My top 10 enforcement & countermeasure pet peeves

Geez... I make one of my best posts ever... and it degenerates into this?

Let me reclarify my "speed kills" rant. Yes, there are instances when speed can be a factor. Doing 75 in a 30 comes to mind. Someone pulls out into traffic and you hit them at 75 and someone dies, well, speed is a factor in that accident because the person pulling out isn't expecting someone to come barreling down at 75.

Speed can also kill if you drive into a bridge abutment or tree, and the faster you're going when that sudden stop happens, the more likely that you'll be killed from it. However, millions of people drive at 70+ MPH speeds everyday and not running into bridge abutments or trees, so I wouldn't consider this a particularly relevant argument.

The problem I have with "speed kills" is when it's used as justification for additional revenue enhancement, er, enforcement. News articles always say "we're going to crack down on drunk driving, seatbelt violations, unsafe driving, and speeding". Every single time. No matter where or for what reasons the crackdown is taking place, "speeding" is always brought up as something heinous that kills millions of people a year. When this simply isn't true on an open highway. On an open highway, engineered for safe travel at 70, 75, or even 80, but posted at 65 or even 55, guess what, almost everyone "speeds" through those stretches but you don't see the bodies piling up on the roadway.

What about roadways that were once posted at 65 or 70 but with no other changes (e.g. construction, road conditions) have been reposted at 55? Is doing 70 on that stretch suddenly more deadly than before? So why are there more speed traps in underposted 55 mph stretches than other places? Because there are more accidents in those areas? Most likely, it's a money making scheme.

When the NMSL was passed in the early 70s, making the maximum speed limit 55 nationwide, did all the highways suddenly become unsafe to drive at 70?

Speed in and of itself doesn't kill. Speed differential is what is dangerous. Doing 75 in a 30 puts drivers at risk. So does doing 30 in a 75. If everyone is going the same speed and direction, guess what, no one hits one another. Whether they're going 30 or 130.

I'll leave it at this. Let's not let it degenerate further, I'd hate to have a mod have to close one of my best threads. ;)

^^^^ :thumb2:

I think there's confusion over what "speed" actually means. It seems like the "speed kills" crowd contends that venturing above the appropriately posted speed limit is inherently dangerous. The message is that as long as you're under the speed limit, you're safe, and it's often presented as a justification for strict enforcement.

We have a self selected group here that doesn't buy into that. We've done our research and are more than a bit annoyed at the motivations behind the message and consider it an insult to our intelligence that we're expected to believe it. Many of us have personal experiences with the speeding ticket "industry", and it doesn't look like an accident that it was engineered to efficiently collect thousands of dollars for insurance companies and local governments for the relatively minimal effort of pointing a magic gun at a car and making a number pop up.

Now, what makes it confusing it that speed does kill. It absolutely does make it harder to react and it makes crashes worse when they do happen. That's an undeniable fact. However, the speed at which risk becomes unacceptable is not necessarily the speed limit (for innumerable reasons), so "speed kills" is a statement that's both theoretically true but often practically (and maliciously) false at the same time.

Then again, maybe I just haven't seen the light because I don't have a job that allows me to see bloody guts all over the road.

You're absolutely right, supercowpowers, and I forgot to mention that fact.

Speed *can* kill. That doesn't mean it always *does* kill. But in reality, it's speed *differential* that kills. Whether that means doing 130 on a motorcycle running into a truck doing 60, or hitting a bridge abutment at 70.

If I'm driving 10-15 over PSL on the highway and crash into a bridge abutment, there is a measurable (and good) chance that I would end up dead. If I'm driving at the PSL and crash into the abutment, there is still a chance (albeit SLIGHTLY lower) that I will still end up dead. On a motorcycle, I *will* be dead, even if I'm going 10 under PSL. You see, speed isn't necessarily a major factor in risk of dying in a crash. At the rates I speed at (10-15 over at most), it's a minor factor at most.

