# Question for LEO, do you obey the limit or flow of traffic?



## cobb (Jun 15, 2006)

As a new driver behind the wheel for a few days over a month I have some questions. I am just mastering driving the posted speed limit vs a few under and in some cases the extra 5 Ive heard I am allowed. The problem is, it seems no one goes the limit or even 5 over. I was on i 95 and caught myself easily doing 65 with cars passing me in the 55-60mph zones. I find even on city streets with 25,35mph limits, flks do 45 or more. I see where it can be a safety concern on city streets with parked cars, schools and intersections, but what about the interstate? 

So, unoffically, do I keep up with traffic or stick to the limit or even slower? I know the driving manual talked about keeping with the flow of traffic, however it can warn if you drive the posted limit and conditions are unsafe from excessive traffic, weather, etc you can still get a ticket. 

My dad goes 5 over any limit. On the interstate he tries to keep up with the pack. If he cant, which is most the case, he backs off to 5 over the limit.


----------



## Rothrandir (Jun 16, 2006)

regarding the 5 over, i believe one of the reasons may be to compensate for innacuracies of your spedometer?
if you end up deciding to only go the "legal" speed, keep in mind that even though your car says you're going 65, you may in fact be going a few above or below that...


----------



## bjn70 (Jun 16, 2006)

I was stopped recently and given a warning for 5 over. I had my cruise set for 2 over, and was on a slight downhill but still thought I was only about 3 over. I've checked my speedo many times using those "your speed is..." radar warning signs that occur various places here. and usually I'm going at or under what my speedo says.


----------



## scott.cr (Jun 16, 2006)

A few years ago I was cited for going 50 in a 35 zone, and tailgating. But I got off the citation on the grounds that I did not violate the basic speed law (it was a sunny day at around 10:00 am, light traffic).

BTW, that was a tip given to me by a traffic attorney. Speed laws are very slippery indeed.


----------



## Pydpiper (Jun 16, 2006)

At one point of my work trucks long abused history someone has put larger tires on it than recommended, this altered my speedometer. I realized this by bringing my GPS along for a ride.


----------



## Donovan (Jun 16, 2006)

cobb said:


> do I keep up with traffic or stick to the limit or even slower? I know the driving manual talked about keeping with the flow of traffic, however it can warn if you drive the posted limit and conditions are unsafe from excessive traffic, weather, etc you can still get a ticket.


Keep up with the flow of traffic!!!! Forget trying to exactly match the posted limit or "only going 5 over". Drive at a safe and prudent speed regardless of the posted number. This may mean going much slower when weather/traffic/conditions warrant but also means that if traffic is flowing at 70 in a 55, go 70! It has been proven over and over that you and everyone around is safer when you "go with the flow"...


----------



## bwaites (Jun 16, 2006)

Unfortunately, safer does not always equate with "Legal", guys!

Bill


----------



## markdi (Jun 16, 2006)

has a leo given his opinion yet ?


----------



## greenLED (Jun 16, 2006)

Donovan said:


> ...if traffic is flowing at 70 in a 55, go 70! It has been proven over and over that you and everyone around is safer when you "go with the flow"...


I'm sorry, but if the rest of the world wants to get killed on the road, it's their problem, don't drag me into it. I follow the posted speed limit and may exceed it only by 5 miles or so *only* when on the interstate. (and, NO, I am not the type that does 45MPH on the left lane of the interstate either - but I don't buy "let's all speed because it's safer" bandwagon)


----------



## markdi (Jun 16, 2006)

maybe for legal or other reasons a leo can not give a opinion on this subject.


----------



## cobb (Jun 16, 2006)

If I had my way, I would be the guy going 45 in the far right lane. Seems to be a good speed with all the merging going on as thats what happens on the right side of the interstate. 

I was just wondering as I could do either, but feel with an extended body white cargo van, I maybe a great target for IR radar. 

Ive seen cops in the mediums of i295, but never any cops waiting on i95. I have seen them drive with the flow of traffic with their lights on or just at an exit with them blinking.


----------



## gorn (Jun 16, 2006)

scott.cr said:


> A few years ago I was cited for going 50 in a 35 zone, and tailgating. But I got off the citation on the grounds that I did not violate the basic speed law (it was a sunny day at around 10:00 am, light traffic).
> 
> BTW, that was a tip given to me by a traffic attorney. Speed laws are very slippery indeed.



In California, in addition to the basic speed law (driving safe for the conditions) there are specific sections for exceeding the posted limit. The basic speed law isn't used much just because of the verbiage of it. A violation of the basic speed law would not only depend on current conditions, but the abilities of the driver.

My recommendation to you as a retired LEO is drive the speed limit. At least in California your car is not required to have a speedometer. That means if the speedometer is off that's not a valid reason to dismiss a citation.

If you try to keep up with the flow of traffic in California you will be going way over the limit. There is no leeway for you going 5 over the limit. The limit is the limit. It has been set by a traffic engineer. That being said I never issued a ticket to anyone that was going less than 10 mph over the limit. YMMV with the Officer that stops you. Some guys take the code as gospel. 

I took one section as gospel, section 4 of the California Penal Code that says to enforce the spirit of the law, not the letter of the law.


----------



## markdi (Jun 16, 2006)

I have never gotten pulled over for keeping pace with the other cars around me.


----------



## MScottz (Jun 16, 2006)

greenLED said:


> I'm sorry, but if the rest of the world wants to get killed on the road, it's their problem, don't drag me into it. I follow the posted speed limit and may exceed it only by 5 miles or so *only* when on the interstate. (and, NO, I am not the type that does 45MPH on the left lane of the interstate either - but I don't buy "let's all speed because it's safer" bandwagon)


 
It is not the speed that caused accidents, but rather the DIFFERENCE in speed between the vehicles. It *IS* safer to go witht hte flow of traffic than to make everyone pass you.


----------



## Alloy Addict (Jun 17, 2006)

The speed limit is not always set by traffic engineers, but by lawmakers. Thus the highway speed limit goes from 55 to 65 or 70. The roads didn't change but the law did.

Many years ago I had the joy of driving on the loop around DC. I was doing the speed limit, but having heart palpitations every other minute because drivers were constantly flying up to my car, getting within inches (and by inches I mean less than 6") of my back bumper. They would honk repeatedly, gesture wildly, and pass me with little to no room to spare. After a few minutes of that I decided to go with the flow, and felt a lot better for the rest of the trip. I was still going a lot slower than many drivers, but I didn't feel like I was going to get rear ended every couple of minutes.

All of this BTW took place in the slow lane. Any accident that day would have been a pile up so my speed would only have had marginal influence on the damage I received, and I certainly felt like my "slow" speed was more likely to cause an accident around me than when I got up to DC speed.

This is a common scenario in many big cities these days, but I hope to never have to drive the loop around DC again.


----------



## Datasaurusrex (Jun 17, 2006)

markdi said:


> maybe for legal or other reasons a leo can not give a opinion on this subject.


I'm not one. I've driven with several off duty LEOs, and I've never known one who actually obeyed the speed limit -- not even close.


----------



## webley445 (Jun 17, 2006)

All depends where you live, road conditions/congestion, and the officer on the road at the time. 

I did a ride along with my local PD last night and it was enlightening.
First off, practically everycar (at least here) has radar in it. The car I was in could clock anyone whether coming or going. Some car have front and rear facing units. Motorcycles have front and rear units that are joystick controlled to clock cars going to opposite direction.
They ALWAYS know how fast you're going. If you come over a hill and see a cop sitting in the median, he already has your speed.

It depends on the cop and how much he will allow for over the limit. Last night we were clocking cars about 300 yards away and he would allow for 10-15 over the limit at this certain location.

Then he busted a guy for having some crack and had to do data entry on the laptop afterwards,so we parked in another median and he allowed for 20 over the limit as he was occupied with the work.

I was told that here in my locale, you could not by law get a ticket for 5mph over, but at an officer's discretion, you could get cited at 6mph over.

Only time anyone was "safe" from the radar was when riding in a pack, and I mean it had to be very closed together traffic. Practically side by side.
If you are just a little too far ahead of the pack you can be singled out by the equipment, same for just barely too far behind.

He also told me that at the radar/laser cert school, you have to learn also to be able to judge speed by eye within 5 mph of actual speed.

They've already got your number out their. Its amatter of time of day and conditions. At 3am, all alone and going 10 mph over you're probably gonna get stopped to see if you're a DUI. At 12 noon everyone else is doing the same so you're safer.
Plus they are really looking for the high numbers like 20 or more over the posted, what they want is to catch those who are being really "unsafe".

Lots of times they will sit somewhere with the lights on to "slow traffic", or maybe they are waiting for something in reference to the incident/call they are on at the time.

As for off duty, most of the guys I know drive like the rest of us.

Sure was funny watching folks "poop" their pants coming over the hill and slowing down fast to get back under the limit.


----------



## Pydpiper (Jun 17, 2006)

In my days of radar detector use I counted on police using the "always on" radar, it always let you know where they were, the ones that scared me were the ones that utilize triggers, those ones were far harder to avoid.
I drive more in a day than an average person, and I have never had a speeding ticket. The only time I do the exact speed limit is when I am near a school or other place that kids frequent.
However, I was on my way to an exam for my real estate licence and was running late last year, I had to make a 40 minute trip in 39 minutes.. I got pulled over for doing 105 in a 60 (it was just at the point where it turned into an 80), when I handed my registration over the guy pointed out that I had never signed my registration and offered me a choice (he was a good cop) said I could have the speeding ticket or the ticket for not signing the registration, which was equally severe. I told him I would take whatever he could write the fastest, the clock was ticking.. He assured me he would be a quick as he could. A few minutes passed, he walked up to my window handed me my licence and registration, said "it's your lucky day, I have to respond to a call" and left.  I pass that spot a couple times a day, and have been doing the speed limit each time.


----------



## Ras_Thavas (Jun 17, 2006)

We probably won't give an opinion because it varies from location to location, and by individual officer's preference. As a general rule, in Virginia Beach a radar cop won't even pull you over unless you are doing more than 9 miles over the limit. In this case, YMMV.


----------



## gorn (Jun 17, 2006)

MScottz said:


> It is not the speed that caused accidents, but rather the DIFFERENCE in speed between the vehicles. It *IS* safer to go witht hte flow of traffic than to make everyone pass you.



Speed has little to do with most accidents. It's the driver not having proper control of the vehicle. If a car "going with the flow" appoaches a vehicle that is driving the limit and hits that car that wouldn't be a speed problem, it would be what we refer to as a HUA problem. (Head Up A..)


----------



## gorn (Jun 17, 2006)

Alloy Addict said:


> The speed limit is not always set by traffic engineers, but by lawmakers. Thus the highway speed limit goes from 55 to 65 or 70. The roads didn't change but the law did.



You are correct there, I am speaking about California, I am not aware of how speeds are set in other States. You can always count on our elected mouth pieces to throw a wrench in the works at some point. Once the National limit was removed the limits went back to what the engeneers set them at. At least in California.


----------



## KC2IXE (Jun 17, 2006)

Then you have towns like Asherokan (sp) NY - on Long Island near Eatons Neck - they are famous - 1MPH over, you WILL get stopped and ticketed - do a rolling stop - you get nailed. Pullout from getting the ticket, and forget to signal doing it (or even pulling IN) - you get nailed. It was a big story when even the mayor of their town got a 1 over ticket from the cops in the towm, his reply? Well I WAS speeding


----------



## CLHC (Jun 17, 2006)

Interesting comments about the 5 miles over the posted speed limit. There's a neighboring city to San Jose that'll ticket you for that. I'm guessing that's how they generate "revenue" for the city their employed in.


