How do you think our laws should handle speeding in regards to preventing accidents?

[Cruentus]

This started in the "Drunk Driving" thread.

The most common primary factors I see are speed and alcohol/drug intoxication.

This brings up another point of discussion: speed.

How many of you think that speed is a killer?

Unless we're talking about residential areas, I don't think that it is per say.

Speed is a force multiplier. Crashing into something at 120 mph is a lot more deadly then 20 mph.

Hwever, I think that accidents are CAUSED by poor judgement rather then excessive speed. Tailgating, not using turn signals, aggressive driving, not looking before changing lanes, not paying attention and tunring in front of people, etc., etc. etc.; all examples of poor judgement.

I understand that speed makes it more difficult to react when someone else does something stupid, however, who cause the accident, the stupid person who changed lanes in front of you while going 20 mph when you clearly were moving at a faster rate, or you because you were moving at a faster rate? I'd say, the stupid person.

So, I would vote that we crack down on stupid driving, and ease up on speed violations.. You don't use a turn signal: ticket. You ride someones @$$ to close: ticket. You drive erratically, the cop gets you on his camera for court purposes, then ticket. Once the crack down is in full effect, then we gradually move to no speed limit on highways, and looser limits on non-highways, and tight limits in residential and downtown areas.

I just don't feel that speed causes accidents. I feel the cause is poor decision making. I think that traffic laws are aimed at the wrong thing as they are designed today, and are instead (once again) restrictive over our rights while failing to prevent accidents.

What do you think...

So...what do you think?

 

[Tgace]

Speed=More severe damage upon collision, less reaction time for driver to react to road conditions, less reaction time for other drivers to react to you.

That being said the location, ammount of traffic, intersections etc. have a large influence on the ammount of accidents. I think the current system is fine, the limit on highways could possibly be tweaked.

 

[Elfan]

Currently most speed limits are based on "zones." Interstates are X, one lane highways Y, residentials Z etc. I think this is a dangerous way to assign speed limits because they beer no relashion to what is actaully a safe speed to travel on the road they deprive drivers unfamilar with the area false advise. Also they make the vast majority of citizens into lawbreakers. Since most people choose a speed that gets them to their destination in a timly manner a better system would be based on how fast people actaully travel on the road.

 

[Tgace]

Currently most speed limits are based on "zones." Interstates are X, one lane highways Y, residentials Z etc. I think this is a dangerous way to assign speed limits because they beer no relashion to what is actaully a safe speed to travel on the road they deprive drivers unfamilar with the area false advise. Also they make the vast majority of citizens into lawbreakers. Since most people choose a speed that gets them to their destination in a timly manner a better system would be based on how fast people actaully travel on the road.

People make themselves into lawbreakers. We are responsible for our own actions. Do many (most) people speed? Probably. Should they be outraged when they see the flashing lights in their rearview? No. Make your choices, take your chances. Petition your gvt. to change the speed. In NY they changed highway speed from 55-65. Now the average speed is probably 75 mph. Its the nail that sticks up that gets pounded down. I like to wait for the knucklehead going 20 over

 

[CanuckMA]

If you observe patterns on highway, the majority of people will settle on a safe speed. Highways in Ontario are 100kph (about 60 mph). On clear, dry conditions, outside of rush hour, the speed usualy settles at 120. Enforcing the 'stupid driver' rules you do far more to promote safety.

 

[Elfan]

People make themselves into lawbreakers. We are responsible for our own actions. Do many (most) people speed? Probably. Should they be outraged when they see the flashing lights in their rearview? No. Make your choices, take your chances. Petition your gvt. to change the speed. In NY they changed highway speed from 55-65. Now the average speed is probably 75 mph. Its the nail that sticks up that gets pounded down. I like to wait for the knucklehead going 20 over

My point is that most people choose a safe speed to get them to their destination in a timley manner. The speed limit should not reflect an arbitrary value but rather what the maximum safe speed on the road actaully is so that it provides useful information to drivers. People certainly choose to be lawbreakers, but the choice should not be between the law and their safety.

 

[Cruentus]

My point is that most people choose a safe speed to get them to their destination in a timley manner. The speed limit should not reflect an arbitrary value but rather what the maximum safe speed on the road actaully is so that it provides useful information to drivers. People certainly choose to be lawbreakers, but the choice should not be between the law and their safety.

I agree with your point. I think that people do generally choose a speed that is safe, and that speed signs should be more suggestive rather then limiting. The only exception would be residential, schools, and downtown areas of course. I don't think any of us would want our kids playing in the front yard if cars were allowed to go 80 mph down your street.

:asian:

 

[Cryozombie]

Two Thoughts...

1) A local town here just instituted a "Zero Tolerance on Speeding" to prevent accidents.