It's all a matter of balancing risks against the benefits. I'll take the minuscule greater chance that I'll die driving to work in order to shave a few minutes off my commute, by doing 10-15 over. Chances are, if I die in a car crash, I would have died even if I was going at/below PSL anyway.

You are a million times more likely to get a ticket for speeding than of getting into a speeding-related accident.

Also, what really is the safest speed on the highway? The PSL? No way. It's the speed everyone else is driving. If you're doing the PSL while everyone around you is doing 15 over, who's being the dangerous driver?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kpatz

If you're doing the PSL while everyone around you is doing 15 over, who's being the dangerous driver?

---

Sorry, but the old, "but everyone else is doing it" argument just doesn't really work on any logical level. And claiming the speed limits are too low is a dishonest cop-out. If they raised the speed limit by 20 mph today, most of the speeders here would still drive at 10 to 15 over PSL. They're speeders. They want to speed. And raising the PSL isn't going to satisfy or stop them.

But yeah... it was a great post! :D

Just to chime in here.. :)

Police almost everywhere have a certain amount of "Speeding" they allow on any given stretch of road... There are very few places in North America that strictly enforce highway limits. In my opinion, this leads to speed limits far below what is actually intended just to allow for this... I'm saying this because I beleive it falls into the 55mph on a highway designed for 70mph argument.

For example, I've been pulled over before doing 20KM over the limit (15 mph) and been told it was just to let me know my light was out.. then when I made the comment "Oh, I thought it was for speed" i was told "Nah, you were only 20 over, not speeding." Yes, that was the actual words from the cop.


Yes, I firmly beleive speed tickets are purely revenue generation. If they were strictly for safety, all these tickets would be demerit points only - and actually points that matter! You know what I have to do in order to loose my license in Ontario?! I have to get caught 3 times in 2 years doing 35 MPH over the limit JUST TO GET A WARNING LETTER!!! Do you know what the fine is for those three tickets? upto $30,000.. No ****!

Safety my ass.... Yes that's an extreme example but even 15mph over is $150.. and I would need 8 of these in 2 years just to get a warning letter.

Speed doesn't kill, Speed bankrupts.

Safety is the excuse, revenue is the intention.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Sorry, but the old, "but everyone else is doing it" argument just doesn't really work on any logical level. And claiming the speed limits are too low is a dishonest cop-out. If they raised the speed limit by 20 mph today, most of the speeders here would still drive at 10 to 15 over PSL. They're speeders. They want to speed. And raising the PSL isn't going to satisfy or stop them.

But yeah... it was a great post! :D

---

Maybe *some* speeders (a definite minority) want to speed, but I bet the majority (including me) do it because the limits are far lower than speeds that I (and the majority of other drivers) feel safe and comfortable driving at. If 80% of people break the speed limit, does that mean 80% of drivers are reckless speed demons? I highly doubt it. Most so-called "speeders" are "created" by artificially low limits, not by some ingrained need to skirt the law. Of course, there are some who have the "need for speed", and those are the reason you have a job, to stop and ticket those who really do endanger the public.

When going from a 65 to a 55 mph zone, does everyone immediately drop their speed 10 mph? Not in my experience. Everyone just keeps cruising at whatever speed they were going. Same when going from a 55 to a 65. They're just going from 15 over to 5 over, doing the same speed, a speed that is perfectly safe for the highway they are driving on.

I typically do 75-80 on the highway in my Audi A4. If the PSL were raised to 75 (a far more reasonable PSL for most highways than the typical 55-65 around here), would I start doing 85-90? Probably not, because my car's sweet spot is around 75-80 and that's my comfort zone. I might average slightly higher due to less ticket risk, but not 10mph higher.

Studies have shown that changing speed limits (either lowering OR raising them) have little effect on prevailing speed of traffic.

BTW, question for you Stealth Stalker. When you do speed enforcement, on an open highway, what percentage of drivers do you see that are exceeding the PSL? How many do you find are going fast enough to warrant a pull-over or a ticket (based on safety, not revenue goals)? I bet the first answer is a much larger number than the second.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kpatz

If you're doing the PSL while everyone around you is doing 15 over, who's being the dangerous driver?