----------



## IlluminatingBikr (Jun 18, 2006)

The fact that this discussion exists is one of the reasons I hate speed limits. Yes, the signs list the "maximum" speed, which is technically not to be exceeded, but if you think that most people follow that or that we should follow it, I have no idea what planet you're from.

It seems silly to me that the speed limit can be 40 mph on a road, but realisitcally the maximum speed might be closer to 50. Why have signs that say the speed limit is 40 in the first place, especially if you are going to allow people to go 45 and they do so? I guess the cops must like it because they can technically pull you over for going 41 in a 40 zone, and you're speeding....but we all know you really aren't doing anything wrong.

It seems like a bit of a power trip to me, the way our whole speed limit system is set up. We all go a few miles an hour over the posted limits, and that's totally fine. So why do we have these signs that say otherwise? Why bother with "maximum speed limits" that 5% of people follow?

If traffic is moving at 45mph in a 40mph zone, then why should you feel guilty or worried about the fact that you are "speeding"?

I wish there was a better way to stop people who really are unsafely going too fast, but allow normal drivers to feel comfortable going the speeds that they are traveling at.


----------



## cobb (Jun 22, 2006)

Thanks guys. Sorry some of you have it that rough. I know little to nothing about being an officer, but its my understanding from someone I spoke to a few years ago its basically at the officer descrission. So, the officer could give you a ticket for 1mph over the limit or let you go with a warning or do nothing at all. 

Anyway, been following the flow. I dont necessarly keep up with the pack, I just run with them for a bit and slack off as the pavement and route isnt great for driving flat out in regards to handling. 

Seen quite a few cops on i95 since this thread and unmarked cars. I passed one cop on the side of the highway in a gaggle of cars doing 85 in the 55mph zone. I am guessing 85 as the meter only goes to 85. I do slow on corners, different pavement and when the speed zone changes then speed back up and I slow it down when feeder lanes show up on my right as I like the right lane since I just cruse the innerstate a few exists to get to and from work. 

On city streets, 25,35,45 I stick to the limit. Dont bother asking about school zones, I slow it to less than 25 and of course when the traffic is heavy, weather, visibility, etc. Last thing I want is to get into or cause an accident, which lead to this topic.


----------



## geepondy (Jun 22, 2006)

Definitely at the discretion of the officer and I can base that on my own experiences without reading a single post. In a nutshell I was once given a ticket for going ten miles over the speed limit (65 in 55 zone) and I was only going ten miles over the limit, the officer was not being kind in reducing the speed, I was only doing 65. Yet again at another time I was only given a warning for doing 77 in a 55 mph zone.

Two weeks ago, I was in very rural NH when suddenly the speed limit dropped from 50 mph to 35. A local deputy pulled me over for still going close to 50, 47 or something like that. I thought for sure, having out of state plates I was going to get a ticket but he too only gave me a warning.

From my experiences, I have a hard time figuring out if the cops only want you to drive slower or they need to make money for the department.


----------



## greenlight (Jun 23, 2006)

Great post, Webley!

You should have seen us in the 4x4 vanagon with 1000lbs of gear going 40 up hills in ca. We did our best to let the other cars pass.


----------



## cobb (Jun 27, 2006)

Been fine in the clear going the flow. I was averaging 75-80 on route 288, 95. Midlothian turnpike folks went the limit and I followed. 

I just dont understand why a sudden down pour makes folks drive at a snails pace.  I just went around those suckers and ramped back up to 75 and went about my way.


----------



## Brighteyez (Jun 27, 2006)

Cops are people. And like people in the general population they all vary in the way they approach tasks. A patrol (beat) officer may just want you to travel at a speed that safe for both you, other motorists, and the people living in the area that you're travelling through. If it takes nothing more to let the driver know that they are in excess of the speed limit, then they've accomplished their task in keeping the peace as a peace officer.

An officer whose task is specifically traffic enforcement is likely to be a bit more stringent about issuing citations as that is an expectation of the specific assignment, and of course personalities play a part here as well, and some will operate very close to the book, almost robot like, and more seasoned veterans are more likely able to exercise discretion that will diffuse the situation somewhat (e.g. 'give you a break' on the speed, yet still issue you a citation.)




geepondy said:


> From my experiences, I have a hard time figuring out if the cops only want you to drive slower or they need to make money for the department.


----------



## jayflash (Jun 27, 2006)

Too many drivers are complete, clueless, unthinking, idiots. Always be thinking ahead, aware of what's around you and drive at a speed you are comfortable with. This speed will likely increase as you get more time behind the wheel - maybe not. If you aren't at ease "keeping up" with speeders, then don't go so fast.

I rarely have to stop for turns and traffic signals because I plan ahead. I've never had a brake job in 36 years of driving old cars because I only use them lightly. My passengers are usually nervous with my driving style because their timing skills suck and they don't realize you don't have to stop before turning. Learn to drive like a pro and set a good example.

Too many people drive like they vote. Consider the congestion on the roads and in Washington D.C.


----------



## cobb (Jun 28, 2006)

I nearly crapped my pants today. I was on 195 doing 75 with traffic. Saw a state police car in the inside most lanebehind me. I let off the gas and he just went by and continued about his way. I then gassed it back to 75. 

I have to admit, Ive had no close calls at 85 or more mph, but quite a few just as I exited the highway to 35-25mph zones. Many folks stopping short, switching lanes right in front of you and pulling out in front of you. 

I dont use my brakes that much either, but keep them covered and press the petal enough to turn on the lights. I just learned today when I make turnes the inside rear tire lifts off the ground a few inches. I bet its like that when I hit off ramps too?


----------



## cobb (Jul 23, 2006)

Going with the flow seems ok. Ive passed a few cops in flow of traffic and sitting on the side of the road. No problems. I just wonder how my dad ended up with all his speeding tickets in his life that almos tgot his license revoked.


----------



## cobb (Aug 26, 2006)

Unfreaking believable. I go with the flow, passed a few cop cars, nothing when you would expect something. 

Maybe leos are more human than we give them credit and it would be too difficult to pull over everyone and they just go for the true speeders or those who go faster than the flow? 

Maybe they have an un written rule that on so and so areas, drivers are allowed so much over the limit before they are pulled? 5mph over for 460, 10 mph over for i295 and a good 15 over for i95, 10 over for 288, etc? 

I sure see the advantage of having functioning cruise control as its too easy to get away following the flow. 

Man, makes me feel bad for nagging my dad about the speed limit. Then again hes the one who gets the tickets for 5-6 mph over the limit. The BS tickets as he calls them.


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 26, 2006)

I've thought for a while that the word "limit" should be removed from the speed limits and their signage. For example, "SPEED LIMIT 45MPH" would change to "SPEED 45MPH." To me, this would aim to get people to all drive somewhere around 45MPH. If someone goes 48MPH in a limit-45 zone, that shouldn't be worth a ticket, but someone going 10MPH in that zone should be fined. A "speed" instead of "speed limit" would more accurately define the "flow" discussed here.

I always drive 25MPH or under in 25MPH zones, such as residential areas. You never know when a dog or a cat (or a kid, I guess  ) will dash into the road. I try to be extra-aware in these areas.

On highways, I go with the flow. If there's no one around to flow with, I'll go between five and eight MPH over.

I've been driving for a little over four years with no tickets whatsoever.


----------



## Diesel_Bomber (Aug 26, 2006)

The car you drive makes a big difference, too. Say you're speeding in a group on the freeway and you pass a speed trap. Everyone around you is driving minivans and station wagons and pickup trucks and is just innocuous general traffic. In your van or Mercedes, Cobb, you blend in with traffic just fine. But what if you're driving an arrest-me red Corvette with a blower sticking out of the hood. Guess who gets pulled over?


:buddies:


----------



## PhotonBoy (Aug 26, 2006)

Personally, I believe that following too closely is far more dangerous than exceeding the speed limit by 20 mph or so; otherwise, if something happens to the vehicle in front of you or there's debris on the road, you have very little time to react. When I travel on the highway, I keep up with the pack but leave lots of distance in front of me. In rainy, icy or snowy conditions, I leave even more space.

In Canada, speed signs use a single word 'Maximum' with the speed shown in large numbers below it. All speeds are in km/h. I believe it's this way since it means the same in both official languages.


----------



## depusm12 (Aug 26, 2006)

As a LEO issuing speeding citations depends on a lot of factors, the location where they are speeding, weather conditions, how far over the limit they are going, if there are other vehicles, pedestrians etcetera in the area. Another big factor to me personally is their attitude.


----------



## Blazer (Aug 26, 2006)

From a LEO the only thing you should hear is "Obey the posted limit." It's the only way to guarantee you'll never get a speeding ticket.


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 26, 2006)

Uh, Blazer, I think you're referring to jggonzales's thread in General called "Need light for police work...". This thread has nothing to do with the guy buying a $150 light for his friend... :thinking:

But yes, following the letter of the law is the surest way to avoid a speeding ticket. That's not to say you won't be cited for impeding the flow of traffic, or something, but whatever.

EDIT: You edited that first part out, so never mind, I guess.


----------



## Blazer (Aug 26, 2006)

TigerhawkT3 said:


> Uh, Blazer, I think you're referring to jggonzales's thread in General called "Need light for police work...". This thread has nothing to do with the guy buying a $150 light for his friend... :thinking:
> 
> But yes, following the letter of the law is the surest way to avoid a speeding ticket. That's not to say you won't be cited for impeding the flow of traffic, or something, but whatever.




My bad, had two replies on the go and the kids were going nuts. It's all been corrected.


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 26, 2006)

Blazer said:


> My bad, had two replies on the go and the kids were going nuts. It's all been corrected.


:laughing: Yes, kids will go nuts sometimes!


----------



## NeonLights (Aug 26, 2006)

As many people have said, speed enforcement varies greatly from one area to another. Talk to local LEO's and other experienced local drivers and speeders for what are the best driving habits where you live.

Here in Ohio for example (at least the last time I saw the stats) we have more State Highway Patrol officers per capita than any other state. They take speed and traffic enforcement very seriously, they do have to use fully marked cars with lights though, not unmarked cars for traffic enforcement. In Ohio, on the freeways, while it is possible to get a ticket for 1-9 mph over the limit, no points will be added to your record until you are doing at least 10 mph over, and I've been told by more than one officer in Ohio (and other states) to keep it to under 10 mph over the limit. 

I've travelled by car to more than 40 different states and have been ticketed for speeding in Ohio, Indiana, and Nebraska, but have been ticket free for almost 6 years, even though I still travel 10-15 mph over the limit (even higher out of state). I seldom use a radar/laser detector anymore either (two of my 6-8 tickets were with a good detector functioning). I value my judgement and eyesight over any detector 99% of the time I'm speeding (even over the V1 I used to own), and they haven't let me down years now. For gross, careless speeding (20-30 mph or more over the limit) a detector has some use usefulness, but I seldom speed like that anymore. Here in Ohio laser is the most popular method of speed detection by the HP, and detectors are seldom useful against laser.

Here in Ohio I typically keep it to 10 mph over the limit on freeways, occasionally as high as 12-15 mph over, but usually only if going with the flow of traffic. In the city in 35-50 mph zones, I'll keep it at the limit or sometimes 5 mph over. At least locally, following these guidelines virtually guarantees not getting ticketed.

