9 ms·
Speed traps have no long-term effect on speeding: study
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- chmaynard 4y agoApparently this article is based on a single study in a single location by a community college engineering student. Caveat emptor.
- dang 4y agoOk we've bestudied the title above. Thanks!
- mattw2121 4y agoThis entire article is predicated on a local college student who measured speeds after the speed trap happened. That student then concluded that the speed trap was ineffective. Shouldn't he have also measured speeds prior to the speed trap?
- heavyset_go 4y agoPerhaps, if speeding in this case was measured on a continuum. If you look at it as a binary choice, either someone is speeding or not, you can conclude that people going over the speed limit are indeed still speeding.
- mattw2121 4y agoAgreed. But I would think that a speed trap would slow some people down, not all people. Lots of reasons for that, such as people unaware there was a speed trap there previously, people forgetting, etc. I know that areas in my town that are well known for speed traps definitely have a lower occurrence of people speeding. On a neighborhood road near my house we had a really bad problem with speeders. Over the course of several months, there were numerous speed traps. Today, there are less speeders than before.
- bombcar 4y agoThere are small towns on small highways spotted all around me - and some are well known in the area to be "speed trappy" and others are known to be "Wild West" - and the speed limit through all are the same 35 mph or whatever, but only one group really has noticeable slowdowns.
- chaps 4y agoThought the same. Dude should've just FOIA'd for the measured speeds before and after.
- xracy 4y agoFeels like the existence of cops writing speeding tickets as an income stream is probably proof of this...
- jay_kyburz 4y agoWow, surprise surprise, a speed trap that is no longer there is no longer working. I bet it would be a different story for a fixed camera speed trap that is well signposted.
- karamanolev 4y agoI've found those just cause people to brake hard before them and speed up after. If they become well known, they make people speed even more before/after, as it's not expected to have another speed control measure so close to a trap.
- smileysteve 4y agoMy state has a super speeder law at 85mph (on 65-75mph highways) this results in 90% of vehicles going 84mph.
- alistairSH 4y agoVirginia? If not, we do too. I think it's 80mph OR posted limit+20. Either way is an automatic reckless driving ticket (which can be criminal, with arrest and impounded car).
- shazzy 4y agoIn the UK fixed speed cameras are actually painted bright yellow, for the sole purpose of making them more visible to drivers. The reason being is they are positioned in places where you want to force the traffic to slow down for specific safety reasons (merging of two lanes, exits etc). They are not meant to change the behaviour of drivers on the road as a whole.
- jay_kyburz 4y agoI don't know about the US, but I think we'll have on every major road in 10 years here in Australia. They also do this thing where there are two sets of cameras, and if your average speed is above the limit between two points your in trouble. At the moment they target heavy vehicles, but my guess its only a matter of time before they target all vehicles.
- heavyset_go 4y agoSpeed traps aren't meant to stop speeding, they're meant to collect revenue for municipalities.
- throwawaysleep 4y agoI’m fine with a world where the stupid and harmful reduce my tax bill.
- heavyset_go 4y agoIn my experience, speed traps aren't catching dangerous people, just people that are unaware of the existence of the speed trap. For example, where I am, there's a hill with a road that winds around it with a 50 MPH speed limit, except right before the bottom and around the turn, suddenly it's 35 MPH before becoming 45 MPH highway. A cop hides around the turn and pulls over people who don't know that their 50 MPH road will suddenly become 35 MPH before they've cleared the hill. Locals know to go slow enough down the hill, as in less than 50 MPH, in order to not get pulled over.
- teeray 4y agoSome municipalities love to pull the trick with a yellow road geometry sign with a yellow limit for the road feature. It’s a speed limit, but not on the traditional white sign with “Speed Limit”.
- wrp 4y agoThe kind of situation you describe is the original reason why it was called a "trap".
- saiya-jin 4y agoin same vein as parking fines... great sources of permanent income with a mask of 'we care'
- u801e 4y agoIs we wanted to remove the revenue aspect, we could eliminate fonts and court costs for traffic violations and just rely on license demerit points. If one accumulates enough demerit points within a given time frame, then their license is suspended. If they're caught driving on a suspended license, then they're arrested and remain in jail until trial.
- unglaublich 4y agoShould be: "An individual speed trap has no long-term effect on speeding: anecdote". However, enforcement as a whole certainly has an effect on the behavior or drivers.
