5 ms·

Um, so was this guy actually driving his car when it was photographed speeding, or not? He doesn't say, but I'm guessing yes. And so this post is simply a tip

Um, so was this guy actually driving his car when it was photographed speeding, or not? He doesn't say, but I'm guessing yes. And so this post is simply a tip on how to break the law and get away with it? That may be fine (sorry!) if it were a useless and unfair law[1]. Perhaps that is the case with speed limits on some sections of road, which seem designed to gather revenue rather than enhance safety. But in general I find speeding to be a fairly selfish and not very useful crime. It doesn't really speed journey times significantly, but puts other road users at greater risk of iinjury or even death. -- [1] It may be ok to ignore stupid laws, under some moral frameworks. Though, if you're not going to follow the actual law, what are you going to follow? How does society function when people have different ideas of right?

coralreef 13y ago
Its protest against unfair implementation. You can't charge a person with a crime when you can't even identify that person. But thats what the government is doing. And people are scared enough (or ignorant of their rights) that they simply submit.
- doughj3 13y ago
  People aren't "scared enough" that they submit, they submit because they have been caught. I'm not sure what makes an automated radar with a camera any different than a state trooper holding a radar gun, can you elaborate why that's an "unfair"?
  - coralreef 13y ago
    An officer pulls you over, takes your license and registration, physically identifies you and can testify in court should you challenge the ticket.
- EpicEng 13y ago
  Yeah... unfortunately, they always get my face as I roll through red lights on right hand turns... usually talking on my cell phone.
- scoofy 13y ago
  There are many ways this isn't unfair. Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you refuse to pay the ticket, but deny your car was stolen, it would be simple enough for the state to revoke your license. Same as with failing to submit to a breathalyser can result in a suspended license. The state can simply make it your duty to monitor who drives your car.
- FireBeyond 13y ago
  A traffic citation is not a felony charge, and hence different rules apply. There is a general, and reasonable (please feel free to argue how it is unreasonable) expectation that the registered owner is the driver of the vehicle or is aware of who is driving the vehicle at any given time.
joshmlewis 13y ago
First off, I'm not going to argue with your sentiment on the legality of speeding, it is wrong and unlawful and I'm not condoning it. BUT to play devils advocate if I may, here are some thoughts: > ...fairly selfish and not very useful crime. It doesn't really speed journey times significantly, but puts other road users at greater risk of injury or even death. There's no doubt that driving at greater speeds increases the risk of fatality or increased damage in a wreck, but your points about it not saving time and putting others at risk is a little unfounded. Here's why I think that, in a ten minute commute, speeding 10MPH over the speed limit will only save you at best a minute. Depending on traffic conditions however, one could argue the more aware you are of your surroundings and at a faster pace, you could beat out traffic lights and other things that would normally slow down a driver going with the flow. I would argue that, speed limits and legality aside, good, well trained drivers that go faster than everyone else, are generally safer and more aware of their surroundings because they are more focused on driving. The real risk here would be going 100MPH down an interstate and a person talking on their phone or looking up a song on Spotify (guilty) swerves a little into the other lane. But if the driver is cautious and is paying attention, he should be able to avoid a collision as long as the speed is appropriate for it's surroundings. Going 100MPH (for example) on a six lane interstate between major cities is a lot different than going 100MPH through a very metropolitan (like Atlanta) downtown area, especially when you introduce intersections. As for time, let's do some quick math. On a 100 mile trip here are some figures based on average MPH, including the speeds stopping/starting and in between: 90MPH = 1.11hrs; 50MPH = 2hrs; 30MPH = 3.33hrs; So there is an obvious time saving factor at travelling at a higher rate of speed over long distances travelled. Let's take 2500 miles for laughs: 90MPH = 27.77hrs; 50MPH = 50hrs; 30MPH = 83hrs; Even if you spread out your commute of 2500 miles a year, traveling at a faster pace would save you hours of time each year of driving. I will also include a reference to some of the cross-country NYC to SF underground races that have occurred over the years. The Cannonball Run occured in the late 70s/early 80s and had a record of no accidents. The drivers were carefully picked and had the upmost care in their races. It was very illegal, but they achieved a huge feat. Alex Roy went on in 200X to beat the record. There's a documentary about it that's worth a watch. He too did it with no accident, and many since. These guys were averaging 90+ MPH across the country. It's pretty crazy. I AM NOT condoning such behavior, just stating the fact it was done and the results. Below are some links to studies about speed and crash risk, they are interesting as well. As I mentioned, there is no doubt the more speed the more likelihood of going out in a flaming glory, but the crash risk associated with higher speeds isn't certain to the driver more so than it is other drivers. http://www.ksl.com/?sid=26729407 http://www.ksl.com/?sid=26729407 http://www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/UK/FS_Speed.pdf http://www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/UK/FS_Speed.pdf

coralreef 13y ago

Its protest against unfair implementation. You can't charge a person with a crime when you can't even identify that person. But thats what the government is doing. And people are scared enough (or ignorant of their rights) that they simply submit.