-Keith


----------



## Diesel_Bomber (Aug 26, 2006)

If you're going to speed on the freeway, the absolute best thing you can get is a CB radio. Truckers and other CB'ers up and down the road know where all the speed traps are long before you get there. Failing that, keep an eye on the trucks. When they're going 55, you better go 55(or whatever the limit is). If the trucks are going faster, it's generally ok to go faster.


:buddies:


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Aug 26, 2006)

I drive with mileage as my main goal. I rarely ever top 66mph even in a 70 zone, but will do 65 in a 60, 60 in a 55 etc.

I too believe the truckers know what's going on, and can be trusted to be doing the right thing when cops are present.

Here in little old Shepherd, the Constables, Sherriffs and DPS triple team our little bit of HWY 59. I do EXACTLY the speed limit around here!!!


----------



## cobb (Aug 26, 2006)

As a new driver who may need to commute, and has safety in mind, I can see where going with the flow and a few mph over the limit can really add up over time. 

I just notice most of those times its fairly near 80 and just puzzles me how the so call revenue generating tickets are no where to be found and what a killing the sate or county the area is could be making.

Thanks for the input. Ive had my co workers say the same.


----------



## PhotonWrangler (Aug 26, 2006)

I've noticed what appears to be a mild form of mass hysteria that happens on freeways every now and then. A cluster of cars will gun it and start traveling around 70-75 in a 60 zone and others behind them will pick up the pace. The group in front drives a little erratically - wild lane changes and such - and the group behind them starts driving a little "looser" also. It's really unnerving when it happens and I usually try to get over to the far right lane, carefully, in case I suddenly have to ditch to avoid a wreck.

Sometimes "going with the flow" is good, but every once and awhile it's downright nuts!


----------



## allthatwhichis (Aug 27, 2006)

Well, I drive 80 miles a day to and from the Orlando, FL area, so I've got a couple of cents to toss in...

I am what I like to call an Offensive Driver, picture a running back during a running play, others term it aggressive. I wouldn't say I have or get road rage, but my blood pressure tends to rise when I drive. I can flick a bird in the direction of an offending driver without looking.   

I suggest going with the flow, or at least be aware and considerate of the other cars, and yes, that also means BEHIND you.  

They are working on a bill here that would make it illegal to stay in the left hand lane... IF the car approaching you from behind is going faster than you (hence approaching  ) AND you can merge to the right lane safely. This is to combat road rage.  It is being held up because the way it is worded it looks like someone obeying the speed limit is in the wrong, BUT it is safer for the car going slower to change lanes. I would think this is common sense, but everyone is entitled to their opinion. Most would say it is safer to do the speed limit. :lolsign: For some reason... j/k 

I AM the *** that is driving 80 to 85 in a 55 on the highway usually offending others. Get it offensive, offending. I can't seem to help it; part of it could be my metabolism. Most of it is that I used to love driving, when it was an optional part of my day. Now, I feel, and this may not be totally true, that I am forced to drive. I understand that statement can be taken many ways... To make it easier, our capitalistic society is based on having a job, need a car to get a job, need a job to keep a car and so on (I know there are alternatives, but this is what I have evolved to so...)... When I was 16 a car meant freedom, at almost 30 I HAVE to have a car to survive, the way I have become accustom, hence I am "forced" to drive... I now loath it to some degree and want to get it over as quickly as possible. There is really only about 10 miles of my trip where it is open road and I can do these speeds... The rest is mainly city driving. 

So I speed excessively on the highway and about 5 to 10 over in town if the location is what I term as safe. One thing we ALL need to understand is that we can only see and experience the world from one perspective... The one just behind YOUR eyeballs and from no where else, yet... We all should drive the way we FEEL safe based on your driving experience. I posted in another thread that I am on my 16th or 17th car. My current 80 miles a day is a lot less than I used to drive, I used to average close to 200 miles a day which is roughly 4 to 5 times what the average driver drives. This amount of experience is what gives me the confidence to drive how I do. 

AND on the days where I am not driving to or from work, and am not in a hurry,  I drive slower and will move out of anybody's way who is wanting to go faster than me, cause I love all things equally! 
:wow: That was a little more than a couple of cents... maybe $0.15. :lolsign:


----------



## pete7226 (Aug 27, 2006)

You should be doing the speed limit. flow of traffic has no legal merit, at least here in Illinois. That being said, as long as youre not going more than 10 over the limit and everyone else is doing the same I can say that in Chicago you will almost never get ticketed unless youre on Lake shore drive and/or acting an @@shole. I've written less than a dozen in eight years. keep in mind you can still be ticketed for driving too fast for conditions even if you are doing the posted speed limit, driving too slow as well. I think this is all common sense right? Evaluate the conditions and go from there.


----------



## cyberhobo (Aug 27, 2006)

I always do the speed limit (or a safe speed according to the conditions) and most seem to always pass me. I would say, 7 out of 10 people speed. I'd like to see more speeding tickets issued! Seems, there is a mad dash to no where. I never understood the drivers that speed to the next red light either. You speeders also drive up my insurance premium and the premiums of other safe drivers.


----------



## Blazer (Aug 27, 2006)

allthatwhichis, :thumbsdow
that is a very selfish way to live and drive, you are endangering the lives of innocent people by actively breaking the law and admitting it proudly. I've seen too many accidents where a nice family was on their way home from church and an agressive driver caused an accident that resulted in someone losing a life or limb. It's not worth it.

My family, my friends, and lots of innocent people obeying the law are travelling hoping to get to their destination safely until someone like you causes an accident. Just because you think you are a good driver (you probably aren't, because good drivers are courteous to others on the road) or have confidence, you may cause a less experienced driver to react to your vehicle in a way that causes an accident.

We target agressive drivers here and I hope to meet up with you someday.:whoopin:

I really hope your post was a joke and not reality, but my post was not a joke.


----------



## allthatwhichis (Aug 27, 2006)

No, it's not a joke. I am selfish, but... I conside me more than just "me". I am very aware of the area around me. You'd have to know me. Driving is what I am best at, and I'm usually good at everything I put my mind to. I'm also more courtious that most on the road. I'm not being callous, or cocky, though it may sound that way, this is just my obsevation. 

That's why I mentioned the law. The state has realized that many accidents are caused by people, like me, going around slower drivers in the left lane. I also don't concider myself an "aggessive" driver, although a few years ago I got pulled by an undercover deputy sheriff and chewed a new hole...




I drive better in that rain cause of that. But drivers more aggressive than I also usually start their rage at a slow dirver in the left hand lane. When I'm not in a hurry, I'm the first to yeild the left hand lane to anyone going even remotly faster than me, AND am usually only doing 5 to 10 over. When I go to work there is about 10 to 15 miles into Orlando that is open highway. This is where I go all out. You'd also have to experience traffic here. FHP has been on the news, there are concerened about people going over 100 mph. I'm not really that bad relativly.



I just don't sugarcoat it. My philophsy is that I treat everyone as if they were me. If I am in your way I'll move, if you're in mine...

I also use my blinker as much as possible... It seems that's an option some people chose not to include on some cars.

I'm probably the nicest guy I know unless... I'm behind the wheel. I'll admit that I'm not proud of the aditude I have when driving, but I haven't really wanted to drive for years either. I've been trying to get my work to let me telecommute for two years. I actually just set up my VPN last night, ironic



, but it's not so I can telecommute. It is in case of emergency.



If I could help it I would only drive... no I wouldn't drive at all. Maybe get into racing. I'm not just talking trash about my driving. If I would have planned my life a little better I'd be driving an Indy car. NASCAR's perpetual left turn doesn't seem too exciting too me. But I would turn down a chance to do it. 

Again, I am very aware of what is around me. The person in the next car is just as important and special as I am, probably more. I will treat them as me because that is my belief. I also have complete faith in myself. That's the important part. And, if something happens... wasn't it supposed to?

I don't want to turn this into anything nasty. I'm just being honet about myself. We all have waht some consider flaws. It's all about perspective. There is no "wrong" given one's view or the world. And I know many consider the way I drive the "wrong" way to drive. Good, that's their, your view of the world given your perspective. You won't change mine. I am doing my best to try and make it possible for me not to drive at all; at least not where I'll be in a hurry. Pray for me. If not telecommuting the lotto will work. :rock:


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 27, 2006)

Most of the Interstate highway system was designed with speeds of 100 mph (much more in most cases with some minor realignments) in mind once automotive technology caught up (which is has). The limits were set at mostly 65 to 75 in the late 1950s based on the 95th percentile speed at the time. Unfortunately, we went from engineered to legislated speed limits once localities saw how much money there was to be made from speeding tickets. At least regarding limited access highways most people speed because the limit is set too low for current automotive and road technology. If we were to go back to 95th percentile limits we probably wouldn't even have threads like this.

Inconsistent enforcement has obfuscated the issue even more. Not only are limits set 20, 30 even 40 mph too low in many cases, but random enforcement via individual officer's "trip points" has basically made posted limits meaningless, particularly on limited access highways. In some places you'll get a ticket for going a few mph over the 65 mph limit. On others with technically lower 55 mph limits you can drive 100 mph with impunity so long as that's the speed of the flow and you stay in your lane. There is no rhyme or reason to both the enforcement and the actual numbers. Setting speed limits should go back to being solely the province of the traffic engineer, and so-called "state maximum" speed limits should be done away with entirely. If the 95th percentile speed (and hence speed limit) turns out to be 100 mph on a given stretch of road so be it. Also, I'm a firm believer that you should _never_ be ticketed solely for speeding but only if it is in conjunction with some other more dangerous traffic violation such as running a red light, switching lanes incessantly to maintain your speed, passing on the right, etc.

There is another good reason to do away with legislated speed limits. For the better part of the first two centuries the law had no remedy unless you committed definite personal or property damages. So-called preventative laws designed to supposedly make things safer have had penalties levied on people because what they were doing was construed as dangerous in the eyes of the legislature and/or the law enforcement, whether or not this was factually the case. This has resulted in the erosion of respect for the law in general, even those laws which do make sense. Speed limits which 90% of the population routinely ignores with no harm have caused these same people to ignore red lights, lane discipline, and even common courtesy to the tune of 50,000 dead/2 million hurt each year. It's time to set limits again on a rational rather than emotional basis.


----------



## cheapo (Aug 27, 2006)

cobb.... your wheel lifts off the ground?? are you driving an SUV?

-David


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

allthat? you need to get psychiatric help. You are full of excuses, blindness, and rationalisations. I think some, no, alot, of cognitive therapy would make you a happier healthier person. It would also help keep the rest of us drivers alive.

rationalisation
n 1: (psychiatry) a defense mechanism by which your true motivation is concealed by explaining your actions and feelings in a way that is not threatening [syn: rationalization] 2: the cognitive process of making something seem consistent with or based on reason.


----------



## cobb (Aug 27, 2006)

cheapo, that was an extended body ford e250 van. It feels very stable, doesnt roll or pitch like the benz does. I had no idea that was taking place either. 

allthatwhichis, thanks, guys like you help me to go over the limit. At the least the cops have two guys to pull over, so I will have some company in jail, if we arent pulled over, we shave quite a bit of time off the commute. Seems pointless to go the limit if it isnt enforced as it can shave time off of a commute. 

Ive been boxed in a few times and just go with the flow. Somtimes I wait for someone to come up on my bumper or pass me, then I come up to their bumper and use them as a cop shield. 

