besides If i am interested in scenery I go climbing The Baer
ark (12/05/82)
My favorite crusing speed is 155 MPH. At that speed, I get about 20 MPG.
draves@harvard.ARPA (Richard Draves) (11/08/84)
Why stamp the tickets from a tollbooth with the entry time onto the highway? When getting off, a quick check of the time spent on the highway would make it obvious if you were exceeding the speed limit consistently. Rich
daw1@rduxb.UUCP (WILLIAMS) (04/03/85)
> > Some very interesting comments here. How can the 55 mph speed limit be > > Phil > The cars may be going above 55, but they are going more slowly than > John PLEASE, if this dead horse is going to be beaten some more, how about leaving off the damn full-length quotes. If the first page consists entirely of a referenced article, most people will probably hit the old "n" key. Then your version of the physics/philosophy/etc of this topic won't be read! If the "n" key is not hit immediately upon seeing the subject line, that is. Doug Williams AT&T Bell Labs Reading, PA rduxb!daw1 or rduxb!williams
ron@wjvax.UUCP (Ron Christian) (04/04/85)
****
PLEASE, if this dead horse is going to be beaten some more,
how about leaving off the damn full-length quotes.
Doug Williams
****
Indeed. Also PLEASE leave off the damned multiple postings. Better
yet, if you MUST go over this whole dreary subject again, why not
do it by mail?
Over and over and over and over and....
--
--
Ron Christian (Watkins-Johnson Co. San Jose, Calif.)
{pesnta,twg,ios,qubix,turtlevax,tymix,vecpyr,isi,idx}!wjvax!ron
"But it won't let me make a directory called R&D!"petersen@ucbvax.ARPA (David A. Petersen) (05/21/85)
-------------------------------
Have you ever gotten an interstate speeding ticket?
Did you feel justice was served and that you deserved to be
separated from $85 and maybe classified as a negligent driver?
Everyone who reads net.auto knows interstates were designed to
accomodate 70mph travel and some places had a limit of 75mph.
We also know that the regulation of highway travel was always the
domain of the state government until 1975. Then came the 55mph limit.
The constitution was not changed giving the feds the right to regulate
our roads; they just discovered blackmail. He who has the gold makes
the rules. The money a state pays in income tax does not go back to the
state unless they pass the laws the feds want. I say the feds have
exceeded their authority; this trick could be used to make states
do almost anything. We need to let them know how we feel.
If you have ever voted because you thought it made a difference,
do something with 100 times the effect; write your congressman
and senators c/o U. S. House of Representatives or U. S. Senate,
Washington, D. C.
DO IT NOW. Our representatives in Washington do tally up the number
of letters they receive from constituents attacking and supporting
the laws they vote on. Consider how few people write and therefore
how much your letter will mean. There are a lot of insurance companies
and airlines who like things juat the way they are.
Paul Bradley
55mph, It's a law we can live without.heneghan@ihu1m.UUCP (Joe Heneghan) (05/22/85)
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Have you ever gotten an interstate speeding ticket? > Did you feel justice was served and that you deserved to be > separated from $85 and maybe classified as a negligent driver? > > Everyone who reads net.auto knows interstates were designed to > accomodate 70mph travel and some places had a limit of 75mph. > We also know that the regulation of highway travel was always the > domain of the state government until 1975. Then came the 55mph limit. > The constitution was not changed giving the feds the right to regulate > our roads; they just discovered blackmail. He who has the gold makes > the rules. The money a state pays in income tax does not go back to the > state unless they pass the laws the feds want. I say the feds have > exceeded their authority; this trick could be used to make states > do almost anything. We need to let them know how we feel. > > If you have ever voted because you thought it made a difference, > do something with 100 times the effect; write your congressman > and senators c/o U. S. House of Representatives or U. S. Senate, > Washington, D. C. > > DO IT NOW. Our representatives in Washington do tally up the number > of letters they receive from constituents attacking and supporting > the laws they vote on. Consider how few people write and therefore > how much your letter will mean. There are a lot of insurance companies > and airlines who like things juat the way they are. > > Paul Bradley > > > 55mph, It's a law we can live without. This is the most positive and usefull anecdote I've ever seen on net.auto and let me contribute to this idea: Since most of us hackers would much rather bang keys than put stamps on envelopes, maybe we could write letters and send them to some location where they could be sent as a group!