3 ms·

Also working from memory. Before the speed limit went away the ticket was only something like $5 as an F.U. to the feds. So effectively, there wasn't much of

by gexla 17y ago

Also working from memory. Before the speed limit went away the ticket was only something like $5 as an F.U. to the feds. So effectively, there wasn't much of a deterrent then. After the limit went away you would get hit not with speeding, but reckless driving if you were going too fast, and that's much worse than a speeding ticket. Today, the speed limit signs are back up. There are a lot of very dangerous roads in Montana where you just can't go without a speed limit. Maybe the reason the fatalities went up is because people feel they have to stick close to the limit even where it's not a smart thing to do. However, people in Montana should know all "reasonable and prudent" because of the horrible road conditions in the winter.

presidentender 17y ago
A lot of dangerous roads where you can't do without a speed limit? Bullshit. People can keep to a safe speed without being forced to on pain of ticketing. The advisory signs (the yellow ones) didn't come down when there were no speed limits.
- gexla 17y ago
  As an example, I lived in a neighborhood where there were a lot of people living and our only way to get out was to get on a highway where people routinely drove at 75 mph or higher. There was a wide corner on one end which hid oncoming traffic (but not enough of a corner to slow people down) and a hill on the other end which also hid traffic. At these speeds you typically have freeways with on/off ramps, we had to pull out directly into it. The city ended up putting in a light farther down the road to protect a bigger neighborhood but that didn't help our own. This road wasn't obviously dangerous because of the road itself, the danger was from people getting on the road at low speeds. Montana has lots of these types of spots because of a state of drivers used to driving at high speeds on roads which service a lot of very spread out communities.
m_eiman 17y ago
because people feel they have to stick close to the limit even where it's not a smart thing to do. If it's unsafe to drive at an allowed speed, then it obviously needs to be lowered. Even if unlimited speeds were to be allowed, it would still be very useful for drivers to have recommended speeds that are set according to local conditions (preferrably "intelligent" ones that also take weather etc into account).
- mootothemax 17y ago
  If it's unsafe to drive at an allowed speed, then it obviously needs to be lowered. What nonsense! As my driving instructor never tired of telling me: it's a speed limit, not a target.
  - Dove 17y ago
    Agreed. It is a good thing to remove the limit and force the driver to consider for himself what is safe given his condition and vehicle. He should have been doing that all along.
  - m_eiman 17y ago
    Then why not just have a global speed limit? (Or no limit, for that matter) It seems obvious to me that different speed limits are indicators of road conditions, and that it should be safe to travel at that speed in a normal car in normal weather conditions.

by gexla 17y ago

presidentender 17y ago

A lot of dangerous roads where you can't do without a speed limit? Bullshit. People can keep to a safe speed without being forced to on pain of ticketing. The advisory signs (the yellow ones) didn't come down when there were no speed limits.

gexla 17y ago
As an example, I lived in a neighborhood where there were a lot of people living and our only way to get out was to get on a highway where people routinely drove at 75 mph or higher. There was a wide corner on one end which hid oncoming traffic (but not enough of a corner to slow people down) and a hill on the other end which also hid traffic. At these speeds you typically have freeways with on/off ramps, we had to pull out directly into it. The city ended up putting in a light farther down the road to protect a bigger neighborhood but that didn't help our own. This road wasn't obviously dangerous because of the road itself, the danger was from people getting on the road at low speeds. Montana has lots of these types of spots because of a state of drivers used to driving at high speeds on roads which service a lot of very spread out communities.

m_eiman 17y ago

because people feel they have to stick close to the limit even where it's not a smart thing to do. If it's unsafe to drive at an allowed speed, then it obviously needs to be lowered. Even if unlimited speeds were to be allowed, it would still be very useful for drivers to have recommended speeds that are set according to local conditions (preferrably "intelligent" ones that also take weather etc into account).

mootothemax 17y ago
If it's unsafe to drive at an allowed speed, then it obviously needs to be lowered. What nonsense! As my driving instructor never tired of telling me: it's a speed limit, not a target.
- Dove 17y ago
  Agreed. It is a good thing to remove the limit and force the driver to consider for himself what is safe given his condition and vehicle. He should have been doing that all along.
- m_eiman 17y ago
  Then why not just have a global speed limit? (Or no limit, for that matter) It seems obvious to me that different speed limits are indicators of road conditions, and that it should be safe to travel at that speed in a normal car in normal weather conditions.