- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>/ hpspkla:rec.autos.driving / sk…@prl.dec.com (Marcin Skubiszewski) / 8:26 am Feb 8, 1991 /
>In Europe, radar detectors are, generally speaking, illegal.
>In France, for example, there is a law banning "devices aimed
>at detecting infraction detectors". I deduce from this, that
>European authorities are on the side of the cops, and against
>you, the Lawbreaker.
>And I really can’t understand how it is that in North America
>radar detecttors remain (mostly) legal. This means that the
>authorities don’t really know on which side to go. Maybe the
>law should be enforced: let’s provide police with radars
>and, why not, radar detector detectors; or maybe it’s citizen’s
>right (constitutional ?) to break the law: let’s maintain his
>right to use radar detectors and, if he can find any, radar
>detector detector detectors.
>So, what’s going on ? Is the electronic industry lobby so strong
>in America ?
>Disclaimer: yes, I speed, i.e. I usually go over the French
>maximum 130 km/h (81 mph or so).
Another thing which has happened in this country (USA) is that speed limits
have been set for political purposes and for collecting fines, not for
reasons of safety. Before the "Oil Crisis" in the 1970′s, speed limits in
many instances were set by survey. The idea was to set the speed limit at
a speed such that 85% of the drivers would not drive above that speed even
if there were no posted limit. The idea is that most drivers drive at a
safe speed. The other 15% allows for those who don’t.
Note that the maximum posted speed in the USA is now 65 mph (about 105 km/h).
Survey after survey show very few people observing these speed limits, and
with good reason–they are set for purposes other than safety. Before the
"Oil Crisis", many of these same roads had speed limits of 70, 75, or 80
mph, and some didn’t have any limit. Why are roads which were designed to
be safe at 75 mph now unsafe just above 55 mph (as they are posted in many
locations)?
There are other stories. One is of a stretch of road in Utah. The posted
speed limit was too low, and no one observed it. A new speed limit was
set to reflect the actual speed being driven, using the 85% method. After
the new (realistic) speed limit was posted, the average speed went
DOWN! People will generally obey a properly set speed limit.
Now, don’t anybody start flaming me about energy conservation. Yes, low
speeds will save energy, but more efficient autos have save many times more
energy than the 55 mph speed limit ever did.
So, because of the politically set, unreasonably slow speed limits in this
country, many of us use radar detectors to drive higher, more reasonable,
and still save speeds.
By the way, I wish the speed limits here were 130 km/h. I would find that
speed limit very easy to obey.
I happen to disagree with the person
who stated that federal speed limits
aren’t for the purpose of safety and
are just for the purpose of collecting
fines..True, traffic violations are a
major source of revenue for the
states, but, for the most part, it is
for the STATES.. Why would the
federal government intervene in
setting up limits so the STATES can
get more money from traffic
violators?? According to studies, the
55 M.P.H limit significantly reduces
traffic accidents and highway deaths..
The federal government does not have
the power to make the individual
states keep their speed limits at 55.
but they DO, however, have the power
to say, ‘If you don’t lower your speed
limits to 55, we will significantly
reduce your state’s federal highway
funding’, and that’s what is done..
Some states were origninally against
this, as was I beleive Nevada at
first, where traffic fines were
something like $10 dollars for 10
miles per hour over…
the 65 m.p.h speed limits arent for
states that defy the government’s
highway funding threat..Because they
are less traveled roads and for other
various reasons the government will
allow certain roads in less congested
areas to be 65 and still retain
highway aid…
In article <garym.3…@irncastl.UUCP>, ga…@irncastl.UUCP (Gary Morris)
writes:
|>
|> violators?? According to studies, the
|> 55 M.P.H limit significantly reduces
|> traffic accidents and highway deaths..
That may be true BUT there are studies that show if the driving
test where not such a joke that more lives would be saved.
Oh I never even looked at the "book" when I took the test.
Just common sense and if it has to do with drunk driving pick
the highest possible fine and thats it.
|> The federal government does not have
|> the power to make the individual
|> states keep their speed limits at 55.
|> but they DO, however, have the power
|> to say, ‘If you don’t lower your speed
|> limits to 55, we will significantly
|> reduce your state’s federal highway
|> funding’, and that’s what is done..