One day all traffic was to a crawl, other than the far left lane and I was the only guy in the lane far as I could see in front. I kept it at 45 for fear of someone pulling in front of me or something around the bend. An ambulance came up behind me and I finally after slowing him down got into the middle lane to let him by. I was tempted to floor it and go in front of him, but I didnt feel like going to jail or being in a reck with an ambulance behind me. I then saw a truck dodge out of the center to left lane behind him and I went too. Man, I must of shaved 15 minutes off of my commute, not to mention the time lost in the traffic jam. 

I check my lights and tires weekly to make sure they are aired up and are working.


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

cobb said:


> <snip> I was tempted to floor it and go in front of him, but I didnt feel like going to jail or being in a reck with an ambulance behind me.<snip>



hard to believe you guys aren't just playing a baiting game here, but if you aren't I'd remind you that a "reck" or jail aren't the only possible results of your drivng behavior; you could injure or kill yourselves and/or others. Hopefully you will kill yourselves alone, or more mercifully; disable yourselves enough so that you can't get behind a wheel again before you hurt anyone else.

btw if you do cause an accident and then appear before a judge, do you suppose his seeing your posts here might affect his judgement of your case? 
:scowl: :whoopin:


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 27, 2006)

When I find myself going faster than ten or fifteen miles above the speed limit, sometimes it still feels "natural," or slow enough. However, I usually try to envision the conversation with the LEO who stops me:

"Well, officer, I was only going 15MPH above the limit."
"That's illegal."
"Well... I... uh... that's true."

As I've said before in this thread, I think it should be a "speed," not a "speed limit," because while I would feel pretty safe doing 70 in a 65, I wouldn't feel very safe doing 35 (assuming light traffic, flow of 70, etc.).

P.S.: Uh... wow. This thread has sure gotten pretty angry. The moderators can get upset with even an indirect, innocent, unintended insinuation of other CPFers needing psychiatric help or medication. (I know because I once said that if one CPFer's particular experience had happened to me, I MYSELF would need to increase my dosage, and there was unpleasantness.) Flat-out telling someone that they're in dire need of psychiatric help is pretty much begging for a scolding from a mod. Let's keep this conversation CPF-like, i.e. friendly and congenial. :grouphug:


----------



## cobb (Aug 27, 2006)

Ive never considered an accident with another person, I am too focused on driving for that and drive within my cars limits. My main concern is hitting an animal or deer along some back road and totaling the car or hurting myself. 

What would a judge say or do? I am sure when he finds out Ive only had my license for 4 months and was a former blind guy and wheelchair user it would be suspended if not some jail time and if its my fault, am likely to get a hefty civil suit against me too for the same reasons. 

What was your line of thinking that a judge would do?


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

cobb said:


> What was your line of thinking that a judge would do?



..assuming it is your fault since we were talking about your self-described wreckless driving behavior; I'd like to think he'd revoke your license, and if you hurt anyone; a couple years to think it over, at least..if you kill someone? I'm not pro-death penalty, but you must be kept off the road somehow, and so I might have to reconsider my position.


Tigey, recommending a person see a pysychiatrist shouldn't be any more insulting than telling someone who is bleeding profusely to see a doctor.. now, assuming the responsibilities of a doctor and telling a person to take medicine or increase the dose is presumptive and antagonistic, as no one who isn't a doctor can do that in a therapeutic manner..
thanks for throwing the gasoline, but there isn't any fire..


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 27, 2006)

TedTheLed said:


> ..assuming it is your fault since we were talking about your self-described wreckless driving behavior; I'd like to think he'd revoke your license, and if you hurt anyone; a couple years to think it over, at least..if you kill someone? I'm not pro-death penalty, but you must be kept off the road somehow, and so I might have to reconsider my position.
> 
> 
> Tigey, recommending a person see a pysychiatrist shouldn't be any more insulting than telling someone who is bleeding profusely to see a doctor.. now, assuming the responsibilities of a doctor and telling a person to take medicine or increase the dose is presumptive and antagonistic, as no one who isn't a doctor can do that in a therapeutic manner..
> thanks for throwing the gasoline, but there isn't any fire..


Gasoline? I threw no gasoline. I was actually trying to distance the gasoline from a... let's call it a fire hazard.

I didn't tell anyone to do anything. I was talking only about what _I_ would do for _myself_.

Are YOU a doctor?

Yes, it is insulting to tell someone they need psychiatric help. Mental instability is a BIT more touchy a subject (and usually a lot less obvious) than bleeding.

Also, notice that I myself wasn't giving you a scolding; I was simply warning of the possibility of its occurence.

Jeez, ya try posting something friendly and helpful, I even threw in a grouphug smiley, and someone bites your head off. What's up with that? 

P.S.: In reference to the snippet below -


TedTheLed said:


> ...
> I'm not pro-death penalty, but you must be kept off the road somehow, and so I might have to reconsider my position.
> ...


I'm not touching that one with a ten-foot pole.


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 27, 2006)

TedTheLed said:


> Tigey, recommending a person see a pysychiatrist shouldn't be any more insulting than telling someone who is bleeding profusely to see a doctor..


The difference is that the doctor can help the person bleeding profusely 99.99% of the time. I question the value of psychiatry at all, especially the modern trend of just prescribing psychoactive drugs. This is coming from someone who has seen a couple of relatives far worse off after "treatment" by a psychiatrist than before. As to whether anyone in this thread has "issues", I'd say that's both too subjective as well as dependent on societal context. In general people tend to think those who think differently than they do or those who don't follow the mores of the society they live in as having issues. I tend to think any such discussions are irrelevant to the topic at hand as well as distracting.

If we want to have a clear cut definition of what constitutes sociopathic behavoir let's stick to actions which definitely hurt someone. "Almosts" don't count. By this definition sticking a knife in someone's chest or ramming your car into them is sociopathic. Going over the speed limit isn't unless you're so determinated to do so regardless of prevailing traffic conditions that it causes an accident (again, _almost_ doesn't count).


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 27, 2006)

jtr1962 said:


> The difference is that the doctor can help the person bleeding profusely 99.99% of the time. I question the value of psychiatry at all, especially the modern trend of just prescribing psychoactive drugs. This is coming from someone who has seen a couple of relatives far worse off after "treatment" by a psychiatrist than before. As to whether anyone in this thread has "issues", I'd say that's both too subjective as well as dependent on societal context. In general people tend to think those who think differently than they do or those who don't follow the mores of the society they live in as having issues. I tend to think any such discussions are irrelevant to the topic at hand as well as distracting.
> 
> If we want to have a clear cut definition of what constitutes sociopathic behavoir let's stick to actions which definitely hurt someone. "Almosts" don't count. By this definition sticking a knife in someone's chest or ramming your car into them is sociopathic. Going over the speed limit isn't unless you're so determinated to do so regardless of prevailing traffic conditions that it causes an accident (again, _almost_ doesn't count).


You know, that made a lot of sense to me. Nice. :goodjob:


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

makes no sense to me. :thumbsdow

this person was bragging about chronic speeding up to 30 miles over the limit, tail-gating just to show aggression,, and purposely blocking or slowing ambulance traffic, taking corners so fast that his tire lifts off the road, among other transgressions, and for no other purpose than to "shave a few minutes off the commute," I think persons like this who show a blatant disregard for the safety of others, who seem to even be proud of themselves for it, are sick, and a danger to themselves and others, and should be kept off the road before they injure or kill someone.


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 27, 2006)

Hey Ted,
Was that directed toward me, cobb, or jtr1962? :thinking:

No offense, but chill.


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

if you read the thread you'd know who I was referring to. 
you, and your "I wasn't throwing gasoline" is so disingenuous I won't even respond.


----------



## cobb (Aug 27, 2006)

Guys, weve gone off course here, I was wondering as the driving manual does not clearly state, do you go with the flow if its over the speed limit and the question was directed to police officers here on this board. 

Yes, I have found the flow of traffic exceeds the 85 mph limit on either vehicle I have own. Makes me ask whats the unposted limit. 

Ted the led
I never said anything about tailgating, thats rather stupid to do without abs. I use a speeder as cop bate then drive behind him so I am in the flow when I am out of the flow. 

I did briefly block an ambulance as the traffic in the center and right lane was haulted. I just wished you would of suggested to go faster or something. I kept slowing and managed to pull into the center lane, let it by, then went back into the left lane behind the ambulance and a few cars which were between me and the ambulance. 

I was unaware I was experiencing wheel lift pulling off an exit ramp to a road. That was two days before I quit driving the van. Ever pull out onto a road with a 45mph limit with traffic on a steep grade to a level one? 

If you commute an hour, you can shave a lot of time off of that commute if you can legally and safely travel faster 10-15 over the limit than the posted limit, which is the whole point of the thread to start with. 

I definitely want you to testify if I go to court, you would make a great character witness.


----------



## Blazer (Aug 27, 2006)

I can probably say with confidence (without paper notes in front of me) that 99% of all the Motor Vehicle Collission scenes I've attended, speed has been a factor. If it wasn't the primary factor then it was definitely a contributing factor. Speed Kills. If you're late, you should have left earlier. If you have to drive long commuting distances, maybe you should re-evaluate your priorities or investigate another mode of transportation. There is no excuse for actively violating the law, and saying "well everyone does it" is a cop out. Excuses are like a$$holes, everybody's got one.

We would all be safer if everybody just slowed down. The world has gone and gotten itself in a big damn hurry for everything.


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 27, 2006)

TedTheLed said:


> if you read the thread you'd know who I was referring to.
> you, and your "I wasn't throwing gasoline" is so disinginuous I won't even respond.


I did read the entire thread - your post was simply vague. "Disingenuous" - are you calling me a liar? I don't know about you, but I generally try NOT to offend people. You seem to be going out of your way to do so. I just can't figure out why you'd do that...

Seriously - chill out. Try to relax. I'll bet that the posters you chewed out wouldn't have been so forthright and trusting if they knew you'd have such a hostile reaction.

Indeed - speed kills. If every driver talked on a cell phone, cut people off, drank, etc., but only drove 5MPH, we wouldn't have any auto injuries. However, if every driver was responsible, alert, attentive, curteous, etc., but drove quickly, we'd have a lot fewer injuries than we do. It's when speed is combined with poor driving that cars become dangerous.

A speed limit is a good way to cut down on the speed+poor-drivng accidents. However, getting pulled over for going 10% over a speed limit can be quite irritating to a good driver for whom speed isn't as big of an issue as it could be with more accident-prone motorists.

Most LEOs act like normal people - if someone's going a bit too fast but not driving like a lunatic, they'll let them go, but a drifting/swerving car going dangerously fast will be stopped.


----------



## NeonLights (Aug 27, 2006)

Blazer said:


> I can probably say with confidence (without paper notes in front of me) that 99% of all the Motor Vehicle Collission scenes I've attended, speed has been a factor. If it wasn't the primary factor then it was definitely a contributing factor. Speed Kills. If you're late, you should have left earlier. If you have to drive long commuting distances, maybe you should re-evaluate your priorities or investigate another mode of transportation. There is no excuse for actively violating the law, and saying "well everyone does it" is a cop out. Excuses are like a$$holes, everybody's got one.


 .....and I can say with confidence that there is a 99% chance you are biased and incorrect in that statement that "speed kills". Statements like that are based ignorance, no matter what you do for a living or what your experience is. Speed may be a contributing factor, but most of the time it is not the primary factor or cause of accidents. It may make the injuries worse, but most accidents aren't caused simply by going over the speed limit. Many people just get brainwashed with all of the "speed kills" rhetoric and throw reason out the window (even some LEO's and EMT's)


----------



## PhotonWrangler (Aug 27, 2006)

Driving habits can be an emotionally charged topic. Can we keep this thread civil and avoid any personal attacks?


