What is Digg?Sponsored by Travelzoo
Take Advantage of Ridiculously Low Holiday Airfares view!
travelzoo.com - Flights $52 and up for Thanksgiving, Christmas & New Year. But move on it now.
258 Comments
- truspector, on 10/12/2007, -13/+80Agreed, probably not good for Los Angeles, but the rest of the country is not one big traffic jam. Where I live, it usually isn't the people speeding that cause accidents, but rather it is grandma doing 35 in a 55 zone with a line of 50 cars trying to get around her.
BTW, Oreilly is a POS. - somnus, on 10/12/2007, -1/+64My favourite is a friend caught doing ~220km (~135mph) who was pulled over. When asked if he knew how fast he was going, he responded "No officer, at those speeds you have to keep your eyes on the road". The officer's response reflected his level of amusement.
- strictnein, on 10/12/2007, -4/+65I think it's because that with higher speed limits the slower drivers are driving faster and the fast drivers are driving just slightly faster. So the difference in speed between the fast drivers and slow drivers has decreased.
- magarity, on 10/12/2007, -1/+58By the time you get up to 55 in RI you're leaving the state anyway.
- Paktu, on 10/12/2007, -2/+59Speed doesn't kill, differences in speed kill.
- Popdmb, on 10/12/2007, -3/+56That would be the rationalization I would give if i was completely hammered, too.
- HoboMaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+51It's because you spend less time on the highway. This was a big deal in Texas in the 80s. When the speed limits got dropped to 55, deaths in Texas went WAY up because more people were falling asleep at the wheel during long trips. It's not as big a deal in a lot of places, but in Texas, 5+ hour drives are common. dropping from 70 to 55 makes that like an 8 hour drive. People were still trying to make the trip in one drive though. That's why Texas got the limits bumped back up first.
- TokenUser, on 10/12/2007, -3/+49You could set the limit in Los Angeles to 90, and traffic would still be doing 5 on the 10.
Higher speeds make sense for interstates where there isn't much in the way of merging going on - not so much in a city where you have on/off ramps and lost tourists. - FTLJohnson, on 10/12/2007, -14/+59The biggest problem is that people believe speed limits DO ANYTHING. They are really just another way for the government to tax people. Think about it for JUST a second. If we were to get rid of speed limits, do you really think that the type of people who would drive 100+ miles per hour and risk not only thier OWN lives, and the lives of other people... are the type that FOLLOW THE LAW? Speed limits don't do anything... the people that want to speed WILL and DO, regardless of the law. Police only catch a FRACTION of people who speed, and often catch people only going a few miles over, because it's not about safety, it's about increasing the police budget. If we got rid of the speed limits, people would drive at speeds that felt comfortable and SAFE. Without them, people would probably organize into the varying lanes more efficiently, and auto manfacturers would be more likely to come up with newer safety solutions. Speed limits are a joke.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+32What in the hell are you trying to say?
- neoform, on 10/12/2007, -9/+32Gas..
Most cars burn a lot more gas when driving more than 70mph since the gear ratio isn't configured for such high speeds.. - hackwrench, on 10/12/2007, -1/+23Consider the states that didn't raise their speed limits the control group.
- somnus, on 10/12/2007, -11/+33@apocalizer: I have never even *heard* of a Canadian that didn't know the difference between Miles and Km's. Every joke I've ever heard on the subject was regarding Americans coming into Canada and thinking they'd gone to Highway Heaven.
- apocalizer, on 10/12/2007, -14/+35Where I live (Northern Michigan) there is so little traffic on the freeway they could increase the speed limit to 120 without problems. (Probably cut down on stupid Canadians driving 75kph instead of 75mph anyways.) I think that speed limits can be raised in some areas without killing motorists, but yeah, LA would be horrible and imagine Atlanta...
- dankoleary, on 10/12/2007, -8/+29Do any diggers wish to opine on why you think this has gone down? In Los Angeles, it seems like this would be a horrible idea.
- mapkinase, on 10/12/2007, -0/+20I travelled 100mph from Scripps Ranch to Irvine all the time beating 1hour limit. The travel would me more pleasant if not for the cops and slow grannies that like to drive 65mph on the leftmost lane.
The lower speed limit should be set to 65mph on the freeways. - scottmweaver, on 10/12/2007, -16/+35Every day, I drive to work and there is an accident-- either coming or going on the 405. People die all the time from these accidents, so it is no testament to more safely-designed vehicles. These people die because either they or someone else wasn't paying attention. If you follow too closely to stop in time, you're going to hit and it's not going to be pretty. Increased highway and freeway speeds are an excellent idea.