---

Sorry, but the old, "but everyone else is doing it" argument just doesn't really work on any logical level. And claiming the speed limits are too low is a dishonest cop-out. If they raised the speed limit by 20 mph today, most of the speeders here would still drive at 10 to 15 over PSL. They're speeders. They want to speed. And raising the PSL isn't going to satisfy or stop them.

But yeah... it was a great post! :D

---

It doesn't work on a legal level which, at the end of the day, is all I think the police really care about.

If the speed limits here were all raised by 20 MPH, I would immediately throw my radar detectors in my 'museum of technology' (the attic) and sell my CB at the truck stop because I could drive like I already do without a cabin full of beeps from false alerts and bullcrap from truck drivers. I already go 85 on the highway (65 MPH PSL) and 50 MPH on back roads (35 MPH PSL), and I don't have much desire to go faster.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by An0nym0us

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

Well, a recent government agency study...Other government studies show...

---

Can you show me a link regarding this? I would appreciate it.

Great thread Kpatz. Fantastic.

---

I will dig up the links (gotta find them in my huge list of bookmarks).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

If law enforcement really wanted to make the roads safer, they would set up random road blocks for license and insurance checks, rather than simply going after casual speeders simply to generate revenue.

---

They would, but people complained about that too. Then the ACLU took it to the courts and got it tossed. Consequently, they're left with speeding.

---

Yeah, amazing since road blocks on back roads were very effective at catching drunks and and other drivers with suspended licenses or no insurance.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kpatz

Geez... I make one of my best posts ever... and it degenerates into this?

Let me reclarify my "speed kills" rant. Yes, there are instances when speed can be a factor...

---

Your original post definitely is one of your best posts ever. As I mentioned, speeding in and of itself rarely is the single and only cause of accidents or fatalities. Yet the majority of the time speeding is a contributing factor when other factors were also determined to have caused an accident or fatality. Speeding on a rural road rarely results in an accident. Yet being drunk and speeding on a rural road is the number one cause of rural highway fatalities.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desmosedici

~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Therefore, it is the speed that kills.

---

Now that's the most acerebral, ultracrepidarian, vecordious piece of yirning reasoning I have ever seen... And it makes no sense.

---

You use your tongue purdier'n a twenty dollar whore. Can't you refute SS's point without resorting to a thesaurus? :rolleyes:

Watch, it's real easy:

If speed is what kills, then how come I don't instantly drop dead the moment I hit 66 MPH?

I have personally driven over 170 MPH and survived. Therefore, it's not speed that kills, it's collisions. I can be killed while traveling 0 MPH, such as when I'm stopped at a red light and a crane drops a grand piano on my head.

There, you see? Point completely refuted while still plain-speakin'. :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by swarga

I can be killed while traveling 0 MPH, such as when I'm stopped at a red light and a crane drops a grand piano on my head.

---

Nahh... that doesn't kill. I've seen that happen in countless cartoons and the character always crawls out from underneath the piano, boulder or anvil slightly flatter and more beat up than before, but by the next scene they're fine! ;)

On the other hand, apparently the act of drinking nitro glycerine and then swallowing a firecracker will use up all of your nine lives.

Nice thread!

On the speed kills thingy......Leos will almost always argue this, because its what they have been taught and what they "enforce" daily.

Its not speed that causes an accident.....Its not paying attention, not having the right car or motorcyle for the speed traveled (driving a semi through the twisties at 90 mph, but can be done in my vette or bike) <that could be argued speed as a factor, but its more on the person who decided to drive that unfit vehicle at that speed. Driving too fast for road conditions is another one. If its dark, get better lights and you can go faster. Its not always speeds fault.

Its peoples lack of experience with closing distances, braking at higher speeds, the effects of inertia, tire traction, aerodynamics, vehicle specific handling, etc. that causes the "speed" accidents. (it doesnt help if you are asleep or drunk, but thats not the root cause).

