More power to the police in high speed pursuit

Can't be done...

A Beaverton police officer cited by photo radar for speeding while on patrol is fighting her ticket.

formatting link
Or can it?

Judge says speeding Beaverton cop won't get special treatment.

formatting link
I guess we will see...

Reply to
My Name Is Nobody
Loading thread data ...

He's not going to actually read it. But someone wrote a quick summary here:

formatting link
But anyway... here's some more sources:

Cirillo, J.A., Interstate System Accident Research Study II Interim Report II. Public Roads, Vol 35, No 3, August 1969, pp. 71-75. Federal Highway Administration. Synthesis of Speed Zoning Practice. Report No. FHwA/RD-85/096. Washington, D.C. July 1985. Federal Highway Administration. Traffic Speed Trends. Washington, D.C. 1969-1975. Solomon, D., Accidents on Main Rural Highways Related to Speed, Driver, and Vehicle. Bureau of Public Roads (precursor to FHwA). July 1964. Federal Highway Administration. Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits. Report No. FHwA/RD-92/084. McLean, VA. June 1996. Tignor, Samuel C. and Warren, Davey. Driver Speed Behavior on U.S. Streets and Highways. Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1990 Compendium of Technical Papers. Orlando, FL August, 1990. David L. Harkey, et. al., "Assessment of Current Speed Zoning Criteria," Transportation Research Record, no. 1281, 1990.

Reply to
Brent P

DAMN IT! Never, NEVER question authority! You risk the safety and lives of all of society by doing so... Moo...

Reply to
My Name Is Nobody

Damn. I had hope, but you missed it again.

I'm not arguing with you. Get it? All I'm saying is that WHERE speed limits are posted, then speed limits are posted. It's really that simple.

What does driving legal speeds in Germany have to do with this discussion? Reality. Reality = "what is".

Nope, you missed it again. The posted speed limit, NO MATTER WHAT YOU THINK OF IT, is the reality. I don't care if 100% of drivers speed, the posted speed limit is STILL the posted speed limit.

Question: when EVERYBODY on the highway is speeding, does the posted speed limit change? No, I didn't think so.

Your experience is counter to my own. People who drive at the posted speed are not the problem. See if you can wrap your mind around that one.

That's fine. At least we got the whining part down.

Bullshit. Sorry. Speed, relative or otherwise, does not in and of itself cause safety issues. You know that. Are you a student of traffic, or not? Speed, as the sole contributing factor, does not cause accidents. Think.

No, I APPLAUD red light cameras. I'm one of those safety hazard types who actually brakes on yellow, not floors it. I'm surprised that you'd bring that up...

Why would anyone rear-end me, when I'm braking for the yellow? That would really be stupid. Maybe that's just the kind of person I DON'T WANT driving. As a matter of fact, ANYONE who rear-ends another car is almost always at fault. I think the insurance companies agree with that.

I guess I should also point out, again, that my driving record is clean. The only time I've been fleeced lately was last year, when I called a plumber about a leaking pipe.

Here's the answer for you: take the driver away from the steering wheel. Put him in the back seat with a DVD player, and let computers handle the traffic. Then we can all travel at 85+mph three feet apart without any risk. That would be great.

There is no personal responsibility. If I slam into some grey-hair doing 55, it's the grey-hair's fault. If I get ticketed for driving 20mph over the speed limit, it's The Man's fault.

What does it say on the speed limit sign?

The number painted on the speed limit sign.

The speed limit sign still has not changed.

DAMN, you go off on some tangents. No wonder you don't understand the reality at the heart of this thread. The numbers painted on the sign.

dwight

Reply to
dwight

Wow.

You got THAT right. Actually quite impressive...

dwight

Reply to
dwight

No you're missing it.

And what I am telling you, is that often those speed limits are not correct, and many times not even legal under the law.

Oh, so you're just demanding others have the same apathy as you.

Then you're just preaching apathy.

Yep, preaching apathy.

Come for a ride with me at the speed limit on chicago area expressways. I'll put plastic down on the passenger seat first though because I don't want the leather ruined.

Read what I wrote again. BY DEFINING NEARLY EVERYONE AS A VIOLATOR, IT (defining everyone as violator) CREATES MORE SAFETY PROBLEMS than SETTING THE SPEED LIMIT APPROPIATELY. Now read and comprehend. It's not the speed, but making normal, reasonable behavior a violation of the law. Let's say the law made some other normal, reasonable behavior illegal... say, drinking a cup of coffee while walking on the sidewalk. Do you think that when police tried to stop people for this 'crime' would some flee? Of course. That's the point. Not defining normal and reasonable behavior as a violation of the law means less police interaction with people and thusly fewer people fleeing police in non-controlled public settings. If you cannot read and comprehend a simple paragraph like the above, don't bother entering the discussion.