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 27, 2006)

PhotonWrangler said:


> Driving habits can be an emotionally charged topic. Can we keep this thread civil and avoid any personal attacks?


Oh, how I wish we could. Let's give civility a whirl.


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 27, 2006)

Blazer said:


> I can probably say with confidence (without paper notes in front of me) that 99% of all the Motor Vehicle Collission scenes I've attended, speed has been a factor. If it wasn't the primary factor then it was definitely a contributing factor.


Of course speed is a factor in collisions. You _need_ a speed differential to have a collision in the first place. I submit that this is the primary problem, not the absolute value of the speed. Rearending someone doing 80 if you're going 100 produces the same collision forces as doing 65 and rearending someone doing 45. You also have the same amount of time to react at a given speed differential. The fact is that within the general "flow" of traffic there is maybe 15 or 20 mph variation in speed. It is those outside this range who cause the most problems whether they're slower or faster. Someone who insists on going 55 mph when the flow is 85 is just as much a hazard as someone going 115. Probably more so because those who drive slow tend to be timid, marginal drivers to start with. I'd much rather have higher limits and more importantly higher _minimum_ speeds so as to get this last group off the roads for good.



> Speed Kills. If you're late, you should have left earlier. If you have to drive long commuting distances, maybe you should re-evaluate your priorities or investigate another mode of transportation.


I won't even dignify the "speed kills" part of your post with a response other than to say that it's inflammatory rhetoric typically used when someone has run out of logical arguments. As to rest, while I agree in principal a balance must be struck between efficient transportation and safety. The prevailing traffic flow represents this balance, and until the early 1970s this was in fact used to set rational, relatively safe speed limits. We should return to this practice ASAP. Unfortunately, there is considerable inertia to do so because it would put a lot of LEOs and traffic court personel out of a job. It would also effective kill many small towns which exist mainly on speeding ticket revenue.

I'll also agree in principal about investigating alternate modes of transport. Unfortunately, and way off-topic to the thread, every high-speed rail project in the US has been killed off by vested interests like airliners, oil companies, and auto makers. We would all be better off if cars were used solely to tool around town at low speeds while intercity distances were covered in 200 mph trains. Sadly, that's not reality. For now the car is all we have, and the US is a big country. If anything we should be at the forefront of advocating safe, high-speed running. I personally think it's an embarassment that in Europe where things are closer limits on highways are set at a more logical 120 to 160 km/hr (75 to 99 mph) while we in the US endure 55 to 75 mph limits. IMHO we should either build a high-speed rail network or raise limits to keep in step with the capabilities of modern cars and roads.



> There is no excuse for actively violating the law, and saying "well everyone does it" is a cop out. Excuses are like a$$holes, everybody's got one.


Legislated speed limits are wrong. They have done more to set back road safety than even SUVs. If the law is wrong you get active civil disobedience. This is exactly what we are seeing here.



> We would all be safer if everybody just slowed down. The world has gone and gotten itself in a big damn hurry for everything.


While I sometimes also feel people are too rushed these days consider the real ramifications of what you're saying-societal stagnation. It is our nature to do things faster, better, smarter. To slow down our transportation network because a minority feels uncomfortable is no better than dictating that we should all dress a certain way, or eat the same food, or follow the same religion. Sadly, this minority has called the shots for the last 30+ years. The total cost of these lower speeds in terms of wasted man-hours, needless speeding tickets, wasted fuel (traffic flow breaks down more easily if you try to force it to go at anything other than it's natural speed-traffic engineering 101), etc. has added up to many hundreds of billions of dollars. A growing segment of society is finally seeing the light. My guess is within a decade the era of legislated limits will finally end. And we'll probably see the end of human-controlled driving within two or three decades, thus making threads like this moot.


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

jtr1962 said:


> Of course speed is a factor in collisions. You _need_ a speed differential to have a collision in the first place. I submit that this is the primary problem, not the absolute value of the speed. Rearending someone doing 80 if you're going 100 produces the same collision forces as doing 65 and rearending someone doing 45. You also have the same amount of time to react at a given speed differential.



wrong wrong wrong. if you are doing 100mph and hit someone, you then are both doing 100mph, ok maybe 90mph, out of control, thousands of pounds of steel careening down the highway, or flying off of it, and on the way to killing some innocent bystanders. But that's the dangerous nature of your thought, it doesn't allow for the rights of others to go on living..

and it's absolute NONSENSE that you have the same time to react at 100 mph as at a lower speed.. THAT IS HOW SPEED KILLS!


----------



## NeonLights (Aug 27, 2006)

Ok, so you are driving along in rural Ontario at night and you are doing 110 kph in a 100 kph speed zone. A bull moose wanders out in the road and you hit it and die. Did you die because you were doing 10 kph (about 6 mph) over the speed limit? Did speed kill you? No, hitting the moose did. This is how many biased people continue the myth that "speed kills". Many times the officer will write down that the motorist was speeding, and the motorist died, so therefore the illogical conclusion is derived that "speed kills". 

Failing to avoid an accident at 100 mph doesn't mean that speed caused the accident. Failing to avoid a collision with the other vehicle caused the accident. Was speed a factor? Possibly, was it the cause? No. Driving to fast for the conditions is the cause for many accidents, but just driving 100 mph isn't always too fast for the conditions, on the same hand, sometimes driving 55 mph in a 65 mph zone is too fast for the conditions if it is foggy or the weather is bad.

-Keith


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 27, 2006)

Poor moose.

Have any of you heard of those NV/IR/something displays projected onto the windshields of some luxury cars? They purportedly had several times the range of headlights. I think there was an article in Popular Science about them a few years ago. If that technology is still in use, it has probably improved. Could be something handy to look into.


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

you're going 65 miles an hour and you see the moose and veer out of the way... you're going 100 mph and you don't have enough time to veer out of the way and you hit the moose and die. (the moose is fine, yea moose!)
or
you are going 65 mph and veer out of the way and lose control of the car in a ditch you didn't see and roll over and survive.
or
you are going 100 mph and veer out of the way, hit the ditch and roll over and hit a tree and die. if you weren't going so fast you wouldn't have hit the tree and died, and the moose wouldn't be peeing on your car..
SPEED KILLS.


----------



## NeonLights (Aug 27, 2006)

TedTheLed said:


> you're going 65 miles an hour and you see the moose and veer out of the way... you're going 100 mph and you don't have enough time to veer out of the way and you hit the moose and die. (the moose is fine, yea moose!)
> or
> you are going 65 mph and veer out of the way and lose control of the car in a ditch you didn't see and roll over and survive.
> or
> ...



Gee, how can you argue with logic like that? You can't, because it isn't anything even resembling logic or reason.


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 27, 2006)

TedTheLed said:


> wrong wrong wrong. if you are doing 100mph and hit someone, you then are both doing 100mph, ok maybe 90mph, out of control, thousands of pounds of steel careening down the highway, or flying off of it, and on the way to killing some innocent bystanders. But that's the dangerous nature of your thought, it doesn't allow for the rights of others to go on living..


And is thousands of pounds of steel careening around at a legal 70 or 60 that much safer? Even 10 mph is enough to kill a pedestrian or cyclist, for example. If you want absolute safety then either don't ride in cars or go within the limits of your federally mandated 5 mph bumpers.

And it's a fact that the majority of fatal collisions occur not on the limited access highways which are the main topic of this thread, but rather on rural two lane highways where speeds are lower, but still high enough to kill, and which have many more opportunities for accidents (intersections, driveways, animals, pedestrians). Collisions on limited access highways are exceedingly rare. I don't see why so much energy has been focused by so-called safety advocates in that area as opposed to the much more dangerous rural two lane highways.



> and it's absolute NONSENSE that you have the same time to react at 100 mph as at a lower speed.. THAT IS HOW SPEED KILLS!


If the closing speed is the same you have the same time to react. Most collisions are with other vehicles, not stationary objects. I'll be the first to admit that deviating from the flow by a large margin is what causes accidents in the first place but it works both ways-too fast OR too slow. However, if you stick with the flow your ability to avoid a collision remains the same whether the flow is going 45 or 100. Hitting stationary objects like moose is exceeding rare and shouldn't be a basis for lower speed limits. This seems to be the main thrust of your argument.

Just out of curiosity have you ever taken a transportation engineering course or read any studies on this subject? I've done both. And also just out of curiosity why are those who are so vocal against sane limits consider 1950s/60s era speed limits in the 65 mph range "safe". Why not the 1930s/40s limits of 45 mph or so? After all, if 65 is safer than 90 then 45 _must_ be safer than 65.

P.S. I had a relative of mine who insisted on going no faster than sixteen (16) mph no matter the road or traffic conditions. Perhaps he based this on the fact that this was a common speed when he first learned to drive. Nevertheless, this behavoir persisted until his death in the 1960s, including on limited access highways where everyone else was going 65 or better. The guy had more accidents than the rest of our known relatives combined, including those with a penchant for driving at triple digit speeds most of the time. I have no idea how many people were killed or hurt trying to avoid him, but it had to have been a lot. Moral of the story-times change. Just because your grandfather drove at 55 or 60 doen't mean that it's prudent or safe to do so nowadays.

P.P.S. I don't drive at all or have a license or a car. First off they're not really needed in NYC. Second, growing up in the era of a national 55 mph limit pretty much got me disgusted with the whole concept of driving. I used to take commuter trains to college which ran at twice that speed.


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Aug 27, 2006)

We have deer around here... therefor I won't go over 60 on hwy 59 after dark.

I know I've explained this before. I rarely exceed 65 and use cruise control extensively. When I come up on a slower vehicle, and I will! I know how close and how fast others are coming up behind me. If it's possible I pass. If not I slow down until the coast is clear. The only time I will impeed knowingly is at the south end of Shepherd, and at the turn into my neighborhood.

Driving like I do has made my last 4 fillups avg. nearly 20.5... in an 8K# aerodynamically challenged truck! I ain't about to change!!!

I do my absolute best NOT to impeed others.


----------



## cobb (Aug 27, 2006)

FYI, my driving instructor, BTW I passed his class, said you can swerge and movernure faster and safer without hitting the brakes than doing so. You also load up and cause cross traction on the tires, braking and steering vs just steering. 

Yeah, this thread has ran its course, it could be locked at any time. Sounds like my next car needs functioning cruse control, although I fear that may lead to being a passenger than a driver and cause an accident. 

When I am in the right line I just steer with my fingers puttering along at or slight below the limit, going 10 or so over in the left, I drive with both hands and sitting up right in my seat. 

As for hitting mooses, deers, etc, you need to slow it down to 35 or less to prevent it from going through your windshield, totaling your car and killing you. 

A deer hitting you at 5mph can easily dent a quarter panel and take out a lamp assembly. I know first hand from my dad slowing to a stop for a heard of deers and one hit him. 

No advice for when you cant pull over and an ambulance is behind you blowing and sirening? If a cop is behind you is this when you slow to 45 and single to turn when you can pull over?


----------



## pete7226 (Aug 27, 2006)

The law says observe posted speed limit. Not flow of traffic. At least in Illinois. You can also get ticketed for doing the speed limit or under it. So youre evaluation of driving/hazardous conditions is also a standard that you are expected to be cognizant off. But this usually works against you rather than in your defense. i know everyone follows the "flow of traffic" motto, but this actually has 0 legal merit.


