3 ms·
I have driven 250K accident-free miles. I’d wager that more than half of those were more than 10 mph over the posted limit. Highways in New England are often po
by sokoloff 3y ago
I have driven 250K accident-free miles. I’d wager that more than half of those were more than 10 mph over the posted limit. Highways in New England are often posted at 55 or 65 and moving at 75-80.
Is that “massively over”? No, but a bill to limit to 10 over is kinda impractical.
- acdha 3y agoI’ve done a bit closer to 300k but I can’t say any of the times I went over the speed limit were necessities like the person I responded to was claiming. There was a single time where I sped up to avoid hitting something - pickup truck right in front of me on the 405 had a mattress fly up after a strap broke and I gunned it to go under before it came down, but I didn’t go anywhere near the freeway speed limit because the only reason I was that close was because we were all stuck in the slowdown approaching the 55 interchange. So that’s almost once in my life where the movie plot scenario came close to happening. Over the same time period I have known 3 people who were killed and half a dozen people who had life-altering injuries due to being hit, and speed was a factor in all of those cases. It’s not as fun as pretending you are shaking the terrorists gunning for the president but that’s the threat I worry about because it happens orders of magnitude more frequently.
- sokoloff 3y agoI wasn't arguing that the speeding was necessary for safety or accident avoidance, but rather that if you put 20% of new cars onto New England highways that are posted at 55 mph and they're governed to 65 mph, that you're going to create an utter shitshow of unsafe speed differentials as the 80% of traffic that's moving at a prevailing 75-85 mph encounters these new rolling roadblocks with the accelerator matted and governed to 65 mph.
- pokerface_86 3y agoin other words, what driving in the South already feels like!