[smellthebeans]

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1199...rss_Autos_Main

Intresting point in the article that modren cars are able to safely handle higher speeds. I 10 West of San Antonio speed limit is 80 Mph.

[MrSteak]

Hahah... Propaganda.

And my fav quote: "Safety is the bottom line for us, so we want to slow drivers down because speeding costs lives."

1. Many states pull in $500+ million a year in traffic fines... (But yeah, I believe that the safety thing is their main concern.)

2. MOST of the time it's not speed that kills, it's everything else...
-not paying attention (eating, drinking, alcohol, talking on phone, etc…)
-doing something stupid
-bad road conditions

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everyone should "speed", but the limits on most roads are set ridiculously low so when the state needs to they can tap into extra $$$.

[ukthunderace]

That depends on what you mean by "speeding". The issue on American roads is inattentive driving. In Germany, I commonly run 120-130 just to work and back. It isn't a thrill and it isn't dangerous, it is just the way many people here drive. You can count on German drivers to know you are there and coming up behind them. Americans are different. They spend as much time in the fast lane going slow as they do in the slow lane going fast, all the while eating or drinking or whatever. Crazy.

[smellthebeans]

Originally Posted by MrSteak

Hahah... Propaganda.

And my fav quote: "Safety is the bottom line for us, so we want to slow drivers down because speeding costs lives."

1. Many states pull in $500+ million a year in traffic fines... (But yeah, I believe that the safety thing is their main concern.)

2. MOST of the time it's not speed that kills, it's everything else...
-not paying attention (eating, drinking, alcohol, talking on phone, etc…)
-doing something stupid = excessive speeding, weaving in and out of traffic & changing lanes because that driver has an exclusive right to move faster than the flow and conditions dictate
-bad road conditions

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying everyone should "speed", but the limits on most roads are set ridiculously low so when the state needs to they can tap into extra $$$.

.

[MrSteak]

Originally Posted by smellthebeans

.

Well yeah, lots of people do stupid things... I was just generalizing.

[epiphone3]

There was a study recently that showed that there are no more accidents per kilometer on the sections of German Autobahn with no speed limits vs. those with the 130 km/h speed limit.

In Montana, the same study indicated that the number of accidents on the highway actually increased when the speed limits were imposed.

Much data indicates that there is an ideal speed limit for highways of roughly 130 km/h where people actually drive safer than they do at 110 km/h (likely the increased speed lowers frustration as you are making better time and encourages drivers to pay more attention to what they are doing as they feel the consequences will be higher). In addition, this higher speed limit, while costing more fuel, actually is an overall economic benefit due to the amount of time saved/cost of time.

I think we should have 130 km/h speed limits on highways that suit such a speed.

The big problems are all the idiots out there who are texting and such and not watching their mirrors ever. Guess what... if you are in the fast lane you should be overtaking somebody. Once you have overtaken, get back into the slow lane. Another thing... if you are in the left lane and you look in your mirror and their someone behind you... that is because they caught up to you. Move into the right land and get out of the way. Following these rules will IMPROVE traffic flow significantly and reduce frustration and reduce accidents.

[stressdoc]

A national speed limit and passing (left) lane restriction on SUVs and pick-ups, combined with a special license to speed (training + clean record + proper vehicle) might improve the situation a bit.

[I335]

Originally Posted by stressdoc

A national speed limit and passing (left) lane restriction on SUVs and pick-ups, combined with a special license to speed (training + clean record + proper vehicle) might improve the situation a bit.

How would putting a restriction on SUVs and pick-ups help?

[purplewidow]

Why Don't We Worry About Teaching Our Citizens How To Drive And Be Kind In The Us!!!! Why Are We Focused On Stopping Speeders!!! Why Don't We Focus On Implementing The German/swiss/ European Driving Standard!!!! Where People Respect Others On The Road And Know How To Drive!!! We Give A License To Anyone Here And Look At All The Idiots On The Road!!!!
________
mustang i
________
Web shows

[Nyulak]

People are taught how to drive well, but the general personality of the nation rejects many courtesies of driving.

Putting restrictions on larger vehicles are implemented due to the inherent lack of performance from trying to control a larger than normal mass and the higher center of gravity. In Europe, there are speed posted on the backs of trucks that determine how fast they are allowed to drive regardless of speed limit. Granted, these are on commercial trucks, but it does show how larger vehicles have more stringent safety standards.

[pdjafari]

Originally Posted by purplewidow

Why Don't We Worry About Teaching Our Citizens How To Drive And Be Kind In The Us!!!! Why Are We Focused On Stopping Speeders!!! Why Don't We Focus On Implementing The German/swiss/ European Driving Standard!!!! Where People Respect Others On The Road And Know How To Drive!!! We Give A License To Anyone Here And Look At All The Idiots On The Road!!!!