Well, maybe you should read how governments place cameras on intersections instead of addressing easy and cheap underlying safety issues and how they actually will make intersections less safe to bring in more money. I'd have no problem with RLCs on intersections that complied with the MUTCD. Trouble is, local governments don't make money with cameras on intersections that comply with the law. There are too few people running the red at those intersections.

I've been rear ended braking for a yellow signal. The research on RLCs indicates that increases because of the need to stop harder for the decreased yellow signal time that makes the cameras profitable.

My record is clean too... so what. It's irrelevant except to those of you with no information to back up your arguments so you've decided to make this some personal attack against the imagined way I drive despite stating otherwise several times.

Yep, just ignore it.

That seems consistant with your apatahy.

Who cares if that's illegal... obey your rulers. Back to the rule of Kings and doomsmen.

Who cares if that's illegal... obey your rulers. Back to the rule of Kings and doomsmen.

Who cares if that's illegal... obey your rulers. Back to the rule of Kings and doomsmen.

No I understand the issues, you don't. You enjoy being a good little slave obeying your rulers. I believe in individual liberty and a restricted government that obeys the law.

Reply to
Brent P

SNIP

You continue to ignore human nature. No matter where you set the speed limit, people will, as they already have shown, exceed it. When speed limts were 55, people drove 60-65. When they were raised to suit the roads (70 on interstates for example) the people began driving 75-80. If you set the speed at 125, you'd find people doing 150.

It's a combination of those who think that extra 5 or 10mph will really get them to their destination well ahead of sticking to the speed limit, coupled with what I believe is a subconscious resistance to authotrity of the state.

Even in places where the speed limts were essentially non-existant (ID and NV) there was still the basic law of conditions. You could be doing 50 and if the roadconditions were bad, it was, and is, a citeable offense. And, just like the Autobahn you so frequently point to, if you have an accident you get hammered whether it's your fault, their fault, nobody's fault. And, as far as I know, the Autobahn is the only stretch of roadway in the world which allows those kinds of speeds. By the way, even the Autobahn has a law concerning the road conditions and speed.

Reply to
Spike

Wrong and proven wrong by the studies cited. Unless severely underposted and coupled with heavy enforcement, travel speeds do not change much with the posted speed limit. What is seen with a properly set speed limit is a tighter distribution where the faster drivers slow down to be legal and the slower drivers speed up because they can now do so legally. I would also add that I have found that lane discipline increases as well, although studies on speed limits don't typically comment on lane discipline.

No, it's an artifact of underposted speed limits and speed taxation. Studies have shown time and time again that raising the speed limit above the 85th percentile causes no significant increase in travel speeds.

If you are really interested read the book "American Autobahn".

Your babble and mis information aside... Of course one slows for poor road conditions, are you trying to suggest that speed limits aren't upper bounds but some sort of one-size-fits-all recommendation? They aren't supposed to be. If you need government guidence to choose a safe speed for the conditions you are presented with you shouldn't be behind the wheel in the first place. There are laws in the USA about unsafe speed for conditions etc and so forth anyway.

Reply to
Brent P

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in news:FLOdnWCkD9LOo9zbnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

In summary, Brent, you're a freakin' idiot.

Reply to
Joe

So, you can fling an insult. Where is your well supported argument? Oh that's right, you're just another moron who accepts things the way they are and anything new that comes along.

It's people like you that remind me the US people as a whole are deserving of this nation is changing into.

Reply to
Brent P

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com (Brent P) wrote in news:BP- dnQcreIQBTNzbnZ2dnUVZ snipped-for-privacy@comcast.com:

There's no argument in telling you you're a freakin' idiot.

BIG (and incorrect) presumption on your part with nothing whatsoever to back it up.

People like me? And you know me how? I called you a freakin' idiot because of the nonsense you posted. Unless you start googling my past posts, your only frame of reference is that I called you an idiot.

Can you explain what you just tried to say? It's really not a cohesive sentence. Guess I was right...

Reply to
Joe

Maybe you should have presented an argument instead of flinging insults.

Nonsense? You mean law, accepted engineering practice, engineering studies, the federal manual on uniform traffic control devices?

Don't worry, you'll find out soon enough. And it was before you cut it up.

Reply to
Brent P

Funny thing, Brent. For all your Big Brother whining, you seem to take Federal studies as bible. Hmm.

Ya know, I could give a rat's differential housing about nationwide statistics and shit. I look at the goings-on where I drive daily, develop my own "style", and that's pretty much it. No arguments. No stress. No countless hours regurgitating the same impotent tripe over and over. You should try it.