Yes speed will make an accident worse, but only if an accident happens in the first place.
If we actually had a mandatory real driving school to get your license that taught some of the things I mentioned, we would have more people who understand the physics of driving at any speed and a lot less carnage on the road.

Imagine all the drivers of IRL, Nascar, F1 , MotoGP, CART, etc. all lived in the same big town with their regular cars and no speed limit........Im sure there would be few speed accidents as long as the uneducated less experienced regular drivers did not live there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kpatz

If you're doing the PSL while everyone around you is doing 15 over, who's being the dangerous driver?

---

Sorry, but the old, "but everyone else is doing it" argument just doesn't really work on any logical level.

---

While your statement is correct, that's not the argument kpatz is making.

What he is saying is that anyone who is driving at a speed which is significantly different than the flow of traffic is a source of danger, much more so that the act of exceeding some arbitrary numbers painted on a sign.

Example: Suppose I'm in a driveway which leads out onto a road with a 65 MPH speed limit. If I pull out directly in front of 65 MPH traffic at 5 MPH, am I causing a significant traffic hazard? You bet your sweet bippy I am, and yet I'm not speeding. The hazard comes from the 60 MPH speed differential between my 5 MPH speed and the rest of the cars which are going 65 MPH.

Speed differential is dangerous at any speed; the bigger the difference, the greater the danger.

Quote:

---

And claiming the speed limits are too low is a dishonest cop-out.

---

Under-posted speed limits are a documented fact. To claim otherwise is a dishonest cop-out.

Quote:

---

If they raised the speed limit by 20 mph today, most of the speeders here would still drive at 10 to 15 over PSL.

---

That statement is ridiculous and trivial to refute. If I make the speed limit 200 MPH, you most definitely will not see most people driving at 215 MPH.

More generally, if a speed limit is set scientifically according to established engineering principles like the 85th percentile rule, then 85% of drivers will automatically be in compliance. The 85th percentile speed doesn't magically change just because you changed the numbers on the sign. To claim otherwise is simply ignorant.

Regardless of the posted speed limit, the vast majority of drivers will drive at the speed which they feel is safe and comfortable for the given road conditions. And that is a statement straight from a government study.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

Regardless of the posted speed limit, the vast majority of drivers will drive at the speed which they feel is safe and comfortable for the given road conditions. And that is a statement straight from a government study.

---

AMEN to that, I have always done that and always will. To me posted speed limits are merely a suggestion and a minimum for people who cant handle their equipment.
Another thing is that the speed limits have not increased with the capabilities of todays vehicles. The technologies have evolved such that the cars handle so much better than 30 years ago and are capable of traveling safer at higher speeds.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

Regardless of the posted speed limit, the vast majority of drivers will drive at the speed which they feel is safe and comfortable for the given road conditions.

---

Sure. But much of what they feel safe with is based upon the PSL. A great many drivers simply feel that -- no matter what the PSL is -- they are safe doing 10 to 15 mph over it. That is part of the reason why PSLs stay low, because they know that the flow of traffic is going to consistently exceed it by an average of 6 to 10 mph.

When I got my driver licence, the PSL was still commonly 70 to 75 mph on the highway, and people were still passing me. You cannot overestimate human nature. We'd be pushing 100 mph speed limits before a great many people felt like it was "fast enough" that they didn't need to exceed it anymore.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Sure. But much of what they feel safe with is based upon the PSL. A great many drivers simply feel that -- no matter what the PSL is -- they are safe doing 10 to 15 mph over it. That is part of the reason why PSLs stay low, because they know that the flow of traffic is going to consistently exceed it by an average of 6 to 10 mph.

When I got my driver licence, the PSL was still commonly 70 to 75 mph on the highway, and people were still passing me. You cannot overestimate human nature. We'd be pushing 100 mph speed limits before a great many people felt like it was "fast enough" that they didn't need to exceed it anymore.