- rr888 4y agoAverage Speed traps work great. I used to hate those in the UK. With all the toll roads in the USA I'm surprised it hasn't been done already. Eg on the interstate for an hour or two, sensors can tell when you entered and exited & average speed.
- lostdog 4y agoIs there any change in accident rates, or any other metric that would suggest that these are worthwhile?
- yread 4y agofrom anecdotal experience these stretches become the most boring. And boring is good
- karamanolev 4y agoBasically all of my accidents were caused by boredom and losing attention, not by speeding, losing control in corners, etc. It's a complicated topic with a lot of variables, but those are my 2c.
- smileysteve 4y agoOne could also draw the conclusion that none of your accidents resulted in fatalities.
- DwnVoteHoneyPot 4y agoI always say if you can text and drive at the same time, it's because you're not driving fast enough!
- whynotmaybe 4y agoAccording to these studies, section speed cameras can reduce the number of accidents by 30% on average, compared to 20% for conventional speed cameras. Even better: section speed cameras reduce the number of serious accidents by 56%! Better, the study highlighted a "contagion" effect: the average speed also dropped in the areas located before and after the controlled section. Finally, the speed seems to have become more homogeneous, and the band changes less frequent in the studied area. https://www.touring.be/fr/articles/radars-troncons-et-securite-routiere-mythe-ou-realite https://www.touring.be/fr/articles/radars-troncons-et-securi... (in french)
- advisedwang 4y agoThe UK has "average-speed cameras", which use number plate recognition to see when you enter/exit a long stretch of road, and from that measure your average speed over a significant period. You can't just slow down for the camera. They are extremely effective - in practice traffic does slow down to the posted speed limit. Unpopular as they are, I wonder if they should be deployed widely. (These are usually deployed near roadworks)
- kqr 4y agoThis is such an obvious extension of the concept, but I've never figured out why they aren't used in the jurisdictions I'm familiar with. Privacy related to license plates? Numerical calculations not being valid grounds for incrimination?
- BitwiseFool 4y agoI sense constituents would be livid and would vote accordingly. I suspect the same backlash around red light cameras and mobile speeding vans would arise and the program would be cancelled after about a decade or so.
- woodruffw 4y agoIt really depends on the municipality: I would vote for this in a heartbeat, and so would a lot of other people in my area. There would also probably be some opposition, but I don't think it would be particularly lopsided against these kinds of cameras.
- windows2020 4y agoDo you drive?
- woodruffw 4y agoNope. Under 40% of households in my area own cars; in the area I grew up in, it's under 25%[1]. [1]: https://edc.nyc/article/new-yorkers-and-their-cars https://edc.nyc/article/new-yorkers-and-their-cars
- midislack 4y agoWhat if the traps are made to be permanent?
- bluGill 4y agoA few locals learn where they are, slam on the brakes just before them, then accelerate to normal speed afterwards. Thus making the total more dangerous.
- midislack 4y agoIs there research to support your thesis?
- idrathernot 4y agoMy daily commute
- midislack 4y agoBoss drop the hammer and require you back in the office? That sucks big time.
- ivraatiems 4y agoIn a local municipality where I used to live, they have a number of double-wide (two lanes in each direction with a median) roads in residential areas, with houses on each side. People often sped on these roads, going 45-55 miles an hour in a 35 zone, causing accidents and hurting pedestrians and cyclists. So they changed the speed limit from 35 to 25mph. Now, people routinely speed on these roads, going... 45-55 miles an hour in a 25 zone. Why don't we just make the speed limit zero? That oughta fix it. What's the alternative? I guess we could develop roads that are actually sized for the speed you want people to travel at, and thereby not make residential areas 100% road-centric, but I'm told by every civil engineer in America that that's crazy talk for some reason.
- lordnacho 4y agoHow about fines that scale with income?
- frumper 4y agoYou'd probably be fine just starting with actually giving out fines.
- JumpCrisscross 4y ago> What's the alternative? Windy roads. Double wide gives you optionality here: convert them into single lane each way and wind through the double wide, turning the remainder into parks or returning it to the adjacent plot.
- frumper 4y agoWindy might slow down some drivers, but it hurts visibility for every driver.
