4 ms·
It also happened in Portland in 2018, and it sucks, and makes me avoid Portland. The speed limit is 20mph on most roads, no matter how many lanes of empty tarm
by toomim 3y ago
It also happened in Portland in 2018, and it sucks, and makes me avoid Portland.
The speed limit is 20mph on most roads, no matter how many lanes of empty tarmac there is, what time of day it is, with how much visibility, how straight the road is, etc. It's a blind political statement with no regard to the actual roads and their circumstances.
- jacquesm 3y ago> makes me avoid Portland It worked!
- toomim 3y agoYour goal is to remove people from the city who value efficiency and productivity? Or are you saying that you don't like me, personally, and want me to leave?
- jacquesm 3y agoAre those the only two choices?
- 28304283409234 3y agoAnd also: do those options cancel each other, or other options, out? Also also: if so, then yes. To hell with efficiency and productivity. If they can't share, I don't care.
- jltsiren 3y agoIt can be a political statement, or it can be about noise and pedestrian safety, depending on the environment. Basically, it's irresponsible to drive faster than 30 km/h anywhere with a significant number of pedestrians. The risk of serious injury and death rises quickly above that speed, and human drivers cannot react quickly enough at higher speeds. You can justify a bit higher speed limits on major streets with significant traffic, as pedestrians tend to be more attentive when crossing them. But even then, the limit should be 40-50 km/h, as road capacity decreases and noise level becomes unacceptably high at higher speeds.
- toomim 3y agoYou missed the point. This law does not distinguish whether pedestrians are present or not.
- wpm 3y agoHow could it? How could the law possibly trust selfish drivers to actually judge that sort of thing adhoc and in the moment? You sound mad. Like a frustrated child. Is it really that hard driving a bit slower?
- 28304283409234 3y agoBecause the tarmac is empty does not mean the people and nature living around the roads are gone. Whenever resource sharing with other living creatures pops up in America it somehow gets turned into a 'blind policital statement'.
- gumballindie 3y agoIf you want to reduce the number of cars on roads - which is a sensible approach - you reduce the need for cars. The easiest is to not mandate people to work in offices where not needed. By slowing vehicles down you achieve a placebo effect since said vehicles would be slow anyway when there’s traffic, while they’d be needlessly slow when there is none. Spending more time driving slowly means the same amount of noxious gases being emitted - even if emissions per car are lower, given that they spend more time on the road you gain little benefits. However safety benefits and noise reduction are an asset. But those can easily be reduced in better more environment friendly ways.
- 28304283409234 3y agouhm. Driving slower increases mileage as it lowers gas usage.