---

Hmm...the speed limit still commonly is anywhere from 65 to 75 mph on most highways. What has changed? Nothing. The vast majority of the federal interstate highway system, as originally built, was designed for speeds of up to 80 mph.

Our federal government, along with numerous state governments, state that posted speed limits reflect the "90th percentile rule" which says that the posted speed limit for a given road is the average speed of 90 percent of drivers on that road based on traffic studies. And yet this has been proven to be false well over 50% of the time. Now ask yourself why the 90% rule isn't realistically applied to over 50% of your road systems. There is only one answer. And that answer involves the word "revenue."

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

Regardless of the posted speed limit, the vast majority of drivers will drive at the speed which they feel is safe and comfortable for the given road conditions.

---

Sure. But much of what they feel safe with is based upon the PSL.

---

Sure, thanks to saturation police patrols, lots of people are too scared to drive as fast as they really feel comfortable for fear of getting a ticket. But if you remove that fear factor, the 85th percentile speed doesn't change even if you change the speed limit. And if you were to raise the speed limit above the 85th percentile level, you'd discover that most drivers will level off at the 85th percentile speed or below; speeds will not increase infinitely as you claim.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

Regardless of the posted speed limit, the vast majority of drivers will drive at the speed which they feel is safe and comfortable for the given road conditions.

---

Sure. But much of what they feel safe with is based upon the PSL. A great many drivers simply feel that -- no matter what the PSL is -- they are safe doing 10 to 15 mph over it. That is part of the reason why PSLs stay low, because they know that the flow of traffic is going to consistently exceed it by an average of 6 to 10 mph.

---

Chicken, meet egg...

They feel that way because they routinely exceed the limit by 15 MPH, so how can they know when a limit is posted that's actually serious?

One final thought and then I'll move on:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/a-slmatr.html

Significant stretches of the Autobahn do not have speed limits. Yes, some vehicles travel at very high speeds, some in excess of 150 mph! But, the average speed for most vehicles is around 80 mph, about 10 mph faster than traffic in the U.S. on comparable highways. But, here's the clincher, the fatality rate on the German Autobahn is lower than the fatality rate on rural Interstates in the United States!

---

Clearly "Speed Kills," and "if you raise the speed limit they'll just drive faster" are nothing more than factoids; these platitudes get repeated so often that some people just assume they're true without ever giving it much thought.

Speed helps kill, but doesnt do so all on its own. Otherwise all F1 and Nascar drivers would be dead by now because they drive damn fast :D

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by MEM-TEK

Regardless of the posted speed limit, the vast majority of drivers will drive at the speed which they feel is safe and comfortable for the given road conditions.

---

Sure. But much of what they feel safe with is based upon the PSL. A great many drivers simply feel that -- no matter what the PSL is -- they are safe doing 10 to 15 mph over it. That is part of the reason why PSLs stay low, because they know that the flow of traffic is going to consistently exceed it by an average of 6 to 10 mph.

When I got my driver licence, the PSL was still commonly 70 to 75 mph on the highway, and people were still passing me. You cannot overestimate human nature. We'd be pushing 100 mph speed limits before a great many people felt like it was "fast enough" that they didn't need to exceed it anymore.

---

I don't agree with that, at least not here. The photo scameras may have something to do with it but in general: In 65 zones in the city on the freeway, traffic moves at 65-70, uniformly for the most part with few going way faster than traffic. In the 55 zones, it is a nightmare, people going way over the limit, by my calculations up into the 80s weaving, cutting people off and is generally a free for all. It's like the thinking is in the 55 zones, we are already exceeding the limit by a large amount, why not go hyperspeed. In the 65 zones people figure why go so much faster and risk a ticket when they are already driving at a decent pace.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by kpatz

Not sure if this belongs in the Lounge, but it's countermeasure related so I'll post it here and if someone wants to move it, I won't pout for too long. ;)

I'm going to try and keep this to a top 10 list. Feel free to post your own.

My Top 10 Enforcement and Countermeasure Pet Peeves

10. LIDAR
In the hands of a skilled operator LIDAR is deadly. But why is it only #10 on my list? Because I rarely encounter it, and if I did, I'd get a laser jammer.