- karamanolev 4y agoWhat I've seen as part of a solution to that particular problem is to shape/decorate the roads according to the speed you want people travelling at. That's more of the case in Europe than the US. For lower speeds, plant more trees along the road, add more swerve-y features like alternating street parking on the left and right side of the road (as seen in Switzerland); avoid large, long visibility areas, asking people to pay attention and slow down. Making a 1mi visibility 2-lane each direction road with a 25mph is stupid, as it just won't be followed or if it is enforced - lead to endless frustration. Just use natural features to cause people to behave the way you want.
- hsbauauvhabzb 4y agoCanberra Australia recently dropped the cbd speed from 50kph to 40kph and setup speed traps the same week. Apparently they made $2mil in revenue. I think that speeding is bad, but cheap shots by law enforcement drive a deep us vs them mentality that makes people resent road law. Surely ‘little Timmy died because someone was speeding, don’t kill little Timmy’ appeals to peoples emotions would work better, if law enforcement actually wanted to make a difference..
- matsemann 4y agoNo, people in cars don't care about the risk they pose to others, if it cost them a few seconds longer drive.
- sfe22 4y agoWell said. I would add they do the same once they jump out of the car, especially when placing speed traps that cause artificial traffic interruptions and possibly accidents. And when they unnecessarily pull over and harass drivers on the highway for driving normal speeds, posing great danger to others.
- hsbauauvhabzb 4y agoThere will always be people like that, I suspect there would be more impact in a compassion driven campaign over blatant revenue raising bass punishments
- matsemann 4y agoHistory shows you to be wrong. When you put people inside a steel cage where they are protected and cut off from everyone else, something happens with their psychology.
- hsbauauvhabzb 4y agoI think you misunderstood my hypothesis, but you also seem hellbent on your assertion with no evidence / citations, so I wish you well.
- ars 4y agoThere's also not anywhere near enough speed limit signs on that road. I'm looking at the photo and I can see any. Add a whole bunch more of them and it would help. They need one by every single intersection - otherwise people entering the road could travel for quite a distance before realizing there's a low limit on that road.
- usea 4y agoMost people drive at a speed that they deem to be safe. Conditions such as road shape and size, and traffic, are the biggest factors that influence this. If you want people to drive more slowly, you should first figure out why you want that. If you're still determined, then you should figure out why drivers believe those speeds to be safe on that road. Changing the road conditions will change the speed at which people drive.
- unglaublich 4y agoThey believe it's safe, because _they are_ safe in their modern SUVs. It's pedestrians, pets, bicyclists and other road users that they put at risk.
- Chirael 4y agoNobody wants to hit pedestrians, pets, bicyclists, or other road users.
- croes 4y agoBut we don't drive like that
- doubled112 4y agoAgreed. About 30 minutes ago I watched a car make a left turn at a pedestrian in a high-vis vest. Either nobody is paying attention, not looking around enough, or the safety features (that A pillar) blocks too much of the view for our own good.
- deleted 4y ago[deleted]
- usea 4y agoYou're trying to place blame on drivers of certain types of vehicles, and make a distinction between the behavior of those drivers and the "rest of us", putting them in an "other" category. This is misguided and ineffective. Even people who drive small cars do so in a way that they believe to be safe. Even people who drove before "modern SUVs" existed did so in a way they believed to be safe. Drivers of SUVs are not the ones risking the lives of others, while the "rest of us" are being safe and responsible. When car accidents are as common and tragic as they are, the fault isn't with individual drivers. Drivers try to drive safely, and generally do their best under the circumstances. They're just regular people, like all of us. The fault is with the system: road design, vehicle design, incentives (city design, etc), and education.
- throwawaysleep 4y agoMake it so that at the third ticket in a year, your car is seized and sold off and your car debt becomes non-dischargable with a credit card interest rate.
- mjevans 4y agoEngineering solutions are best. A nice safe design where cars are away from people. Where turns are limited. Where pedestrians only cross at designated, high visibility areas, ideally timed to gaps in intended traffic flow patterns. Arterial routes are necessary; designate them, build them accordingly. Add a small buffer between them and residential areas. Time the dang lights on an arterial to encourage the most common flow to drive at the posted speed limits to continue hitting green lights. Avoid red lights to 'calm' traffic patterns, that just encourages bypasses through whatever alternatives exist, which will be neighborhood streets.
- giraffe_lady 4y agoThat still sounds like a world designed primarily for cars. It's hard for me to picture it honestly but it doesn't sound pleasant to move through as a person.