This means that even speeders going 2-3 mph over the limit WILL be ticketed, no exceptions. Considering a lot of cars have radial speedometers with "tickmarks" every 5 miles per, and police radar is <ahem> accurate and digital, doesn’t that seem a trifle unjust?

2) If you are say, I dunno... on a major interstate or something, and you're obeying the posted 55mph limit, and most other traffic is traveling in excess of say, 70mph... You are doing the LEGAL thing, but are you doing the SAFE thing? If everyone is passing and swerving around you at high speed, are you an accident waiting to happen? Are you contributing to road rage? And are you more likely to take a bullet from a POed Motorist, in say, LA?

 

[Tgace]

How are speed limits determined?

Answer:
The Michigan Department of Transportation (MDOT) and the Michigan State Police (MSP) are jointly responsible for establishing speed limits along all state trunklines. The objective of any speed limit is that it be reasonable, enforceable, and that it assures a maximum limit.
MDOT and MSP conduct a speed study and analyze the data with the primary focus being on an arbitrary measurement called the '85th percentile' speed (that speed at or below which 85 percent of the vehicles are traveling).

The 85th percentile speed is considered by most agencies nationally to be the appropriate speed limit. It recognizes that most drivers voluntarily adjust their speed to the total roadway/roadside environment (width, alignment, surface condition, roadside development, pedestrian activity, weather, light conditions, etc.).

http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0%2C1607%2C7-151-14034-28532--F%2C00.html

General Principles

A guiding principle for setting rational speed limits is that they
should provide a high level of compliance and consequently be largely
self-enforcing. This requires that drivers understand the basis for the
limit and that it appears to be reasonable. Such rational speed limits
help to establish a reasonable standard for enforcement and permit
authorities to concentrate enforcement efforts on those more flagrant
speed limit violators and high-risk drivers who are likely to create
unsafe situations. Achieving high compliance will require an effective
combination of Public Information and Education (PI&E) and dedicated
enforcement. For this cooperative agreement program, the recipient will
be required to determine rational speed limits using the engineering
study procedure described in ``Guidelines for Setting Safe and
Reasonable Speed Limits''. (Appendix A).

Elements of Speed Management

Managing speeds depends on the integration of three key elements:
engineering, enforcement, and education. The prevailing speed
engineering study is frequently cited as the desired way to achieve
high compliance with what drivers choose as reasonable speed limits.
For this approach, the 85th percentile of the distribution of free-
flowing vehicle speeds is used as the starting point for setting the
rational speed limit. To establish credibility of the rational speed
limits program, a rigorous enforcement program must be developed and
systematically applied. Finally, in order to gain full compliance of
rational speed limits, the public must understand the basis for their
setting and realize that they will be rigorously enforced. To achieve
this, the community must also develop an effective PI&E program.

http://www.dps.state.la.us/tiger/grant4.html

 

[Gary Crawford]

I voted for "raise speed limits and crack down on poor judgement" because that it as close to my real opinion as the choices provide.I think speed limits shoud stay the same and the enforcement of speeding violations should be very liberal,however,the enforcement of other laws are the real problem.There sre too few citations issued for "poor judgement" violations.Following too closely is the one that citations are almost NEVER isssued for unless there is an accident.If the purpose of driving laws are to reduce accidents and loss of life,then wouldn't that purpose be better served by issuing citations BEFORE there is an accident?

 

[Tgace]

I voted for "raise speed limits and crack down on poor judgement" because that it as close to my real opinion as the choices provide.I think speed limits shoud stay the same and the enforcement of speeding violations should be very liberal,however,the enforcement of other laws are the real problem.There sre too few citations issued for "poor judgement" violations.Following too closely is the one that citations are almost NEVER isssued for unless there is an accident.If the purpose of driving laws are to reduce accidents and loss of life,then wouldn't that purpose be better served by issuing citations BEFORE there is an accident?

Problem is, most people are on their best behavior when they see a squad car around. Some days I drive around all day and dont see a single red light run. Then on the way home have 2-3 people do it right in front of me.

 

[loki09789]

My point is that most people choose a safe speed to get them to their destination in a timley manner. The speed limit should not reflect an arbitrary value but rather what the maximum safe speed on the road actaully is so that it provides useful information to drivers. People certainly choose to be lawbreakers, but the choice should not be between the law and their safety.

This idea of 'arbitrary' being some evil thing keeps coming up. EVERYTHING, just about, that humans do is arbitrary. About the only thing that isn't is birth and death (and certain batman tv words like 'pow' 'biff' 'bam'). Every limit, price, material designated as valuable.... is arbitrary. That just means that the importance is imposed by the human group, not some natural occuring thing. "chair" is an arbitrary term in english, there is nothing about a chair that makes the term "chair" the term - only people chose that.