9. Cobras
They give the countermeasure users a bad rap. They are among the poorest performing RDs on the market, but the top selling brand. But worst of all is their annoying tendency to leak at frequencies that set off other RDs.

8. "Speed Kills"
Every time I see this phrase, especially when it's used to justify additional speed enforcement, it makes my blood boil. Proponents tend to filter the facts to fit their agenda. Exceeding an arbitrary and underposted speed limit is not dangerous at all. Driving like an idiot or driving drunk, those are far more dangerous than "speeding".

7. Laws making countermeasures illegal
Well, any laws that are purely anti-consumer or anti-motorist are peeves of mine (don't get me started on the DMCA). Most relevant to the discussion are laws that make detectors or laser jammers illegal in certain locations or for certain classes of drivers. The fact is, smart RD users tend to be more alert than those without them, so making them illegal is counterproductive from a safety standpoint. They're only illegal because they impact speeding ticket revenue, and such laws are justified due to our countermeasures being used as "tools to break the law."

6. Radar-based door openers
Once upon a time, automatic doors were triggered by pressure pads that emitted no signal whatsoever. Then, someone got the bright idea that a wireless solution would be cheaper to install, so someone invented radar based door openers. While these originally polluted the X band, nowadays they primarily occupy K band, which in the good old days was a reasonably false free band, and still popular with LEOs. Why they don't use cheap, reliable passive infrared sensors is beyond me.

5. Infiniti LCC (and other radar or laser based adaptive cruise controls)
Another "bright idea" that wasn't really thought through very well. These are primarily annoyances for V1 users, but they can trigger laser jammers as well. But worse is that some may come to rely on the adaptive cruise to handle the task of driving (well, braking) for them. And these things will only appear in more and cheaper cars over time.

4. Points and Insurance Surcharges
If the fact that speeding tickets are used as a revenue source for local/state governments isn't bad enough, insurance surcharges are the ultimate scam. The argument is that drivers with tickets are at a higher risk for accident claims, but that doesn't necessarily hold true for those with only speeding tickets. Get nailed in a speed trap at 65 in a 55 or something equally ridiculous, and you're branded as a "risky" driver and your rates go up. Even worse, some insurance companies use the extra money to donate radar/laser guns to police departments, so they can do what? Give out more tickets, resulting in even more insurance surcharges. These are the kinds of things that should be illegal, not RDs and jammers.

3. Tickets given for "70 in a 55"
More proof of speeding enforcement being used as a revenue scheme. Many stretches of highway are engineered for safe travel at over 70 mph, but are underposted at 55. Then, since everyone "speeds" through these stretches, they are constantly patrolled and they become ticket factories. Route 3 in southern NH/northern MA is a classic example of this. How many unfair tickets have been issued on highways such as this, when the victim was traveling at a perfectly safe and reasonable speed for conditions? Look in our "beat a ticket" forum for many examples.

2. Hidden and/or Unmarked vehicles used for speed enforcement.
Once again, proof of enforcement for revenue. If speed enforcement was done for safety reasons, a LEO would park out in the open, and if using radar, would run it constant. This provides a visible presence which encourages drivers to watch their speed and in general, be more alert while driving. Hiding or using unmarked vehicles doesn't encourage better driving, it just causes more tickets, and more revenue.

and Numero Uno is...

1. INSTANT ON!!!!!!!!
I *HATE* instant on. HATE HATE HATE HATE it. If anything should be outlawed as a speed trap scam, this is it. This is the one and only thing we don't have a truly reliable defense against. Rabbits help but not always. Everytime I read of "increased enforcement" in an area and then hear that they're using I/O, laser, or other sneaky tactics, the big dollar sign appears above my head. My worst close calls have been I/O attacks.

Ok, so what are yours?