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

jtr1962 said:


> And is thousands of pounds of steel careening around at a legal 70 or 60 that much safer(than 100 mph)?


 Yes! exactly the point.


jtr1962 said:


> I don't see why so much energy has been focused by so-called safety advocates in that area as opposed to the much more dangerous rural two lane highways.


 doesn't make any difference to me Im just talking about speeding.




jtr1962 said:


> If the closing speed is the same you have the same time to react. Most collisions are with other vehicles, not stationary objects.


Here's where you miss the point again. 'Most collisions' don't matter to me. (where did you get that stat anyway?) Stationary objects matter. One of them might be me. Might be a tree. Kill you just as dead.



jtr1962 said:


> I'll be the first to admit that deviating from the flow by a large margin is what causes accidents in the first place


 then my work is done here....


jtr1962 said:


> However, if you stick with the flow your ability to avoid a collision remains the same whether the flow is going 45 or 100. Hitting stationary objects like moose is exceeding rare and shouldn't be a basis for lower speed limits. This seems to be the main thrust of your argument.


 yup.



jtr1962 said:


> P.P.S. I don't drive at all or have a license or a car. First off they're not really needed in NYC. Second, growing up in the era of a national 55 mph limit pretty much got me disgusted with the whole concept of driving. I used to take commuter trains to college which ran at twice that speed.



D'OH!!!!


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 27, 2006)

cobb said:


> No advice for when you cant pull over and an ambulance is behind you blowing and sirening? If a cop is behind you is this when you slow to 45 and single to turn when you can pull over?



ok ok I misread this in your story, sorry. maybe you did all you could do. ..you sure there was no space to pull over to the left?


----------



## Diesel_Bomber (Aug 27, 2006)

Cobb-

You might consider driving with both hands firmly on the wheel and sitting upright, ready to take evasive action, _all_ the time.


:buddies:


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Aug 27, 2006)

Cobb, I ain't terribly likely to get caught up in that scenerio. But if I did, I'd be likely to foot it! And get the he77 out of the Ambulances way!

Here it's common to hit the shoulder of the road and let 'em go...


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 28, 2006)

TedTheLed said:


> Here's where you miss the point again. 'Most collisions' don't matter to me. (where did you get that stat anyway?) Stationary objects matter. One of them might be me. Might be a tree. Kill you just as dead.


The stat I mentioned came from one of the many papers on the subject of speed limits which I've read. Interestingly, the majority by far of collisions on limited access highways occur at entrances and exits because of the greater disparity in speeds. In between there are almost _none_ statistically speaking, and most of those actually involve only one vehicle. Typically these in between exit accidents occur either because the driver falls asleep behind the wheel, and lands in a ditch, or hits an animal. Usually the former happens. Collisions with stationary objects other than animals occur, but not in any statistically significant amount. This is why no traffic engineer ever takes them into account except on roads where they could be expected to occur (a winding, tree-lined two lane highway, for example). Also, whether you're going 65 or 200 when you hit a tree is pretty much irrelevant. Anything much over about 30 will probably kill you. Same thing for hitting moose. As for the lower speeds give you more time to react part of the argument, again this is irrelevant since the moose can climb an embankment so as to suddenly appear ten feet in front of you. Not much chance to do anything here regardless of speed so any arguments in favor of lower speeds in this context basically boil down to having less mangled corpses. Any speed not likely to result in fatalities would be intolerably low for today's society.

The best policy to reduce the already low number of deaths on limited access highways further might be to keep the lower speed limits in the vicinity of entrances or exits, and raise them to the 95th percentile everywhere else. For all we know the 95th percentile speed might already be much lower around entrances or exits, thus making for a consistent speed limit policy everywhere. Oh, and recollect data at least every five years so as to adjust limits up or down as needed. If the majority want lower limits they'll effectively vote for them by driving slower. Ditto for higher limits.

I thought a review of the reasons I learned for having speed limits might be appropriate:

1) *To stop before the next signal so as to avoid rear-end collisions with a stopped vehicle.* This is mostly applicable to railways where stopping distances can be many thousands of feet. For the purposes of this thread it is non-applicable since limited access highways have no signals.

2) *To avoid leaving a curved path.* Basically you don't want to exceed a vehicle's ability to follow a curved path. Usually there is a built-in margin of safety in case of less than ideal adhesion conditions. This is sometimes applicable on roads with fairly sharp turns. In the case of most limited access highways, especially the Interstates, the curves are so gentle that adhesion limits wouldn't be reached until well in excess of 150 mph.

3) *To avoid exceeding the dynamic limits of the vehicle.* Every vehicle becomes unstable/unsafe past a certain speed even on a straight road. You want to avoid operating in an area where this instability exists. Modern automobiles are kept under the region of instability by design-either through limited engine power or a governer. Therefore, there is no need to consider this factor when setting limits.

4) *To avoid exceeding the heat limits of the vehicle's tires/brakes.* Usually by design a modern car will have tires capable of running continuously at the maximum speed the engine can propel the car at, and brakes capable of stopping from full speed without overheating. This makes this factor irrelevant when setting limits as well.

5) *To avoid situations where the visibility is less than the stopping distance.* Once in a while this is a factor, but rarely on limited access highways with gentle slopes and curves. Usually you can see for thousands of feet, giving plenty of time to stop.

6) *To be able to stop for an unexpected stationary obstacle.* Usually the obstacle is a wild animal but rarely is there any speed which will allow avoidance all the time while still allowing efficient movement of traffic. Therefore, this factor doesn't merit consideration on limited access highways but often does on local roads where much lower limits of 30 mph or less can be tolerated.

7) *To have uniformity in vehicle speeds so as to reduce the chance of collisions.* Self-explanatory.

Of these 7, only #7 is applicable to most limited access highways. In most cases maximum curvature speed, visibility speed, and even vehicle instability speed far exceed most vehicles' maximum speeds. Therefore, obtaining uniformity of flow is simply an exercise in adjusting the traffic flow to the speed of the vehicles with the lowest maximum speeds. By definition these slowest vehicles are intermixed with traffic, and they in fact dictate the flow. This leads us right back again to the 95th percentile since it is found that the disparity in speeds between the 5th and 95th percentile rarely exceeds 30 mph, or 15 mph from the mean. Often traffic will be traveling even less than the maximum speed of the slowest vehicles due to weather, curvature, or other conditions but the same 95th percentile math still applies.

Also note that in _none_ of these cases is it possible for anybody not technically qualified to set a reasonable speed limit. In the case of #1 through #6 one must be intimately familiar with the path in question as well as the design parameters of all vehicles likely to operate on it. In the case of #7 one must at least be aware of the maximum speeds of the slowest vehicles likely to operate on the path, and the speed distribution of all vehicles. Basically in a nutshell that makes my case against present day legislated speed limits, and even more so against the seemingly arbitrary enforcement of those limits by equally unqualified LEOs.


----------



## Blazer (Aug 28, 2006)

jtr1962 said:


> Also, whether you're going 65 or 200 when you hit a tree is pretty much irrelevant. Anything much over about 30 will probably kill you.



:shakehead
What a joke. I've seen vehicles hit concrete light standards at 30mph and the driver walks away. I've seen vehicles hit concrete light standards at 125mph and all that was left of the driver was his liver (it was the only peice big enough to actually identify it as part of a human).

If you don't agree with the law run for public office, don't say "I'm not going to obey it because I don't agree with it." That only endangers others.

BTW, I love running radar or other traffic enforcement. It's very satisfying to give a ticket to someone doing 150 km/h in a posted max 100 km/h zone and have him complain that there are better things we should be doing than giving tickets to "good people" like him. He had also been drinking and had 4 passengers in the back seat, none of which were wearing seatbelts. (actually to clarify, we towed his car and suspended his licence on the side of the road)


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 28, 2006)

Blazer said:


> What a joke. I've seen vehicles hit concrete light standards at 30mph and the driver walks away. I've seen vehicles hit concrete light standards at 125mph and all that was left of the driver was his liver (it was the only peice big enough to actually identify it as part of a human).


As is usual with those of your point of view you twist things around and use poor examples. Light standards _by design_ allow survival within certain impact speeds. Trees don't. I mentioned trees, not light standards or any other manmade barriers. And you could just as easily make 100 mph collisions with these manmade objects surviveable by design. Not so with trees or moose. Besides, 125 mph is pretty much well past any 95th percentile speed on public roads at this point in time and moot to the discussion. There likely will be a time when automotive technology allows safe travel at 125 mph, but that is at least a decade or two away.



> If you don't agree with the law run for public office, don't say "I'm not going to obey it because I don't agree with it." That only endangers others.


That's exactly the problem-elected officials have no business setting speed limits. This belongs in the prevue of traffic engineers along with designing signs, road markings, gradients, curves, etc. It's micromanagement of the worst kind. What exactly makes elected officials feel that they're qualified to set speed limits but not the other things I mentioned? Wait, I already know one of the answers-low (10th percentile or less) speed limits are a _great source of easy revenue_. And of course these elected officials always know what's good for us, don't they?



> BTW, I love running radar or other traffic enforcement. It's very satisfying to give a ticket to someone doing 150 km/h in a posted max 100 km/h zone and have him complain that there are better things we should be doing than giving tickets to "good people" like him. He had also been drinking and had 4 passengers in the back seat, none of which were wearing seatbelts. (actually to clarify, we towed his car and suspended his licence on the side of the road)


Sure, someone like this is a menace of the worst kind and you have my full support getting morons like this off the roads. Had he been going under the limit and doing all the other things you mentioned he still would have been a menace but would you have pulled him over? I don't advocate or support drunken, aggressive driving or not wearing seat belts. I simply support speed limits set in accordance with sound traffic engineering practices which were applied with great success up until the era of legislated speed limits began with the US 55 mph national limit in the early 1970s. When a limit is set properly (95th percentile on limited access roads, 85th percentile everywhere else) the only people who exceed it will be on the far outlier so by ticketing them you will definitely be going after the most dangerous drivers. Not so today when 90% of drivers are technically eligible for speeding tickets. I'm also a firm believer that a speeding citation, even with properly set limits, should only be issued in conjunction with some other violation. The rationale for this was mentioned by me earlier in this thread: _The law has no remedy unless you commit definite personal or property damages. So-called preventative laws designed to supposedly make things safer have had penalties levied on people because what they were doing was construed as dangerous in the eyes of the legislature and/or the law enforcement, whether or not this was factually the case._

I don't expect to change your views since you are part of a bad system, and hence too jaded for me to expect otherwise. I just ask you to consider that every time you pull a competent, seat-belt wearing driver over solely for speeding and issue a citation you're diluting the value of _all_ laws, and also undermining the respect for your profession. Small wonder that such an antagonistic relationship exists these days between the police and the general public, especially in large cities. Maybe one day you or a colleague will pull over such a driver who has been milked by the system one too many times, and have your head blown off. It has happened already. Again I certainly don't condone such behavoir, but once pushed too far I've seen people do terrible things. I sincerely hope such a thing never, ever happens to you or any of your colleagues but I do hope I've given you some food for thought.


----------



## Blazer (Aug 28, 2006)

jtr1962 said:


> Maybe one day you or a colleague will pull over such a driver who has been milked by the system one too many times, and have your head blown off.