I call this bribery.
|> Some states were origninally against
|> this, as was I beleive Nevada at
|> first, where traffic fines were
|> something like $10 dollars for 10
|> miles per hour over…
Nevada didn’t have a speed limit until the feds stepped in.
|> the 65 m.p.h speed limits arent for
|> states that defy the government’s
|> highway funding threat..Because they
|> are less traveled roads and for other
|> various reasons the government will
|> allow certain roads in less congested
|> areas to be 65 and still retain
|> highway aid…
That is because alot of western states told the feds to "shove it".
In fact Colorado was the first state to put into effect the 65 limit.
Out here you can drive several hundred miles without seeing anything
above a gas/food/motel town.
Laszlo Nemeth
las…@boulder.colorado.edu
"Nothing is as over rated as a bad f*ck or as under rated as a good sh*t."
"hey – my tool works (yeah, you can quote me on that)." From e…@Sun.COM
"A government should be like unix: indecipherable, powerful and yet easy
to use,
rarely seen by the great majority, and totally reconfigurable upon
demand."
From garn…@boulder.Colorado.EDU
DoD #0666 UID #1999
From article <garym.3…@irncastl.UUCP>, by ga…@irncastl.UUCP (Gary Morris):
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> I happen to disagree with the person
> who stated that federal speed limits
> aren’t for the purpose of safety and
> are just for the purpose of collecting
> fines..True, traffic violations are a
> major source of revenue for the
> states, but, for the most part, it is
> for the STATES.. Why would the
> federal government intervene in
> setting up limits so the STATES can
> get more money from traffic
> violators?? According to studies, the
> 55 M.P.H limit significantly reduces
> traffic accidents and highway deaths..
> The federal government does not have
> the power to make the individual
> states keep their speed limits at 55.
> but they DO, however, have the power
> to say, ‘If you don’t lower your speed
> limits to 55, we will significantly
> reduce your state’s federal highway
> funding’, and that’s what is done..
> Some states were origninally against
> this, as was I beleive Nevada at
> first, where traffic fines were
> something like $10 dollars for 10
> miles per hour over…
> the 65 m.p.h speed limits arent for
> states that defy the government’s
> highway funding threat..Because they
> are less traveled roads and for other
> various reasons the government will
> allow certain roads in less congested
> areas to be 65 and still retain
> highway aid…
Getting a speeding ticket for 75, 85, … mph in 65 mph zone in clear traffic
makes no sense. My radar-detector makes perfect sense.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
>/ hpspkla:rec.autos.driving / ga…@irncastl.UUCP (Gary Morris) / 9:49 am Feb 17, 1991 /
> I happen to disagree with the person
>who stated that federal speed limits
>aren’t for the purpose of safety and
>are just for the purpose of collecting
>fines..True, traffic violations are a
>major source of revenue for the
>states, but, for the most part, it is
>for the STATES.. Why would the
>federal government intervene in
>setting up limits so the STATES can
>get more money from traffic
>violators?? According to studies, the
>55 M.P.H limit significantly reduces
>traffic accidents and highway deaths.
Unfortunately, this is not true. This is another case of "figures
don’t lie, buy liers to figure. If you look at traffic deaths per mile
travelled (the only meaningful way of making the measurement), you find
that traffic deaths did NOT go down when the 55 MPH speed limit was imposed,
and that the death rate did NOT go up when it was (partially) relaxed.
> The federal government does not have
>the power to make the individual
>states keep their speed limits at 55.
>but they DO, however, have the power
>to say, ‘If you don’t lower your speed
>limits to 55, we will significantly
>reduce your state’s federal highway
>funding’, and that’s what is done..
As said before, bribery and coercion.
- Hide quoted text — Show quoted text -
> Some states were origninally against
>this, as was I beleive Nevada at
>first, where traffic fines were
>something like $10 dollars for 10
>miles per hour over…
> the 65 m.p.h speed limits arent for
>states that defy the government’s
>highway funding threat..Because they
>are less traveled roads and for other
>various reasons the government will
>allow certain roads in less congested
>areas to be 65 and still retain
>highway aid…