Reply to
CobraJet

The MUTCD isn't a study. The studies that are federally funded often have their findings 'softened' for the status quo. However I am not taking them as bible nor do you have any such evidence. I prefer to use government sources in debates where people are arguing 'you just want to disobey the law and drive fast' as their counter argument. the reason should be obvious to even a dead cat, and that reason is it cuts off attacking those behind the study.

Far better a futile effort trying to inform people with my inbetween time than trying to act tough from behind a keyboard like a certain person does....

Reply to
Brent P

Oh yeah, that makes really good sense. Guess that playground scenario really got to you, huh? LOL!

Reply to
CobraJet

Is this the same government you disdain for it's traffic enforcement and arbitrary establishment of lowered speeds?

Good luck Brent. Guess the world just isn't ready to change just for you.

Reply to
Spike

CJ Did you kick sand in his face with your keyboard? Look out. He may just sign up for a muscle building course for his fingers. Next he'll want the marbles he lost back. Hope you kept count so he doesn't try to take some of yours.

Reply to
Spike

Do you have ADD? I want the government to follow the law. State vehicle codes usually demand following the MUTCD and even incorporate parts of it directly into their vehicle code.

Reply to
Brent P

They're still there.

The sign still says 55.

I'm preaching reality. It's not that fine a distinction between reality and fantasy. Most people understand that.

The sign hasn't changed.

Chicago. Wow. Been there, done that. Chicagoans drive like pansies. Come drive in New York.

Oh, and guess what - even in New York there ARE people who drive at the posted speed limit. And they have every right to do just that. If you want to drive, you have to understand that they're out there and deal with it. Just another bit of reality, y'know.

Coffee? C'mon. Speed (again) does not cause safety problems. It is the UNSAFE DRIVER (no matter WHAT speed he's driving) that causes safety problems. Personal responsibility in all things. Stop trying to blame everyone and everything else. I don't give a crap what speed you drive at or even what speed the vast majority drive, it's the unsafe behavior that causes problems. Not the speed limit signs, not the state trooper waiting in the bushes, but the individual driver.

And the sign still says 55.

Waitaminute... Some guy rear-ends you, and you blame the traffic signal? Are you KIDDING?!? The idiot that hit you was 100% at fault! It doesn't matter if you stopped dead at a GREEN light - the idiot that hit you was 100% at fault. Oh, man...

Stop making stuff up. I didn't say anything about your driving, since I have no idea how you drive. But I'll say this - I never assume that the "other guy" knows what he's doing. That's probably a major reason why TFrog has been untouched in over 200,000 miles.

So... what? You speed? Drive a little faster than reasonable at times? Push the envelope once in a while? Big deal. That only leads me to one conclusion:

If you speed but have never been ticketed for speeding, then shut the hell up. What's all this blather about, if it has no personal effect on you?

Apatahy... What are YOU doing about any of this, other than preaching to a Mustang group?

I was watching a little Tucker tonight, a little Lou Dobbs... Seems that several of the clergy are reinstituting a Sanctuary program. They don't agree with the current immigration laws, so they choose to go around them.

Tucker asked, well, what if I don't believe that bank robbery is a crime. Would I be justified in harboring bank robbers? What about me? I get to ignore laws I don't agree with, too. So do you. And the next guy. And the next. Let's all just ignore whatever laws we want.

Meanwhile, someone out there is actually trying to do something about it. I know this, because you keep dropping links to these other people who are actually doing something.

Every great change came about not because people groused about the law in a newsgroup, but because someone went out, broke the law, and paid the penalty. Jesus, Rosa Parks, Ghandi, King... the list is endless. The martyrs.

The whole time you've been tippy-tappin' on your keyboard, that sign has said 55. It said 55 yesterday, 55 today, and will in all likelihood say 55 tomorrow. You want to ignore that law? Go ahead, break it. But be prepared to pay your penalty. Tell the judge all about how that speed limit is illegal, I'm sure he'll listen. Tell the press. See if you can convince your congressman to take your side. Get the ball rolling.

Your constant whining about this in this newsgroup accomplishes nothing.

The sign still says 55.

I was going to say that you were repeating yourself, but that's a given.

I understand that the sign STILL says 55.

dwight

Reply to
dwight

He's gonna need more than non-stop Itsy Bitsy Spider finger sessions to get near *my* marbles.

However, it's not me he needs to worry about. As you know darn well, attitudes like his will be picked up on by any cop with some experience. I expect to see Brently on TV one night, bleeding from newly formed orifices, begging, "Can't we all just get along?"

Reply to
CobraJet

MotorsForum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.