:shakehead
For you to even post such a thing shows a level of immaturity. Using inflammatory language instead of an intelligent level of discussion, particularly in regards to a public servant being intentionally injured, is disgusting and has no place in the discussion of speed limits or their enforcement. Shame on you (even if you did say "I don't condone such things")

So your solution would be to let people speed because they may react irrationally to being pulled over for committing an offence?:shakehead



jtr1962 said:


> It has happened already. Again I certainly don't condone such behavoir, but once pushed too far I've seen people do terrible things. I sincerely hope such a thing never, ever happens to you or any of your colleagues but I do hope I've given you some food for thought.



Yes, the food you've given me is that you will continue to rationalize illegal behaviour.


----------



## jtr1962 (Aug 28, 2006)

I'm bowing out of this thread, Blazer. You're not worth continuing to have a discussion with. I've said my piece. I suggest reading some traffic engineering books if you wish to further your education on the subject.

I also apologize for what you consider inflammatory language even though that wasn't my intent. You simply confirmed my suspicions that you're letting your emotions govern your discussion of this subject. Since that's the case, there can be no point in my continuing the discussion.


----------



## Blazer (Aug 28, 2006)

Take your ball and go home. I wouldn't expect anything less.


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 28, 2006)

death rate/ speed limit comparisons: --- (still need something better..)

http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSFAnn/2003HTMLTSF/tbl58.htm

I'm still looing for stats re: crashes/rate of speed -- but according to the last chart i looked the death rate pretty much DOUBLES when the speed limit goes from 50 to 55

Some factors that fudge the stats somewhat I guess are 'parking lot dinks' which seems to bring the average speed of crashes down -- but I'm looking for death stats as they relate to the speed the car was going -- which is impossible to say unless the car has a 'black box' data recorder in it..

still, physics seems to win out; the faster you're going the more energy you're likely to be hit with when you come to a stop. 

anyone got anything else?


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 28, 2006)

I just checked out the chart in the link. The death rate from 50-55MPH DOUBLES - :huh: that's pretty scary! It's a little odd, though, that 55MPH, rather than higher speeds, has the most deaths. It's too bad that this otherwise excellent chart doesn't have a date, or how often these speeds are driven at, rather than just the raw numbers. It could be that "60MPH or higher" occured very rarely but still accounted for nearly as many deaths as 55 - or possibly not.

Good chart - and, indeed, KE=.5MV^2. That means that when velocity doubles, energy quadruples, and so on. A crash at 50MPH (relative speed, of course) has four times as much energy as a 25MPH crash!


----------



## TedTheLed (Aug 28, 2006)

prolly because there are more 55mph speed limit signs that any other signs? and so thats where most crashes happen..
they can't really say what percentage of drivers going 80mph crash and die since there's no 80mph speed limit areas to check the stats at, that I know of.. and again, no way of telling how fast the car was actually going before it crashed..


----------



## jnj1033 (Aug 29, 2006)

[SOAPBOX MODE ON]
I have delivered pizza for about four years now (paying my way through college), and have been driving for about nine years. I have not had an accident for over seven years, and the few I have had were not my fault. I have also never received a speeding ticket. I try stay within 5mph of the posted speed limit, and as a result, I am almost never going with the flow of traffic. Either nearly every other car on the road is passing me, or I am passing or wanting to pass nearly every other car on the road.

I have driven in Germany, England, and New Jersey, a few places where "lane discipline" is taught as part of driver's education and enforced on the roads. For those who don't know, lane discipline simply means that you only pass on the designated side, and after you pass a slower moving vehicle, you move out of the passing lane, even if no one is directly behind you. In New Jersey, for example, I noticed that passing drivers began signalling right before they even completed a pass, so that law enforcement and other drivers would know they intended to yield the left lane. I felt safer and enjoyed driving more in these places.

Unfortunately, many states do not teach or enforce lane discipline. One of my greatest frustrations on the freeway is the "left lane lallygagger:" the individual who stays in the leftmost lane, driving slowly, and obstructing faster moving traffic. Often, the lallygagger's speed will match the speed of the car in the next lane. As a result, a driver who wishes to pass has no choice but to pass on the right, often tailgating and making unsafe lane changes to accomplish it.

I submit that the left lane lallygagger is the primary instigator of dangerous behavior on the freeway, and that most aggressive driving incidents are the direct result of someone ignoring proper lane discipline. I further suggest that requiring and enforcing lane discipline would significantly reduce occurrences of aggressive driving, making the roads that much safer. If such laws existed and were enforced, speed limits could be increased and traffic would flow more efficiently. Some sections of Germany's Autobahn have speed limits well in excess of 100mph. These high speed roads work only because the drivers never use the left lane except (gasp) for passing.
[SOAPBOX MODE OFF]



I apologize if this wandered off topic. It's just that after driving in Europe, my perception of drivers in the States has never been the same. I went from driving in England to driving the Beltway around DC in the same week, and I was horrified at the utter lack of discipline and respect.


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Aug 29, 2006)

I'll signal (blinkers) for everything. I'll even signal in a parking lot or on a winding road. I figure that if I don't like it when other drivers don't signal, I had better signal myself. Who knows, maybe someone will be grateful for my signaling.


----------



## cobb (Aug 29, 2006)

I have driven with and without my lights on during the day and see no difference in folks behavior. 

Seems 35mph was the perfect speed to pull out in front of someone when they are a tractor trailer length from you approaching. (Yes, when I go 35, folks have pulled out in front of me making me slow down, swerve, etc to avoid them and that was with a big white van or black mercedes)

I too signal in parking lots and go around the empty spots where the lines lay out the spots. 



TigerhawkT3 said:


> I'll signal (blinkers) for everything. I'll even signal in a parking lot or on a winding road. I figure that if I don't like it when other drivers don't signal, I had better signal myself. Who knows, maybe someone will be grateful for my signaling.


----------



## allthatwhichis (Sep 1, 2006)

:grinser2: Gave it five days for this... To be honest I didn't even finish reading the past few days... So this reply may, just may kill this thread. Let's see if I can walk a thin line... :grinser2: And if the MODs have to close it... well it had to be done then... F it!  




PhotonWrangler said:


> Driving habits can be an emotionally charged topic. Can we keep this thread civil and avoid any personal attacks?


  




TedTheLed said:


> allthat? you need to get psychiatric help.


 

Hmmm, and you are who to judge? My spiritual beliefs say God doesn't even judge, so again, to quote the Cheshire cat, whoooo are yoooou? I'd say my close friends can and may judge me, and they do; they've known me longer than two posts in a forum, have you? You want to know who they ask to take them places... Me. They know of my driving experience. 

I was merely being honest about how I drive... Honesty the best policy huh... I even mentioned it as being a problem... 1st step and all, admitting... Remember I used to LOVE driving. I was MUCH worse as a teenager; no please do not bring up teen driving here, that's a much bigger thread!!! I said how I drive and why... What is a Shrink gonna do but try to find out that same information, tell me how to fix it? I'm trying to find a way to survive in our society and not drive at all. Good solution huh? Maybe you should post some productive thoughts not flame... as it seems you have done to all who have been honest. Tigey was right. 





jtr1962 said:


> I question the value of psychiatry at all...


:bow: is all that's needed...

Most seem to agree that you should drive the way you feel safe in the given circumstance you are in. Anyone ask when I drive, what I drive, I've given the where... I was commenting on how I drive in the situations I drive to and from work. I work nights and drive in the opposite direction of rush hour traffic. I do 80 to 85 when and where there are very few drivers, and for only about 10 to 15 miles... well, there's always the interstate, which I avoid!!! If I don't avoid it and find myself on that cursed piece of concrete I'm usually NOT the fastest on the road. I could be doing 80 and not come close. Maybe those yellin my direction should research driving in Central Florida. I learned how to drive on Interstate 4... That's in NOT an excuse, but should be seen a reason. We only know what we've been shown...


What feels safe to me may feel dangerous to others... I have NEVER jumped out of an airplane. It doesn't feel safe; just getting into a plane feels rather unsafe to me. There are instances while driving when I feel unsafe. I slow down when these instances creep up. Usually around curves, or coming up on a group of cars or when it rains like it does here in the sunshine state. :ironic: 




Blazer said:


> We would all be safer if everybody just slowed down. The world has gone and gotten itself in a big damn hurry for everything.


 


The big damn hurry seems to be for money... Time = money. I hate that statement but... I, you, and everyone else, whose employed, at least in our great Nation, gets paid X amount of Money per whatever increment of TIME they work... I know this isn't right, but that's is how our society is put together, or has evolved. I have grown up being told this and trust me is goes against my innermost FEELINGs but these are the rules and framework I have been given since... well forever. I speed to work because I have this incessant NEED to get to work quickly and to get home faster. These are my ying and yang. I really don't want to even go to work, but I do so I can be a good citizen and pay my taxes. I really want to be at home, sleeping (I'm even better at sleeping than driving!). or tinkering with all the STUFF... I can afford because I work. It doesn't even sound right, but... what are we going to do. :huh:


----------



## allthatwhichis (Sep 1, 2006)

*continued post, can't seem to get it all into one... keeps timing out...*

I also agree, SPEED KILLS, or better said, CAN KILL. Just like knives, guns, and nukes, it usually takes an id10t to kill with them. Yes, I have been id10t before, a lot, but have taken medicine against that happening again... Gotta lighten it up a little. I've been thinking about this reply for 5 days. :lol: 

But seriously, I am trying not to drive at all. Getting a company to let you telecommute is NOT easy. I though I read an article 4 or 5 years ago saying that telecommuting would save all these companies all this money when technology got advanced enough... Well the tech is here and has been, but I haven't seen any less people on the roads or in the office. I've offered to take a pay cut is I could work from home... no dice, they just laugh... all the way up the food chain or corporate ladder, which ever you chose.


Here's a question, why can my car even go over 55 or 60? Is it the same type of reason cigarettes are still legal? 





TigerhawkT3 said:


> Seriously - chill out. Try to relax. I'll bet that the posters you chewed out wouldn't have been so forthright and trusting if they knew you'd have such a hostile reaction.





TigerhawkT3 said:


>


 
:bow: again, nothing more needs to be said. 


All we were doing was replying honestly. 




Alloy Addict said:


> The speed limit is not always set by traffic engineers, but by lawmakers. Thus the highway speed limit goes from 55 to 65 or 70. The roads didn't change but the law did.


I guess if the laws didn't change, and from what I understand they only changed to get us to use less gas, I would be doing what most others do now, 10 to 15 over... It used to be 75 correct?

I have been reading this thread on new "CTRL+N" page and whewww... :sweat: I can't comment on them all. Looks like others are passionate about this also. My closing remark is... I drive the way I do because of how and where and when I learned to drive. I'm sorry if it offends you. I probably did not paint a good picture of exactly how I drive, but it is not how your grand mother drives, or even your mom. I drive as and how I FEEL SAFE. I also consider everyone one the road a different incarnation of me, hence the screen name. So I treat everyone, everywhere like I would if I met or drove near me, myself, not how I want to be treated but how I would treat me. If that doesn't make sense to you it is not your time for it to make sense. So, I don't really drive as bad as you think, but I probably did when I was a teen.   
 

Love, peace, and grease,

 

allthat...

 

I have some biddness to take care of... :toilet:


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Sep 1, 2006)

Wow, allthatwhichis! I always enjoy reading a lengthy, deeply considered post (or two) on weighty issues.

Thanks for the "props." Those are always appreciated. 