---

My comments on yours:
10: Agree
9. No comment
8. Speed doesn't kill, but sudden impact might
7. Agree. This is America
6. Agree
5. Agree
4. Agree - totally financial motivation
3. Disagree. 15 over the PSL is too much in my opinion. I someone wants the PSL changed they should petition the jurisdiction to change it.
2. Agree. LEO vehicles should be CLEARLY marked
1. Agree

I think my biggest peeve is a person's insistence that their favorite countermeasure is the only acceptable countermeasure. But everyone is entitled to their opinion.

Probably my second peeve is that as far as I have determined, speed enforcement radar is inexact, is widely accepted as valid, and should not be permitted to be used for that purpose. LIDAR and VASCAR are different matters all together. Moverover, that a lone LEO's testimony of a speeding charge using radar, pacing, or even worse visual estimate of speed, is widely accepted as having met the burden of proof in court, while in reality is no PROOF at all.

Third is the use of photo enforcement where the driver of the vehicle is not identified, and yet the photo "evidence" is accepted by many as proof of guilt of a person. This is extremely unfair and in my opinion unconstitutional towards the person receiving the ticket. In many cases, the registered owner of the vehicle is ticketed and fined where there is no proof who was driving the vehicle.

Forth is the use of money from traffic fines or forefitted property, by any LE agency. Instead, that money and property should go towards education of youth and college tuition, and health care.

Just my opinion.

Stealth Stalker:

Speed alone does not kill. You can go a billion miles an hour through space for eternity and never die if the conditions are right. The danger of speed is relative to many many things. The faster you go the better the conditions must be and the smaller the margin of error. Also, as much as most people don't want to admit it, skill is a huge factor. Look at the "ring"... people do die there, but the speeds are insane on that track and they are driving all types of different cars (plus most of the people that die are bike riders).

Also, Stealth, people will not just keep speeding forever if the limits are raised. The average on the autobahn is like 95mph or something. And its not more fatal than in the US, BTW. However, I don't think that system would work in the US because we have way too many ignorant/retarded drivers. Nonetheless, my point still stands... people (of the world) will not just continue speeding until they kill themselves if the limits get raised.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gokhos

15 over the PSL is too much in my opinion. I someone wants the PSL changed they should petition the jurisdiction to change it.

---

14 is okay though? I find it funny that people (who speed) say one speed is completely cool and then say that another amount is "too much".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

14 is okay though? I find it funny that people (who speed) say one speed is completely cool and then say that another amount is "too much".

---

Exactly how I feel about age of consent laws! ;)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

14 is okay though? I find it funny that people (who speed) say one speed is completely cool and then say that another amount is "too much".

---

Exactly how I feel about age of consent laws! ;)

---

touché!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

Speed alone does not kill.

---

I never said it did.

Quote:

---

Also, Stealth, people will not just keep speeding forever if the limits are raised. The average on the autobahn is like 95mph or something.

---

That's what I said. I said you would be nearing 100 mph PSL before people accepted it as the max. Your figure pretty much proves that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

Speed alone does not kill.

---

I never said it did.

---

Okay, I may have skimmed a little over the last 7 pages.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

Also, Stealth, people will not just keep speeding forever if the limits are raised. The average on the autobahn is like 95mph or something.

---

That's what I said. I said you would be nearing 100 mph PSL before people accepted it as the max. Your figure pretty much proves that.

---

What is wrong with that speed? I think if the road is flat and dry and straight and everyone is paying attention and competent it is a perfectly reasonable speed.

I didn't say I had a problem with that speed. I was merely making the point that, with escalated PSLs comes escalated speeding over PSL, up to a certain point.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

You can go a billion miles an hour through space for eternity and never die if the conditions are right.

---

I think a billion might be over stepping it, but point taken.:p I guess the whole "nothing in front of you" has a whole different meaning.

I don't really have anything else to add, except another screen shot from my defensive driving course.

If you want to take the largest bite out of the fatalities that occur on US highways, get people to stay in their lane!

Its also easy to say speed kills when the speed limits are atificially low and EVERYONE speeds everywhere. So when someone does die... were they speeding? Hell yeah... statistics are great like that. I could also say that driving under 200mph kills and I would probably get the same type of analysis.