doughj3 13y ago
People aren't "scared enough" that they submit, they submit because they have been caught. I'm not sure what makes an automated radar with a camera any different than a state trooper holding a radar gun, can you elaborate why that's an "unfair"?
- coralreef 13y ago
  An officer pulls you over, takes your license and registration, physically identifies you and can testify in court should you challenge the ticket.
EpicEng 13y ago
Yeah... unfortunately, they always get my face as I roll through red lights on right hand turns... usually talking on my cell phone.
scoofy 13y ago
There are many ways this isn't unfair. Driving is a privilege, not a right. If you refuse to pay the ticket, but deny your car was stolen, it would be simple enough for the state to revoke your license. Same as with failing to submit to a breathalyser can result in a suspended license. The state can simply make it your duty to monitor who drives your car.
FireBeyond 13y ago
A traffic citation is not a felony charge, and hence different rules apply. There is a general, and reasonable (please feel free to argue how it is unreasonable) expectation that the registered owner is the driver of the vehicle or is aware of who is driving the vehicle at any given time.

joshmlewis 13y ago

First off, I'm not going to argue with your sentiment on the legality of speeding, it is wrong and unlawful and I'm not condoning it. BUT to play devils advocate if I may, here are some thoughts: > ...fairly selfish and not very useful crime. It doesn't really speed journey times significantly, but puts other road users at greater risk of injury or even death. There's no doubt that driving at greater speeds increases the risk of fatality or increased damage in a wreck, but your points about it not saving time and putting others at risk is a little unfounded. Here's why I think that, in a ten minute commute, speeding 10MPH over the speed limit will only save you at best a minute. Depending on traffic conditions however, one could argue the more aware you are of your surroundings and at a faster pace, you could beat out traffic lights and other things that would normally slow down a driver going with the flow. I would argue that, speed limits and legality aside, good, well trained drivers that go faster than everyone else, are generally safer and more aware of their surroundings because they are more focused on driving. The real risk here would be going 100MPH down an interstate and a person talking on their phone or looking up a song on Spotify (guilty) swerves a little into the other lane. But if the driver is cautious and is paying attention, he should be able to avoid a collision as long as the speed is appropriate for it's surroundings. Going 100MPH (for example) on a six lane interstate between major cities is a lot different than going 100MPH through a very metropolitan (like Atlanta) downtown area, especially when you introduce intersections. As for time, let's do some quick math. On a 100 mile trip here are some figures based on average MPH, including the speeds stopping/starting and in between: 90MPH = 1.11hrs; 50MPH = 2hrs; 30MPH = 3.33hrs; So there is an obvious time saving factor at travelling at a higher rate of speed over long distances travelled. Let's take 2500 miles for laughs: 90MPH = 27.77hrs; 50MPH = 50hrs; 30MPH = 83hrs; Even if you spread out your commute of 2500 miles a year, traveling at a faster pace would save you hours of time each year of driving. I will also include a reference to some of the cross-country NYC to SF underground races that have occurred over the years. The Cannonball Run occured in the late 70s/early 80s and had a record of no accidents. The drivers were carefully picked and had the upmost care in their races. It was very illegal, but they achieved a huge feat. Alex Roy went on in 200X to beat the record. There's a documentary about it that's worth a watch. He too did it with no accident, and many since. These guys were averaging 90+ MPH across the country. It's pretty crazy. I AM NOT condoning such behavior, just stating the fact it was done and the results. Below are some links to studies about speed and crash risk, they are interesting as well. As I mentioned, there is no doubt the more speed the more likelihood of going out in a flaming glory, but the crash risk associated with higher speeds isn't certain to the driver more so than it is other drivers. http://www.ksl.com/?sid=26729407 http://www.ksl.com/?sid=26729407 http://www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/UK/FS_Speed.pdf http://www.swov.nl/rapport/Factsheets/UK/FS_Speed.pdf