[P-51]

Quote:How do you figure this? The majority of drivers, as incompetent as they are, do not have collisions. I’m not saying you’re not safe … but you’re obviously no statistician either.

The vast majority of people do have collisions. I don't think I know a single person who hasn't. For example, my wife who always obeys the limits and has never had an accident in her life... fell asleep on the 401 and we piled into the center median at 100km/h. She had a "perfect record", but that was the closest I've ever come to dying in a car.

My statistical point is this: Every mile I drive is a sample group. I have a chance of hitting somebody, or somebody hitting me. I've been hit far more often than I have hit others. This despite the fact I speed.

Quote:Statistically the majority of drivers do not have collisions and the majority of drivers are never charged with speeding. Statistically that says drivers that don't speed don't have collisions - statistically.

See, that's where you're wrong. Majority of people don't speed. Vast majority of people have been in collisions.

Quote:Right or not, this is irrelevant … we’re discussing the enforcement of existing speed limits, not lowering them.

My point is, this law will drive down actual average travel speeds. The limits on the 400's have been a joke for at least a decade. Now the 100 really means "no really, don't go over 150".

Quote:can't outrun the radio dude

Yes you can. Buddy of mine is a cop, and probably a better driver than me. He has had to give up on some chases.

Quote:Kids safety – doesn't it start from education?
Isn’t it required by law to be around them all the time before they are 12?
KEEP THEM OFF THE ROAD! that’s safety. If a kid is on a road – charge the parent! Talking about highway speeding – what are kids doing there?

As a new parent, I've already come to realize that I cannot control everything my kid is going to do. That's why I advocate reducing residential limits to 40, and I'd support enforcement of these new laws for anyone doing over 60 in a residential area!

In residential areas, the problem goes away from attentiveness, and becomes just pure reaction time. If a kid runs out from behind a car parked on your side of the street, you never had a chance to see him. Your only hope is to brake enough so as not to kill him, or maybe throw your car into the parked car.

That would be something else I would propose. Currently in that situation, you are charged with an at-fault accident. That's wrong. If I respond to a child's mistake by pitching my car into a parked car or light pole to save that child's life... I shouldn't be at fault. You get into the difficulties of proving, etc. etc... but it's just wrong the way it is now.

Quote:Since I actually HAVE children, what do you suppose I do? Keep them under lock and key until their 12? Were you kept in a box until you were 12? Do you think that on their 12th birthday they will suddenly find some mystical wisdom that will make them impervious to some f***ing moron doing 80 in a school zone?

I agree 100%.

And more to my point... somebody would have to be doing 100 in a school zone to be charged with this. These rules should apply to less than that in School zones.

70 or 80.

Why are we more concerned about somebody doing 150, largely surrounded by concrete, more than we are about people doing 90 in a school zone. Or passing school buses, etc.

Quote:The f***tard wannabe racers should slow the f*** down. People crossing the street judge the time they have by figuring the oncoming driver is doing 50, 60, 70, or whatever the limit is maybe plus 20. Nobody figures on people doing 100 in a 50 zone.

Well, I disagree with this. People should judge crossing time based on rate of closure, not distance. That's stupid, for just this reason.

Our brains have been programmed to judge rate of closure of predators for millions of years. Let's use them.

Quote:If you want safety - educate your children and k e e p t h t e m o f f t h e r o a d !!! Do your part of safety at least. You have more control of you children than some driver, you can just fine him later but it may be too late...

People, including kids, have every right to be on the road in residential areas. In so many new housing areas with no back yards, that's the only open space. People deserve to walk, bike, run and play on the roads in their neighborhood. Cars should be secondary.

Quote:What's your problem with the stunting laws again? They clearly define what you can't do...

I have a problem with misapplication.

ie: my tires slip a little by accident, but I'm in a "racy looking car". You get charged. The objectiveness of cops is bad enough when you give them a tool like a breathalyzer or radar gun. Just placing it up to them for perception... scares the crap out of me.

We've been over this one before.

There's also a big problem with one of them.

If somebody is following too close, you can't brake check them, or EVEN SLOW DOWN to get out of their way. The only option is to speed up to pass the car next to you to pull over.

If Mr. Tailgater wants to tailgate you up to 150... guess what...

You're faced with losing your car either way.

If I'm doing 118 passing a semi on the 401, and some jackwad is tailgating me... I have to sit there and do nothing now.

The other one... I'm at a light waiting to turn left. Light goes green... grandma in the oncoming lane is snoozing. We now ALL have to wait there. That's dumb.

They should make another law, when the light goes green, you have to move your car in 2 seconds or you get a small ticket.

Quote:It's usually some idiot contractor rushing to his next job.

I find the same thing. Contractors are the WORST on residential streets.