Also, for clarification, the lane position statistics are referring to head on collisions on undivided highways (I am pretty sure). Nonetheless, I do agree that people need to stay in their lane!

I had a nice big post last night, but due to database errors, I couldn't post it. :(

Basically, I was saying, speed doesn't kill, but it can be a factor, sometimes more so than other times. If you are doing 100 on a busy road with other cars doing 55... then speed would be a major factor in reducing your reaction time. Now if you are on a road where everyone is doing 75, and you are doing 100, speed is less of a factor because you have a bit more reaction time.

There are plenty of other things that come into play though, weather, type of car, tire condition, etc... but just coming out and saying, "Speed kills" by itself leaves so much open, and is silly to state alone.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StandingCow

I had a nice big post last night, but due to database errors, I couldn't post it. :(

---

It's been doing that every night around 0200 for some reason. It's maddening.

~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

Speed alone does not kill.

---

I never said it did.

---

Really?

Did you forget you said this in post # 8 in this thread?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Sorry, but you guys are all wet on this one. You're intentionally ignoring the laws of physics to suit a dishonest agenda. Simply being an idiot or drunk is no more dangerous than simply speeding. Why? Because the level of danger is determined by behaviour, not by mental status. It's not the drunk driver's alcohol that kills you. It's his driving that kills you. Now, answer this simple question. Would you rather him hit you at 75 mph, or at 30 mph? How about this: would you rather be doing 75 mph when he pulls out in front of you, or 30 mph? There's no way to parse that one. Speed kills. Whining about it does not change the law of physics. And it doesn't matter if it was the other guy's fault that you crashed. You still lose.

If you want to say you simply don't care because you are teh aw3some driver, that's an honest position. But arguing that speed doesn't kill is dishonest, and frankly silly.

---

Or did you forget that you said this in post # 11?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Drunk is the gun. Speed is the drunk pulling the trigger. Therefore, it is the speed that kills.

---

And kpatz, Supercowpowers, MEM-TEK... Kudos on doing a fine job. I couldn't agree with each of you more! Thanks! :thumb2:



~

Desmosedici, I feel like you just have something against SS and you just have to say something to keep the argument going when neither of you guys will change your mind on the matter. My opinion.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Desmosedici

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by 9500ier

Speed alone does not kill.

---

I never said it did.

---

Really?

Did you forget you said this in post # 8 in this thread?

---

Another dismal reading comprehension FAIL on your part.

Where in that quote did I use the word "alone"?

~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Another dismal reading comprehension FAIL on your part.

Where in that quote did I use the word "alone"?

---

Fail? Maybe in your opinion, but take another look at this statement of yours in that post...


"Speed kills. Whining about it does not change the law of physics. And it doesn't matter if it was the other guy's fault that you crashed."


Where is any mention of any other factor? You said yourself, right there, "it doesn't matter if it was the other guy's fault..." You simply said "Speed kills." No qualifiers. No additional factors mentioned.

And I noticed how you simply avoided anything about your post # 11.

You know... Where you said, again without qualification or equivocation...


"Therefore, it is the speed that kills."


But you know, despite what ssick92 suggested, I honestly don't have anything against you, SS. I simply disagree with your use of the same tired, old LEO fallacies to try and defend PSL's that are shoved onto the populace for no other reason than revenue generation and having nothing to do with safety, road design, or documented traffic studies. Continuing to use that "Speed Kills" fable is, IMHO, a colossal FAIL on your part, and it is readily apparent far more here see it to be as much of a monument to mendacity as I do.

See y'all tomorrow. I'm going to bed.

G'night! ;)



~

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stealth Stalker

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by StandingCow

I had a nice big post last night, but due to database errors, I couldn't post it. :(

---

It's been doing that every night around 0200 for some reason. It's maddening.

---

Not sure about these forums, but in vBulletin there are maint options to help fix these kinds of issues. Who admins these forums anyway? Radar Roy?