Why dont we NOT capitalize the first letter of EVERY word, and instead capitalize only those words which require capitalization???

[Rimola]

well lets see...he are a few reasons as to why you can not even compare european driving standards to the US

* license in the US cost just as much as 2 Happy Meals at McDonalds with a milkshake on the side
* having 15 year olds drive certainly does not help the cause
* driving instructors should not exceed the age of 89
* driving test should not be limited to just parallel parking
* sales of motor vehicles that are worth less than my PlayStation 3 should be reconsidered


some eastern european countries, demand that you MUST take the driving portion of the exam with a manual car. furthermore this portion at times consists of multiple days. or even a week. NOT 15 mins at your local Department of Motor Vehicles.

i dont even want to get into the price of a license some of our european residents pay for the right to call themselves a licensed driver.

[smellthebeans]

Couple more thoughts here. LOONG WINDED

A couple of key differences German vs. US driving

1. The Autobahn compared to lets say Oaklahoma interstate (the other thread got me thinking of this) is night and day different in terms of road surface and driveability/safety. I think the Autobahn is 2x as thick and the average American Expressway.

2. The Germans use a strict intrepertation of what a "safe" car is than we do here. I have owned and driven cars here in the US that would not pass muster (safety inspection) in Germany.

3. General populations views of responsibility. Drivers testing and views on driving are just different. It's like they are more respectful and courtious and understand its a responsibilty not a God given right.

4. I dont think a "high speed license" is the Answer...How would a law enforcement Officer Such a Barney Gilley (read below) tell as you go zooming by? How would you address the different states licensing options.

5. I do agree totally that speeding tickets are often a signifigant source of revenue for cash strapped cities & towns.

Small town relies on the
lead-footed to pay its bills
Houston Chronicle
ESTELLINE — With his lean profile and
weathered face, Officer Barney Gilley looks
every bit the part of a West Texas lawman.
Now and then, tourists stop and ask him to
pose for snapshots in his mean-looking
Dodge Charger squad car.

"People know me from Los Angeles to
New York," he says, a slight grin forming.
Gilley writes about 23 tickets a day to
drivers who fail to slow as the wide, flat fourlane
leaves the Panhandle's red-dirt cotton
fields and enters this farm town of 168 residents
about a hundred miles southeast of
Amarillo.

Despite a 1975 Texas law aimed at curbing
speed traps, Estelline has been able to
mine nearly its entire budget from motorists
who fail to slow from 70 mph to 50 mph
when they hit the city limits.

"We follow the state law," said Estelline
Mayor Rick Manley, whose current budget
anticipates it will take in $320,000 in traffic
fines this year. The town keeps some of the
money but by law will have to give a chunk
to the state.

Paying back the state

Texas' speed-trap law uses an indirect
approach to discourage small towns from
relying too heavily on traffic tickets.
Under the law, which applies to towns of
fewer than 5,000, nearly all traffic fines that
exceed 30 percent of a city's previous year's
total general revenues must be paid to the
state. For instance, a town that takes in total
revenues of $100,000 this year can keep only
$30,000 in traffic fines next year, plus $1 for
each ticket over the cap.

This year, Estelline will keep about
$110,000 in highway fines, said Connie
Mondragon, the municipal judge who also is
working temporarily as city clerk.
Since 1999, Driscoll (south of Corpus
Christi), Estelline, Martindale (east of San
Marcos), Mount Enterprise (north of Nacogdoches),
Payne Springs (southeast of Dallas)
and Zavalla (east of Lufkin) have each voluntarily
paid more than $10,000 to the state in
excess fines, according to figures provided by
the comptroller's office under the Texas Open
Records Act.

People in Estelline, which ranks second
behind Mount Enterprise in excess fines voluntarily
sent to the state over the past seven
years, do not deny the highway is the town's
chief meal ticket.

"If we did not write tickets we would not
have a City Hall, city employees, a police
officer, a judge," Mondragon said. "Welcome
to Estelline."

A city surviving

It costs about $126,000 a year to run its
one-man police force and city court, including
Gilley's $50,000 a year salary.

"It's hard if you're a small town finding
someone who will work like Barney," said
Manley, the mayor. "A lot of the guys will
just sit around by the coffee pot. Barney will
work six days a week."

Local drivers such as Justin Garnica,
owner of Gloria's Café in Memphis, the
county seat, say they know to slow down in
Estelline.

"He'll be parked behind City Hall, where
the building confuses a radar detector, or
there's a little dip he likes north of town,"
Garnica said. "Everybody around here knows
to slow down over there. It's out-of-towners
who get caught."

Were Estelline 25 miles to the northeast,
on the other side of the Red River's Prairie
Dog Town Fork in Oklahoma, it would face a
more explicit speed-trap law. Since 2003,
Oklahoma officials have had the power to
stop local police departments from enforcing
traffic laws on state and federal highways if
the town derives more than 50 percent of its
operating revenue from moving violations.
Late last year, Oklahoma officials designated
three towns as official speed traps and
shut down their highway operations for at
least six months. One, Moffett, declared
bankruptcy within six weeks.