As far as an arbitrary value of speed limits, there is plenty of basic, scientific and practical decision making that goes into setting speeds. Laws are not designed to impact the 'most people who....' obey (okay, play the 5-10 mph game) the limits. They are designed to deter and hook those 'minority of poeple who...' DON'T follow the speed limit or make responsible choice. Show me someone who knows city and highway planning here and I might listen, the rest is just armchairing and opinion on half information.

Safety/accident statistics. Volume of traffic issues. Physics and force of impact, response times..... I don't know the details myself, but with a little research, it isn't hard to figure out that 'arbitrary' in this case isn't just "WE THINK THAT LOOKS GOOD"

 

[dearnis.com]

For the most part the laws are fine...the issue is enforcement. I also like to target those who are grossly out of line (and I do not care how well you drive, you can not justify, to me why you are in excess of 20mph over the limit.
Citing for 2-3 miles per hour over is absurd; the radar unit will have a +/- 1MPH margin for error anyway.
More later, I worked enough today and this is too much like the office!

 

[Cryozombie]

As far as an arbitrary value of speed limits, there is plenty of basic, scientific and practical decision making that goes into setting speeds.

Safety/accident statistics. Volume of traffic issues. Physics and force of impact, response times..... I don't know the details myself, but with a little research, it isn't hard to figure out that 'arbitrary' in this case isn't just "WE THINK THAT LOOKS GOOD"

Hmmm. The village my office is in reduced the speed on the single road thru the industrial park, dropping the speed from 40 to 25. There were no reported accidents I am aware of, and it is not a residental street. Its in an industrial park, so mainly the only traffic it sees is employees of the facories and offices on the street... Id be interested to know what Safety/accident statistics and Volume of traffic issues prompted such a drastic reduction in speed on such an isolated street, and why "suddenly" a street that rarely saw a LE patrol car often has 2-3 of them on it parked and "running radar" at any given time writing tickets. I'm certain it wasn't an arbitraty decision designed to bring revenue to the village, our body politic wouldnt do that. <Ahem> But you are right, that conjecture relflects nothing but my OPINION. However, I am also not sheep who blindly believes because someone with athority says "This is good for you" than it must be and who am I to question it... Questioning authority is good for you, and for athority. %-} In theory it keeps the rat bastards in line.

And No, I have not been ticketed on that street for speeding, the morning they posted the new signs and began "aggressive enforcment" our boss warned us she saw the new signs posted, and I obey the new limit.

 

[loki09789]

Hmmm. The village my office is in reduced the speed on the single road thru the industrial park, dropping the speed from 40 to 25. There were no reported accidents I am aware of, and it is not a residental street. Its in an industrial park, so mainly the only traffic it sees is employees of the facories and offices on the street... Id be interested to know what Safety/accident statistics and Volume of traffic issues prompted such a drastic reduction in speed on such an isolated street, and why "suddenly" a street that rarely saw a LE patrol car often has 2-3 of them on it parked and "running radar" at any given time writing tickets. I'm certain it wasn't an arbitraty decision designed to bring revenue to the village, our body politic wouldnt do that. <Ahem> But you are right, that conjecture relflects nothing but my OPINION. However, I am also not sheep who blindly believes because someone with athority says "This is good for you" than it must be and who am I to question it... Questioning authority is good for you, and for athority. %-} In theory it keeps the rat bastards in line.

And No, I have not been ticketed on that street for speeding, the morning they posted the new signs and began "aggressive enforcment" our boss warned us she saw the new signs posted, and I obey the new limit.

This reasoning behind the industrial park speed would be a question for the planners and developers. If it is because of the volume of traffic given the number of employees moving in/out of such a small access area at given times, it makes sense.

I am not calling you sheep (because sheep are plural and you are an individual ) I am saying that 'arbitrary' arguments are useless because everything we do is arbitrary. And, as you have said in the past, you don't know the laws so find out before you start accusing anyone of trying to rake the community. Just because you don't like being told what to do, doesn't mean that it is a bad thing, or immoral abuse of political authority.

 

[lvwhitebir]

I think the speed limits we have now are fine. People generally go 10-15 mph over the limit anyways. I certainly don't think the limit needs to be raised. The problem is "poor judgement" but unfortunately that is a vague term.

So, in order to crack down on "poor judgement" we'd have to seriously define what exactly "tailgating," "excessive speeding," "erratic driving," etc. means. These will always be hotly debated.

For example, with a speed limit, excessive speeding can be defined as perhaps 20 mph over the posted limit. Without a speed limit what is it? 20mph faster than the other drivers at that moment? What about road conditions (rain, snow)? What about knowledge of the road itself for out-of-towners (going too fast for a turn ahead or heavy merge areas)?

WhiteBirch