My frst year or two of driving, I DID drive like a little old lady, and it probably annoyed the heck out of everyone else on the road. I think my sister summed up the pervading attitude best, while driving me somewhere once: "At LEAST go the speed limit!" To which I replied, "No, at MOST." It was pretty funny.

Bringing up driving habits, psychiatry, knives, guns, nukes, and cigarettes all at once is pretty brave. I think I'll dust off the ol' ten foot pole (no, not THAT pole, you naughty person, the proverbial "I'm not touching that one with a ten foot pole" pole) I mentioned earlier.

"360 DEGREE AWARENESS" and "go WHEN SAFE."


----------



## allthatwhichis (Sep 1, 2006)

:bow: Namaste...


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Sep 1, 2006)

allthatwhichis said:


> :bow: Namaste...


After thinking for several minutes, I can't think of anything appropriate to say, except "thank you."

Namaste to you, too, allthatwhichis.


----------



## allthatwhichis (Sep 1, 2006)

You're the first person I have seen EVER look it up... although now no one has to, you gave them a link...   :lolsign:


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Sep 1, 2006)

That's just one more of my many free services.

(Hmm, I think I got that from a T-shirt: "Sarcasm is just one more free service I offer." Oh well.)


----------



## Diesel_Bomber (Sep 1, 2006)

TigerhawkT3 said:


> I'll signal (blinkers) for everything. I'll even signal in a parking lot or on a winding road. I figure that if I don't like it when other drivers don't signal, I had better signal myself. Who knows, maybe someone will be grateful for my signaling.




Oh yes, someone is grateful for your signaling!:goodjob: Wish more people would do that. A turn signal is not an option! Most don't even realize why it's so important.


Mini rant: A few days ago I was heading into town. Got stuck behind a black Suburban going 35mph on these country roads(55mph limit), slowing down to 25 on the corners. I was in my STi, so this was especially frustrating. Get to a clear straight stretch and I pass(signaling both ways). I glance over as I go by, expecting to see an older lady or gentleman, driving as fast as they feel comfortable. But oh no, it's some blonde teenie bopper, jabbering on her cellphone AND applying makeup! My flabber was gasted. At least she was going slow. :thumbsdow


End rant. Grrr.


:buddies:


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Sep 1, 2006)

The same thing happened to me yesterday. I was on the on-ramp to highway 101 South, and the car in front of me was going around 35MPH. Since it would be very, very bad to enter a freeway at a mere 35MPH, I pulled to the left (fortunately, the on-ramp had two lanes) and passed the car. I looked, and sure enough, it was some teen on her cell phone. People who are unable to simultaneously talk on a cell phone and drive in a safe, attentive manner shouldn't be trying to.


----------



## Safety1st (Sep 1, 2006)

I personally obey the limits in certain zones...

In the UK we have many speed limits....30s, 40s, 50s, 60s and 70mph zones...

Built up areas are usually 30mph....motorways (freeways) are 70mph..and the country roads are usually 60mph.

In the 30s, 40s and 50s I stick to the limit rigidly....out of respect for other road users, mainly pedestrians.

On the motorway, I'll not venture much past 70mph and will often set my cruise control at it...so that i'm not tempted to get carried away....as the journey is usually long..so any time I make up by speeding (and risking a ticket)...will usually be wasted later at the service station restaurant/toilet or something.

The only place where I might be tempted to be 'liberal' with the limit would be out in the country on the 60mph zones.....

I've been a cop for 10 years..and have issued 1000s of tickets. However, the majority have been in 30s and 40mph zone....a few in the 50s.....the motorways have been targetted...but generally when the driver has got to 90mph or more....

and in 10 years of being a cop, I've never ticketted anyone in the 60 zones..

Generally because they are out in the country, and away from built up areas, schools etc... Also, because the standard of most drivers isn't very good. ie: the driver will be speeding in a 30mph zone, because they might be slack and ill-disciplined. However, when they get on the country roads, their driving skills aren't good enough to get much past 60mph on the bends, windy roads etc....so not many actually speed on them anyway...


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Sep 1, 2006)

:bow: Safety1st

Because my Ram got knacked (Dad ran over a bundle of wire which wrapped up on the driveshaft and made mincemeat of the exhaust sytem) I'm driving the Boss/Uncles 99 f250 5.4 Gasser... ROTTEN gas mileage no matter how I try. No torque to speak of.

I filled up earlier, went about 30 miles with tank (5140lbs) and 30 miles empty (2000lbs) and used well over a quarter of a tank! The Ram wouldn't have even tickled the gauge!

Anyhow, since it actual runs better going faster, my usual program of driving is on hold. I'm not sparing the rod nor spoiling the truck!


----------



## TedTheLed (Sep 1, 2006)

sometimes when I have come up on the left of cars in which the driver is applying make up,
(or in one case, counting money) I beep them with the Ferrari (Hela) horns installed on the right side under the hood..

The blast jolts them, back to reality I hope, and I think I am doing them a favor by reminding them that the UNEXPECTED HAPPENS and to watch out.. Bad?


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Sep 2, 2006)

Similar to Ted, on the Ram I have a set of Wolo "Longhorns" (instant on air horns) behind my bumper.

I don't honk often. But I wish to cause messy pants when I do! Is that SO wrong?


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Sep 2, 2006)

I have a 2006 Honda Civic LX, and the horn is absolutely weak. I feel like a Chipmunk when I use it. How much does it cost to get a beefier horn, and how difficult is the upgrade?


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Sep 2, 2006)

It isn't terribly difficult to change/upgrade electric horns. Mine on the Ram are right behind the left headlight assembly. Three bolts and it's out.

CSK, O'Reily, Auto Zone etc. should have what you need!

Should be able to get a LOT better for >$25-30


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Sep 2, 2006)

Thirty dollars is definitely within my price range. I was afraid it would be something like $200-300.

Uh, I'm really not a car modder. I'd either need REALLY detailed and clear instructions, or professional installation. Are either of those available? I would prefer professional installation, so how much does that usually run?


----------



## cobb (Sep 6, 2006)

I had to go away for a while, but am back. I was helping out my parents, not in jail for anything. 

Yeah, this benz really holds the curves and its fun to take the backroads. I use to dread it in my van as once you went onto the shoulder, it was impossible to get the rear wheels back on the paved road without some fancy driving and in the mean time you have to drive off center. I can drive both wheels at teh same time on the benz down into and out of the shoulder while taking a curve at the same time. 

Yeah, I hate folks puttering along in the on ramp as I need a good 17 seconds with foot to the floor to get to 60 and it just fustrates me as they can leave me in the dust when they look up from their cell phone or down from the vanity mirror. 

I usually try to get over to the far left lane and floor it one I am on, then slowly wiggle back to the right for my exit. 

I have the stock horn in both my van and benz. I seldom use it unless the person is sitting at a green light or takess off while the light is still red. I wouldnt mind a train horn, 10 gallon air tank and matching compressor, but I hate to get shot or have to engage in a batter of whits with someone.


----------



## Bimmerboy (Sep 9, 2006)

Got interested in this thread and wound up reading the whole thing.

What a shame that jtr1962's logic fell on such deaf ears. What a shame. Very frustrating.

Hey jtr, for what it's worth, your postings were not a _complete_ waste of time. And, good decision to bow out. :goodjob:


----------



## TigerhawkT3 (Sep 9, 2006)

About the power of my car's horn: I definitely need more. Not once, but TWICE in the past week or so, drivers in front of me have been jabbering on a cell phone, rummaging for things on the floor, and generally ignoring the glaringly bright green light in front of them. I tap the horn - nothing. I repeatedly press the horn - nothing. I lean on the horn for a few seconds, and... nothing! It took the impatience of other drivers (and their powerful horns) to get things moving. I shudder to think of what would happen if someone decided to merge into my lane while I was in the way - a horrible thought.

Is there anywhere I could go to have a horn installed for me loud enough to wake the dead and make them dance? When I need the horn, I need VOLUME.


----------



## PlayboyJoeShmoe (Sep 9, 2006)

You could ask around at a local garage, or ask the guys at the parts store if they know anyone.

But it really isn't hard to upgrade electric horns. It's when you get into Airhorns that it gets fun!


----------



## cobb (Sep 9, 2006)

If you read one of his posts, he claims to not drive as he gave it up a few years ago. I use to take the bus, took me 3 hours to travel 10 mile round trip and no service on weekends, holidays or bad weather.



Bimmerboy said:


> What a shame that jtr1962's logic fell on such deaf ears. What a shame. Very frustrating.
> 
> Hey jtr, for what it's worth, your postings were not a _complete_ waste of time. And, good decision to bow out. :goodjob:


----------



## Robocop (Sep 10, 2006)

I skimmed through this thread and may have missed a few points however did find it interesting. As the title asks do officers obey the law of the roads I will add my part to this.....the answer is mostly no...or at least around here anyway.

For me the biggest problem is that I work a high activity beat with at least 18 calls per shift. Of these calls about 60 percent are what we call "hot" calls thus we get there as quickly as possible. It is so easy to get used to driving very fast and having people yield to your patrol car that you will keep these habits most all the time.

For me I often find myself reaching for the shoulder radio when I see some type of trouble off duty only to realize I do not have my radio. I have also been driving off duty and witness an accident. I quickly reached down for my in car radio to call it in and to say I was going to work the wreck....I quickly realized I was off duty and not in my patrol car however years of repitition have instilled this in me thus it is hard to break.

The truth is when on duty officers will drive crazy sometimes and it becomes a habit....I am no different as I will often speed on the highway and even surface streets. My Dept. is slowly placing black boxes in every car and we now have in car video as well. The camera activates manually or also each time I activate my overhead lights. The black box or as we call it a tattletale box will record data for weeks. The box can make or break an officer however is never monitored unless an officer wrecks a car...then it is pulled and studied. The box will tell how fast a car was going as well as braking force and if the officer was using lights and sirens....it also has GPS on it.

I do not write very many tickets for speeding and it has to be very wreckless or well above the limit when I do. My pet peeve is insurance and I am very strict on that as I feel everyone should have it. 

So yes I do feel most officers will skirt the speed laws at times and the argument could be made that they are trained drivers and thus safer...hehe at least this is what I use to make myself feel better.

As far as the argument over speed vs slower vehicles cause more wrecks I am not sure. I do feel slower vehicles on the interstate do cause more wrecks however injuries are usually not as bad. Faster moving areas seem to have very fewer wrecks however when one does happen it usually has worse injuries. So it is a give and take....do you want 100 wrecks a day with maybe 10 injuries or lets say 10 wrecks with 2 serious injuries.

I may have missed it however has anyone got any details on some of those roadways that have no speed limits such as in Germany? I would like to know if they have as many accidents and problems as U.S. roadways.


----------



## allthatwhichis (Sep 10, 2006)

@Robocop

Thanks for your honest input... :thumbsup:


----------



## cobb (Sep 16, 2006)

I made a right turn on red when traffic cleared and chirped my tires taking off in first. Of course I was rather pokie getting up to speed and I make it a habit not to race to stop lights, but to roll to them. No sooner I took off from a dead stop a cop made a u turn and pulled right up to my bumper and paced me for a few blocks. I just mind my manners and the lights, signs and rules of the road. I used the turn signal well in advance of turns, lane changes and tapped the brake petal to make the brake lights come on well before stopping. I even went 5 mph under the limit. 3 blocks later he vanished. 

I guess he thought I was trying to flee for being guilty and ran my plates hopeing in the mean time I would mis a rule of the road and pull me over or something?


----------