- mjevans 4y agoA world designed for persons needs a __massive__ overhaul compared to what exists literally everywhere I've seen. Even the nearby major cities are still begrudgingly designed for cars. They lack external interfaces and vehicle storage warehouses sufficient to break from that paradigm. A city designed for humans would need to be far closer to Azimov's Caves of Steel world, where everything is closer together, beltways and moving sidewalks replace in city bus transit. You'd still need the vehicle layer for emergency services, construction, and bulk product delivery; those vehicles will probably be electric though, or possibly transported by in city dedicated vehicles. Walt Disney World comes to mind as a larger area intended to have several hubs of primarily human scale transport. EPCOT has the well earned acronym 'Every Person Comes Out Tired' for good reasons; it's too far of a dang walk and the humidity around that lake is murder on a hot day. The inner facade stages are roughly at the sensible limits of human scale, but they're connected either by utility corridors or paths or direct abutment to roadways behind the parks. Even in these _designed_ areas, economics dictates both vehicle and human existence mostly at the same or similar levels and very few over or under passes; where there are it's often exactly two effective layers. Some might have multiple modes of transit. E.G. between EPCOT and Hollywood there's a boat and pedestrian system, which has bridges for the pedestrians, and is crossed in one location by a major road bridge.
- cosmiccatnap 4y agoThey do however have a short term effect on the income of a particular counties law enforcement.
- mig39 4y agoOur (Northern Canadian) municipality stopped doing speed traps near school zones. Instead, they now have an automated radar that just tells you what your speed is. It seems to have solved the problem. Most people will slow down. They still do photo radar speed traps on the highway, but it's not really a deterrent or safety thing. More like an automated toll booth for people who insist on speeding.
- mig39 4y agoYou know what seems to really work to slow people down? Speed-triggered red lights. Sure, people are more than willing to drive a speed they consider "safe" even if it's above the limit. But most aren't willing to run a red light. So in many parts of Portugal, that's how they slow you down. If you go above the limit, it triggers a red light. Then you can sit at the red light as other motorists (and even nearby pedestrians) give you a death stare. Thanks for slowing everybody down, dumbass! Never underestimate the power of an old Portuguese woman (usually dressed in black) staring at you in disgust! lol!
- josephcsible 4y agoCollective punishment is always wrong.
- iggldiggl 4y agoAnd in Mumbai they're supposedly experimenting with traffic lights that lengthen the red phase if there's too much noise due to honking.
- sumoboy 4y agoOdds are still in your favor to speed. What was the traffic volume over the course of that week to calculate the odds? I see more and more in residential areas at 25mph where they install digital signs indicating current speed through highly traveled streets to hopefully slow down drivers but idea if that theory works. I'm assuming it doesn't hurt given how drivers are easily distracted but I'm curious if these sign log any data.
- Imnimo 4y agoSo wait, the "study" in the headline is this? >Deciding to conduct a speed study, Staggs placed himself in an inconspicuous spot away from school zones or intersections that may have influenced the results. He spent two hours tracking oncoming traffic speed from both directions to collect the study data.
- topkai22 4y agoA strong conclusion from a weak study. I do think the way the police intervened probably wasn’t effective- a one shot intense enforcement effort. A counter example is my kids school. Their was a real problem with people speeding through the school zone. School district police started showing up at least one a week for about 6 months and occasionally after that. I don’t have quantitative results, but qualitatively speeds have remained down for years afterwards, especially because they still park a police car there every month or two. I’m not saying speed enforcement is the right solution generally, but done correctly in the right circumstances it does seem like it can lead to persistent change.
- lifeisstillgood 4y agoThere is an "urban redesign" going on - it has started in places like Barcelona (or maybe Amsterdam) and is (slowly) spreading out. It has three or so basic precepts - car centric as opposed to people centric is not building economic or pleasent places to be - denser living is more efficient - even if it's hard to rub shoulders with, you know, other smelly people. You need more apartments / condos and less gardens. - if you live dense enough to have viable public transport, then you live dense enough to share other public amenities like libraries, schools, hospitals, streets, toilets cafes. getting along with people you don't like is a social necessity. It turns out not many people like these implications. The turning down the dial on car-first urban design has lots of implications - some of it looks like enforcing speed limits (yes this whole article is about enforcing - speed cameras can happily work along vast swathes of modern roads. Imagine speed cameras on every motorway or highway that automatically pumped out fines as you went over the limits. yes annoying and expensive but also suddenly that 45 minutes commute takes 1.5 hours and the train looks a good option. As does the coach. Just enforcing the current rules will probably have 50% of the effect desired.
