Hi, Guest
10-12-2007, 03:05 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-12-2007, 05:30 AM by darkpuppet.)
split p-51's post across this and the next to address broken quotes.. -dp
I guess that's where our arguments diverge. I don't think me or anyone else should be doing 50 over a posted limit. The problem is, I think many speed limits are artificially low. Particularly on intercity, devided highways.
I think the limit should be 120, and rigorously enforced at 130, today. If people get used to that, then we can talk about going higher later.
Speed doesn't kill. Speed differential kills.
Attentiveness improves. More chance of actually *seeing* the problem and actually doing something to avoid it instead of just not seeing it, and just hitting it. A kid is going to die if hit by a car at 30 anyway. They aren't "more dead" if they get hit at 80. I know at least for myself, I have a better chance of seeing somebody if I'm going at a good clip, than if I'm just loafing along.
And let me be PERFECTLY CLEAR here. I'm not saying we should be doing 80 on residential streets. Frankly I'm surprise the limit is often 50, and think it should drop to 40 in all cases. And rigorously enforced. I'm complaining about the limits on highways, industrial boulevards, etc... being too low.
You prove my point. Slow limits leads to feelings of security and "I'm going so slow, I can play with my Ipod while driving."
They shouldn't be on 400 series highways until they have their G anyway. You can get anywhere you want without being on the 400's. The 400's should be reserved for those who've proven they know how to drive.
Oh yeah, THAT would be a popular move woudln't it! :lol:
It's completely true. Those are the numbers. I agree that it was largely achieved because of safer cars. But, the fact is, traffic deaths are down, and that is the only point I'm trying to make.
I basically agree with most of what you said, except this final point. Low limits are part of it. It's all part in parcel of the problem.
My policy of raising the limits would go hand in hand with fixing some of the other problems too. #1 would be evasive manoever testing mandatory to get your G, and be allowed on teh 400's.
I don't claim the accidents make me a good driver. Neither case was I following too close. It was inattention. First case, I was distracted by somebody waving a pizza sign on the sidewalk, turn back, car ahead is stopped. I had a trailer, and couldn't stop. Light bump. Guy behind me (not towing a trailer) piled into the back of me. More distraction than inattention.
Second time, slippery road in the rain, we're plodding along in heavy traffic, lots of room ahead. Woman ahead *yields the right of way* to an oncoming car to turn left in front of her at an unsignaled intersection. She basically stopped in the middle of the road. I was looking at the radio or something, slid, hit her. That was my innattention, coupled with I believe her committing an error too. I should point out, this was THE WORST intersection in Windsor, and it was super slippery because of all the oil from the accidents (no joke, I almost fell walking on the road).
What makes me a good driver is all the OTHER accidents I've avoided. I've only ever been hit from behind while I was stopped. Many other instances where I saved somebody else's ass.
My point exactly. I've avoided things like this.
Am I saying I'm safer than you? Probably not. We're probably roughly equal, but in different ways. You're probably more attentive than me in traffic. I'm probably more capable of evasive manoevers than you.
Basically true for me too. The careless doesn't count, because it's a trumped up charge. The cop said she "had to" but told me to go to court to get it quashed. Her words. "If a cop responds to an accident, somebody HAS to get a careless."
Quote:However, for argument's sake, I could say that even if being the best driver doesn't exempt you from the possibility of getting in an accident, how does that give you the right to do 50KPH over?
I guess that's where our arguments diverge. I don't think me or anyone else should be doing 50 over a posted limit. The problem is, I think many speed limits are artificially low. Particularly on intercity, devided highways.
I think the limit should be 120, and rigorously enforced at 130, today. If people get used to that, then we can talk about going higher later.
Speed doesn't kill. Speed differential kills.
Quote:If a moment of inattentiveness at 30KPH can lead to an accident, how do things improve at 80KPH?