In addition, I propose that we have a slow lane for the idiots who travel in clustered groups of slowness. Also, the right to shoot people in the face who don't even have the common decency to use their turn signal.
Thank you. - senfo, on 10/12/2007, -0/+19@mecole21,
> Someone going 30 in a 55 is gonna be worse than someone going 70 in a 55...
Not necessarily true. In my experience, traffic flows at its best when people are driving about the same speed as the other people around them. Slight differences in speed (e.g., 5 MPH) rarely is a cause for concern. More dramatic differences in speed (either higher or lower than the general flow of traffic) are where I begin to see chaos.
People that insist on driving (i.e., not passing) in the left lane on highways is also a leading cause of aggression on the roads I travel. Time and time again, I see people make risky maneuvers while attempting to get around somebody that refuses to move back into the right lane. - HoboMaster, on 10/12/2007, -0/+18"Perhaps putting speed limiters on turbo charged rice burners driven by 18 year olds with 6 weeks of drivers ed experience (a far greater cause of death) might also help??"
Not a bad idea, but actually, senior citizens are the largest cause of fatal accidents. I learned that in defensive driving. I was thoroughly unsurprised. In my experience, old people have been a larger problem than young people. Young people are likely to get themselves killed. Old people are likely to get others killed. - BigPapi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+17In MA, the speed limit is 55-65 on most highways, but everybody drives 70.
- somnus, on 10/12/2007, -5/+22Such as the difference between a car at highway speeds and a stationary wall. =)
- johndi, on 10/12/2007, -2/+19The article mentions other factors, try reading it. Guardrails in the median don't decrease the number of accidents. Though they will reduce head on collisions.
- Dustyb, on 10/12/2007, -2/+17Maybe because at 70 mph people don't feel like they can be on their cellphones, and be distracted? Like on the Autobahn in Germany there are less deaths per mile than there are in a highway of the same length, if that makes sense.
- Captbob007, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Maybe the higher the speed limit, the fewer senior citizens (the cause of many accidents) are interested in driving on the highways
- jdavid, on 10/12/2007, -1/+14I think Cops looking for speeders causes accidents, rear end collisions to be exact.
- Atroz, on 10/12/2007, -0/+13Grok, The article does address the other states
Two studies, by the National Motorists Association and by the Cato Institute, have compared crash data in states that raised their speed limits with those that didn't and found no increase in deaths in the higher speed states. - TokenUser, on 10/12/2007, -3/+16Perhaps putting speed limiters on turbo charged rice burners driven by 18 year olds with 6 weeks of drivers ed experience (a far greater cause of death) might also help??
Generalisations do noone any good. - SuicideBarbie, on 10/12/2007, -0/+12Do Rhode Islanders actually drive the speed limit?
In MA, its not that our speed limits are all that high, it's mainly that we all speed here. - deadbaby, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11I absolutely hate these people who drive 50 on the highway. I've gotten into so many near accidents with slow drivers. They merge in, you think they're going to speed up and they never do. This starts a desperate jump to the left lane which causes accidents. People who do this should be fined or even held liable in a civil suit. Minimum highway speeds should be enforced just as much as maximum speeds.
- mancat, on 10/12/2007, -0/+11Shouldn't you be in summer school right now?
- okvol, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10LA traffic is bi-polar. Speed limits are meaning less. I drove the Valencia/Hollywood commute for 2.5 years. The traffic was either stop/go (average 5 mph) or fast, at 75 in a 65 zone. If you are on a section that is moving, a cop will run over you if you try to make only the speed limit. So, bump it up and legalize what is happening.
As far as mileage, you don't start getting detrimental effects until about 80 in most cars. 70 to 75 are a sweet zone. When you have a choice, pick your car by aerodynamics. Actually look up and find the drag coefficient. This can actually mean more at 80 than gearing. Big hint - don't buy a Hummer. - mcdevitts, on 10/12/2007, -12/+22Correlation NOT causality. There are plenty of other factors that could have led to increased safety (guardrails in the median, etc).
- dspickes, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10Drivers in Germany also have a completely different attitude towards the road than those in the US. Such as, in Germany, it is almost a given that unless you are passing someone, you stay in the right lane to allow faster drivers to go around you. This is not so in the US.
Vehicle licenses there are horrendously more expensive than in the US, and fuel definitely isn't cheaper.
Maybe they appreciate it more than we do. - anonyjames, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10I think the point is, from the numbers in the article, it can be safely assumed that the increase in speed limits did not significantly /increase/ the chance of dieing on the road. They didn't have any yearly graphs or anything, but if 70 mph was the deathtrap people said it was, then the increase in car safety features wouldn't overcome that margin.