- twobitshifter 4y agoMy bird scooter can’t speed, why are fantastically more dangerous and sophisticated cars allowed to?
- johnea 4y agoHope springs eternal I guess. Anyone who thinks speed traps, or limits, were put in place for safety, is forever hopeful. The function very well for the purpose for which they were implemented, to raise revenue for the local administration. It's like thinking a company's product price, or change in product price, has anything to do with costs. The price is what they can get people to pay.
- Overtonwindow 4y agoI have found the ideal highway speed to be 90. Set the adaptive cruise control and relax.
- denni9th 4y ago90km/h? I've come to the same conclusion. It felt too slow at first but I got used to it. It's safer, more economical, speed cameras aren't a problem and traffic pretty much dissappears. I don't think I can ever go back to driving faster, there are too many benefits.
- Overtonwindow 4y agoMph!
- 1970-01-01 4y ago>If we want drivers to slow down, we don’t ignore human behavior and the 85th percentile speed,” said Strong Towns president Chuck Marohn. “We change the street design to make it feel less safe for drivers. In other words: we change the street design to reflect reality." I don't get this. Isn't this doing the opposite of reflecting reality and ignoring the 85th percentile speed by modifying the street design to add danger? >The 85th percentile speed is the speed at or below which 85 percent of the drivers will operate with open roads and favorable conditions. The assumption underlying the 85th percentile speed is that most drivers will operate their vehicle at speeds they perceive to be safe. https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/7/24/understanding-the-85th-percentile-speed https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2020/7/24/understanding-...
- josephcsible 4y ago> This is what’s known as “design speed,” and it may be substantially higher than the legal speed limit. Engineers often use the 85th percentile speed (the speed that 85% of drivers are going at or under) as an indication of design speed. According to Staggs’s findings, on Delta Drive, the 85th percentile speed falls at 45 mph, a full ten miles per hour over the posted speed limit. They came so close to the solution without saying it. The point of the 85% rule is that's what the speed limit is supposed to be. The reason so many people are speeding is that the speed limit is too low, and the right answer is to raise it.
- iggldiggl 4y agoWhile I don't disagree with the general notion that ideally the "natural" speed of a road should match the intended target speed, especially in the case of existing infrastructure changing the road design isn't always possible easily and/or quickly, and yet there might still be good reasons for lowering the speed on a particular stretch of road. So I still disagree with a blanket "well, then never post a speed limit that's lower than what people would drive at naturally".
- tmm84 4y agoThis is the common situation with human brains. We rationalize something because of perceived risk not calculated risk. The article shows people were speeding because of perceived risk but doesn't explain the calculated risk. The undeniable fact is, if car makers, auto safety ministers and everyone else with something in the matter cared about speeding your car wouldn't be able to go over the speed limit set. But, alas, money is at stake.
- midoridensha 4y ago>The undeniable fact is, if car makers, auto safety ministers and everyone else with something in the matter cared about speeding your car wouldn't be able to go over the speed limit set. How exactly do you do this? If your answer is GPS, this means that highways will either become very dangerous, or will need to reduce speeds to ~15 mph in many places, because there's tiny access roads parallel to them with low speed limits. GPS is so horribly inaccurate that Google Maps frequently thinks you're driving on a parallel road, so to avoid some people's cars suddenly slamming the brakes on (because their GPS thinks they're on the access road), you'll need to just limit the total speed limit to the lowest speed limit of all roads in the vicinity. In other words, your suggestion is technically infeasible.
- rad_gruchalski 4y ago> The undeniable fact is, if car makers, auto safety ministers and everyone else with something in the matter cared about speeding your car wouldn't be able to go over the speed limit set. Until the moment when you need to speed away from the danger or you need the extra power to escape the skid. But yeah, let’s just put enforced speed limiters on cars. What could go wrong.
- NoblePublius 4y agoSpeed traps are revenue generators, not safety policies. Same for all red light and speed cameras.
- moving_sofa 4y agoOh you have soooo much space to add some cycle lanes. Here in the UK we are fighting for shared space. There in the US you _have_ the space. Holy shit make some cycle lanes. US is seriously carbrain damaged.