[Rimola]

interesting article above...however i think we all can agree that "Estelline" is an extreme case. with a 1 man police dept. i think it really should not be even considered a department. i dont know what its crime rate is, but it must be low

also interesting that the article mentioned the split between a municipality and the state. that ofcourse varies from state to state, but on average, it is about a 70/30 split. some citations however almost the entire sum goes to the city (parking violations, etc.) most are split though, especially speeding violations.

in the end though, do not speed and this will not affect you. doing 70 in a 50 is a significant increase over the limit and i can not blame Officer Gilley.

[smellthebeans]

70 in a 50 certainly I agree....But unless you have driven through the panhandle and its endless miles of flat straight road its easy to forget to turn off the cruise control.

I was ticketed for 68 in a 55. Similar type of town in the wonderful state of Missouri. Where upon I made my non tax deductable controbution to the city. I am averageing one moving violation every 14 years...so its not like I am fast and furious.

Makes me wonder what would happen if everyone slowed down. I immagine a billboard comming into town stating the city budget is almost entirely funded by traffic tickets would achieve that.

[Rimola]

im wth you on that one...especially if it has been an interstate travel with a 4 lane highway of nothing but straight. one may have an excuse to speed (if one does exist), but police do not need an excuse to write speeding citations, considerng you just gave them the opportunity to do so...

[MrSteak]

Originally Posted by smellthebeans

70 in a 50 certainly I agree....But unless you have driven through the panhandle and its endless miles of flat straight road its easy to forget to turn off the cruise control.

I was ticketed for 68 in a 55. Similar type of town in the wonderful state of Missouri. Where upon I made my non tax deductable controbution to the city. I am averageing one moving violation every 14 years...so its not like I am fast and furious.

Makes me wonder what would happen if everyone slowed down. I immagine a billboard comming into town stating the city budget is almost entirely funded by traffic tickets would achieve that.

70 in a 50 is not bad in most cases since the limit shouldn't even be 50 in the first place. On most highways and roads the limit is set too low in the first place. I could even understand a lower limit for the daytime hours, but at night and even in the early hours of the morning when nobody is on the road it's even worse to have such a low limit.

This is about money, not safety. I'm sure states wouldn't make nearly as much money if they raised the cost of getting a license, and implemented better driver education. It's bullshit getting a ticket for driving 70 in a 50 at 3am, and then having to shell out hundreds of dollars for years because of it.

BTW: That article was disgusting... although that one town in Texas being forced to declare bankruptcy was nice.

[Rimola]

Originally Posted by MrSteak

This is about money, not safety.

ok, lets not get carried away here. just because you want to drive 70 in a 50, does not mean other motorway users feel the same way. so lets imagine a speed limit of 100mph on Rt. 80 are you kidding me ?!? it would be disaster. i am NOT saying that YOU are unable to do a 100mph safely, heck i am sure most of you have traveled at much higher speeds, but you can not forget that the MAJORITY of motorway users travel at normal speeds, even if the limit was increased. which would mean that they are the hazard on the roadway, even if they were the minority. you will never get rid of granny doing 40 in the left lane (which is a violation of the law itself).

in other words, increasing the limit CERTAINLY will not decrease the danger of traveling, so why not keep the limit low and pray for a better outcome ?? you can not possibly argue that traveling at lower speeds, the safety factor does not increase. try to make a sudden stop at 80 and do the same at 50. i dont care how many pistons your Porsche brakes have, simple math, statistics and common sense shows the winner.

the fact that you like to ignore all of this and still continue to bitch and moan over speeding tickets is your thing. but please do not question the safety involved in speed limit travel.

[MrSteak]

Originally Posted by Rimola

the fact that you like to ignore all of this and still continue to bitch and moan over speeding tickets is your thing. but please do not question the safety involved in speed limit travel.

Not exactly "bitching and moaning"... more like arguing for one side.

As far as speed limit safety goes, it's all relative… if you want safety then make the limit 20mph, and make people wear helmets. (Or just restrict passenger vehicle speeds.)

There’s a time and place for everything, and the majority of drivers (average up to good drivers) would be able to handle an increase in speed limits. As far as the people who couldn’t handle em such as “granny doing 40 in the left lane”… not my problem. There are more people that can handle it than not. So why should the majority suffer because of the few people who can’t keep up?

[Rimola]

i was just stating the obvious fact that lowered speed limits increase the safety factor. you mentioned that this is NOT done due to safety but because of profitable income, which i question very highly. if you are one of those kind folks who feel the need to donate to the state, on top of a State surcharge, be my guest because the State sure as heck won't mind free money aka donations