Attentiveness improves. More chance of actually *seeing* the problem and actually doing something to avoid it instead of just not seeing it, and just hitting it. A kid is going to die if hit by a car at 30 anyway. They aren't "more dead" if they get hit at 80. I know at least for myself, I have a better chance of seeing somebody if I'm going at a good clip, than if I'm just loafing along.
And let me be PERFECTLY CLEAR here. I'm not saying we should be doing 80 on residential streets. Frankly I'm surprise the limit is often 50, and think it should drop to 40 in all cases. And rigorously enforced. I'm complaining about the limits on highways, industrial boulevards, etc... being too low.
Quote:Safety on the roads needs to improve. Unfortunately, I'm not even sure that adding safety equipment is going to improve things either. Like SUVs, people believe they're safer they tend to take more risks.
You prove my point. Slow limits leads to feelings of security and "I'm going so slow, I can play with my Ipod while driving."
Quote:Just to add one more factor to the discussion. To those of you who are good, and very good drivers, we have to realize that when the G2 driver doing 100 doesn't look, or miscaculates the speed of you coming up beside them, then that's where you'll get the blame for the accident that'll occur.
They shouldn't be on 400 series highways until they have their G anyway. You can get anywhere you want without being on the 400's. The 400's should be reserved for those who've proven they know how to drive.
Oh yeah, THAT would be a popular move woudln't it! :lol:
Quote:It is absolutely true ââ¬Â¦
It's completely true. Those are the numbers. I agree that it was largely achieved because of safer cars. But, the fact is, traffic deaths are down, and that is the only point I'm trying to make.
Quote:The point is our driving public didnââ¬â¢t get this way because the speed limits are too low. They got this way because our standards are woefully too low ââ¬Â¦ any idiot can get a license and do. And conversely raising the speed limits will not improve their skills, knowledge or awareness one iota.
I basically agree with most of what you said, except this final point. Low limits are part of it. It's all part in parcel of the problem.
My policy of raising the limits would go hand in hand with fixing some of the other problems too. #1 would be evasive manoever testing mandatory to get your G, and be allowed on teh 400's.
Quote:Surely youââ¬â¢re not contending this makes you a good driver, are you? What it makes you is an inattentive driver, or perhaps a driver following too closely ââ¬Â¦ and if youââ¬â¢re claiming it was the low speed limit that ââ¬Åmade you do itââ¬Â then thatââ¬â¢s pretty lame in my view.
I don't claim the accidents make me a good driver. Neither case was I following too close. It was inattention. First case, I was distracted by somebody waving a pizza sign on the sidewalk, turn back, car ahead is stopped. I had a trailer, and couldn't stop. Light bump. Guy behind me (not towing a trailer) piled into the back of me. More distraction than inattention.
Second time, slippery road in the rain, we're plodding along in heavy traffic, lots of room ahead. Woman ahead *yields the right of way* to an oncoming car to turn left in front of her at an unsignaled intersection. She basically stopped in the middle of the road. I was looking at the radio or something, slid, hit her. That was my innattention, coupled with I believe her committing an error too. I should point out, this was THE WORST intersection in Windsor, and it was super slippery because of all the oil from the accidents (no joke, I almost fell walking on the road).
What makes me a good driver is all the OTHER accidents I've avoided. I've only ever been hit from behind while I was stopped. Many other instances where I saved somebody else's ass.
Quote:one a broadside by a drunk driver going through a red light ââ¬Â¦ and the first one ââ¬â two weeks after I got my license, a car pulled out of driveway in the rain in front of me and I couldnââ¬â¢t stop.
My point exactly. I've avoided things like this.
Am I saying I'm safer than you? Probably not. We're probably roughly equal, but in different ways. You're probably more attentive than me in traffic. I'm probably more capable of evasive manoevers than you.
Quote:The only offense Iââ¬â¢ve been charged with in all that time is speeding.
Basically true for me too. The careless doesn't count, because it's a trumped up charge. The cop said she "had to" but told me to go to court to get it quashed. Her words. "If a cop responds to an accident, somebody HAS to get a careless."