- moving_sofa 4y agoAint gonna work. Design affects behavior. If the road encourages speeding but the sign says "hey go slower", drivers will end up speeding. This is known for decades. Design roads for slower speed: complexity e.g. chicanes, trees whatnot
- robomartin 4y agoHere's a concept: How about we start with facts? "Critical Reasons for Crashes Investigated in the National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey" https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812115 https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/... If we jump to table #2 we can learn about driver-related causes for accidents: Recognition Error 41% inattention internal and external distractions inadequate surveillance Decision Error 33% Driving too fast for conditions Too fast for the curve False assumption of others’ actions Illegal maneuver Misjudgment of gap or others’ speed Performance Error 11% Overcompensation, poor directional control, etc. Non-Performance Error 7% Sleep was the most critical reason Other 8% Note that just over 2/3 the critical driver-related reasons had nothing whatsoever to do with speed. If we just add-up the categories that do not include speeding we get 41 + 11 + 7 + 8 = 67%. Even worse, the 33% group in "Decision Error" does not include speed as an absolute isolated critical reason. Speed always requires context. In this case, the definition only lists road conditions, turns or the proverbial freeway stops and a car plows into the car in front of them. BTW, not sure where blood alcohol level might be on this table. My guess is that it is a factor in all categories. Again, absolute speed, in isolation, isn't a root cause. People have been killed by someone driving the posted speed limit while intoxicated. The point isn't to dismiss speed as a contributor but rather to make an attempt to use facts rather than incorrectly focusing on speed as a the most important contributor or a root cause. Speed is, by far, not the most serious issue on the road. This is empirically evident to almost anyone with reasonable driving experience and the ability to think critically. If that fails, watch a few of these videos: https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=idiots+driving+cars https://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=idiots+driving+... From my perspective, driver training and horribly bad/lowest-common-denominator licensing requirements are a huge part of the root cause. For those outside the US who might not be familiar with this, here's the basics: In California a 16 year old kid can drive after completing six hours of training with a licensed instructor plus six months and at least fifty hours of practice with any licensed adult (older brother, grandpa, parent, the neighbor, anyone). After this they can take a very simple driving test and obtain a license. What do I mean by "very simple"? It does not include any accident avoidance or car control tests at all. Something as simple as driving towards a cone and quickly changing lanes when commanded tells you a lot about the degree of control someone might have. Hard braking and hard acceleration. Driving figure-8's around a set of cones. Driving figure-8's in reverse. Braking and lane changing on wet pavement. Etc. Not one of these skill tests is included at all. And yet, some of these are absolutely critical for accident avoidance. My family and I almost had a horrific accident on the highway about a year ago. A pickup truck engaged in highway maintenance suddenly drove into the fast lane --where I was driving-- from the construction zone to the left (between the north and south-bound lanes). Where it not for my performance driving training and vehicle control skills this would have been a horrific t-bone accident with our SUV plowing into a pickup truck entering the highway at almost a 90 degree angle and zero speed. An SUV hitting a wall at full speed. Thanks to may awareness, constant strategic positioning in traffic and ability to execute a rapid lane change at speed while maintaining control this became a "holy shit! what was that idiot thinking!" event rather than a trip to the hospital. As a side note, that's when my wife made the most interesting comment: Now I understand why you insist on taking the kids to race driving school at the track. This license, after 50 house of substandard training, allows a 16 year old to get on the road, by themselves, driving anything from a 76 HP Mitsubishi Mirage to a 500 HP 200 MPH Corvette and even a 1000+ HP monster if mommy and daddy can afford it. What could go wrong? Useless training and a 500 HP monster? Heck, even a 150 HP car is dangerous given that starting point. Regulating speed isn't going to do a damn thing to mitigate what could (and usually does) happen with such inadequate training and licensing thresholds. Seriously, why do we allow any driver to get into a 500 HP monster without requiring serious training? The cars are not cheap, which means that requiring they spend $3000 in training and certification should not be an issue. In terms of skills, licensed instructors are pretty bad. They are the result of the same substandard training. What they teach does not help make better drivers. It's just enough to pass the test, and nothing more. I can get into how I teach kids to drive during those 50 hours after the certified instructor. It's a bit long, so I'll leave it for a follow-up comment if anyone is interested.
- simonebrunozzi 4y agoSpeed traps are tax tools. They have nothing to do with road safety.