- brenbart, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11It's not just Germany, when I was in the Caribbean last it was so strange. Drivers didn't act like being passed was a challenge to their manhood. The car behind would just go 'beep-beep' and pull around. The driver being passed would usually give a friendly wave.
- trialofmiles, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11@mutt
Your comparison to those other crimes is way off base. Even if there were no highway speed limit laws, there could still be traffic laws. For example. driving recklessly or if your driving 100mph is putting others in danger.
There are highway systems around the world that operate without.speed limits. Like the German Autobahn. - mecole21, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13Someone going 30 in a 55 is gonna be worse than someone going 70 in a 55...
- blu64, on 10/12/2007, -0/+10i drive a courier route in AZ, USA about 360 miles a day, i set my cruise control at 80 mph. At the request of my boss i set my cruise at 55 for one week and fuel mileage only went up by 6%. not enough of a savings to make it worthwhile, considering the additional time and wages. and yes people driving 60 in the left lane should definitely be shot on sight.
- 4bit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12But don't safer cars mean it's safer to travel at faster speeds?
- miller9time, on 10/12/2007, -3/+12@mutt
Apples != Oranges
You are comparing a civil infraction (i.e. speeding) to criminal actions and felonies. - celeronxl, on 10/12/2007, -1/+10I definitely believe these studies. I live in Rhode Island where speed limits are horrendously low. Every time I drive into Massachusetts I have to increase my speed by 10 to 15 miles per hour even on the same road. And yet, the safety levels seem exactly the same.
- remthewanderer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9regardless of the current speed limit set on highways, what should really be addressed is the sudden change in speed say from 65 to 55mph. This seems to be a blatant speed trap with no purpose other than increasing the money raised from speeding fines. In my 45 minute commute to work i encounter 2 such instances.
- jeshjohn, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9I had a senior citizen driving in front of me today she was driving 15Mph in a 50Mph, she was also in the left lane and would not get over. People behind me were honking at me for not going faster so she almost caused a wreck or at least a fight.
- superkendall, on 10/12/2007, -0/+9That's why some states have passed laws that make it illegal to drive in the left lane at the same speed as other drivers around them (with exceptions for heavy traffic of course).
It really does help reduce cases of road rage. I find many of the people that just sit there in the left lane to be really intent on not letting others around them, speeding up just enough when people try to go around that no-one can pass them. That can't be an indication of a healthy mind, they are just transferring their own anger onto other drivers. - gorkish, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9badbox:
Hang on a sec "It's true?" I'm not saying I never went 90 on an empty highway but your logic is fatally flawed. On an empty highway you remove the variable of other drivers. Barring weather or other visibility conditions, the primary factor in how dangerous your accident is going to be, should you have one, is the speed you are going.
I'm not going to have any sort of accident parked in the middle of the road if there's no other cars. It's pretty much impossible. But if I'm driving 20 miles an hour all sorts of things might happen. My tire might blow out or I might fall asleep... Take it up to 90mph when all the same things could still happen and the accident gets much worse. Time spent on the road is nearly irrelevant if you are moving -- it's the distance travelled. - nappingcracker, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8You may be German, but I doubt you drive 300mph.
Fastest production car: Bugatti Veyron 253mph at the Volkswagen Ehra-Lessien test track.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bugatti_Veyron
Honda managed to get their F1 car up to 256mph with minimal downforce settings
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Formula_One_cars
Fun reads about fast cars. - apocalizer, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14@RandomSkratch:
Okay, first I was being sarcastic in the first place. Second, I was not referring to all Canadians. Yes, I should've rephrased that to "Old Geezers" instead but the point I'm trying to make is slow drivers cause way more accidents than speeding ones. Slow ones won't react fast enough in an accident.
Don't make me write a third counter-rebuttal. - JohnboiWaltune, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9@tocard
"the people that want to speed WILL and DO, regardless of the law. "
Not where I live. We have photo radar on the freeway. If you wanted to, you could conceivably rack up half a dozen speeding tickets in about 20 minutes, and lose your driver's license as well.
It is a new system and I hear it's quite lucrative for the city. So expect to see it in other cities very soon. - absoluteczech, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8people in stupid sports cars wouldnt have to pass them if the damn semi werent always blocking both lanes and passing when going up hills causing everyone to drive 40+ mph.
- renyad, on 10/12/2007, -1/+9I read something about this awhile ago, basically the cops want the speed limit set around what they call the "80% rule", that is, set the limit to the speed 80% of the drivers are actually doing. It has been pointed out for years that there is more danger in having wide differences in speed, not so much the speed itself. This along with VASTLY improved engineering and safety have all been factors, please let's not go back to 55 ever again.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 260 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is