5 ms·

The fundamental reason is because drivers feel entitled to speed and most voters are drivers. People with expensive cars further believe they've paid for the pr

The fundamental reason is because drivers feel entitled to speed and most voters are drivers. People with expensive cars further believe they've paid for the privilege of violating more laws more often, and those people are also more influential in policy setting. There are lots of expressions of this fundamental reason, such as people throwing a fit about automated license plate reading in the name of privacy. But our all boils down to the fact that a person turns into a sociopathic scofflaw as soon as he gets behind the wheel.

fossuser 12y ago
OR it could be because speeding isn't that dangerous and the current limits on most roads don't represent what speed people actually drive at or what speed people could safely drive at. It's different on residential streets, but on freeways I think the way Germany handles it is better. Speeding tickets (and most traffic violations really) are not about safety or curbing behavior they're about generating revenue for the town/city.
- Liesmith 12y ago
  Speeding is extremely dangerous. It's ludicrous to argue otherwise. A third of crashes (including fatal crashes) involve speeding, and the faster you are driving the more likely you are to die or fatally injure another. Also, changing the speed limits on roads have been studied and it doesn't make a humongous difference. The government usually sets the speed limit at slightly lower than the average speed people actually drive.
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 12y ago
    [deleted]
  - vonmoltke 12y ago
    > Speeding is extremely dangerous. It's ludicrous to argue otherwise. Actually, blanket arguments like "speeding is extremely dangerous" are ludicrous. "Speeding" is exceeding a semi-arbitrary speed threshold. If that threshold is, say, 70 mph I'm OK at 70 but if I go to 71 I am being "extremely dangerous"? 71 is speeding in that case, after all. > A third of crashes (including fatal crashes) involve speeding, If a third or more of all drivers speed, that statistic is meaningless. > the faster you are driving the more likely you are to die or fatally injure another. Indeed, and that statement has nothing to do with speeding. It is a continuum from 0 to whatever the top speed of a given vehicle is. This statement is equally valid when you are under the speed limit. > Also, changing the speed limits on roads have been studied and it doesn't make a humongous difference. The government usually sets the speed limit at slightly lower than the average speed people actually drive. I have seen that happen before, but in my experience that is the exception rather than the rule.
  - colanderman 12y ago
    A third of people driving are speeding. "The government usually sets the speed limit at slightly lower than the average speed people actually drive." I don't think you've ever driven on a US interstate.
- reitanqild 12y ago
  A Dutch engineer once told me (back before 2004 I guess ) that they once raised the speed limit on the roads in Netherlands only to find average speed decreased. His explanation IIRC was that 1. once people broke the limit it didnt matter how much and 2. when speed limits felt more correct more people respected them. I'd love to know if anyone has any pointers to research on this as around here speed limits are weird. (80 in places where you obviously can't even drive 80 and 80 on the highway, -four lanes)
  - grndn 12y ago
    I used to live in Los Angeles. On the freeways, the speed limit was 55mph but I read once that the actual average speed was around 17mph. My (unscientific) theory is that with higher speed limits, you get more traffic waves, and people try to change lanes more often, causing delays. If the speed limit on LA freeways was only 25mph, I would hope that people would chill out and the traffic would flow more smoothly, resulting in a faster average speed than at present.
    - goodcanadian 12y ago
      Be careful with your average speeds. I often drive in excess of 70mph on the (65mph limit) freeway in LA, and I am far from the fastest car. The key difference is that I don't drive in rush hour. A 25mph speed limit would be absurd.
    - bri3d 12y ago
      Look up "rolling speed harmonization," an attempt to mitigate atrocious traffic to and from the mountains here in Colorado by using a pace car (effectively a strictly-enforced lowered speed limit). Initial "tests" with lighter traffic conditions proved that the system helped stabilize closing speeds and volume, but in the actually troublesome heavier traffic conditions the state has been unable to figure out when and where to deploy the pace vehicles effectively.
- grndn 12y ago
  > the current limits on most roads don't represent what speed ... people could safely drive at. If there's a sidewalk or any t-junctions, that's about 20mph tops. Anything faster, and you can't stop in time, plus in a collision, kinetic energy goes as the square of the speed. For local trips, with stoplights that slow you down anyway, driving slower adds only a few extra minutes to your journey time. Personally, I'm not seeing the need to be so hurried all the time. http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/driving/speed/inappropriate-speed.aspx http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/driving... http://blog.americansafetycouncil.com/why-speeding-is-dangerous/ http://blog.americansafetycouncil.com/why-speeding-is-danger...
  - colanderman 12y ago
    I think the GP is talking about speed limits on controlled-access highways, not on residential or commercial streets.
throwaway888888 12y ago
a person turns into a sociopathic scofflaw as soon as he gets behind the wheel Boo this man! That is an ideological position, and I could easily apply the same blanket label of absolute sociopathy to law enforcement, and I'd be just as wrong. But there's a difference between a mechanized, automatic law enforcement system and a law enforcment system that is implemented as a practice performed by living human beings. The human version is prone to imperfections and corruption, yes. But mechanized, automated law enforcement really COULD express a perfect ideology and attempt to enforce it perfectly, with an unforgiving brutality, which could not otherwise be accomplished with the complicity of human beings. Please understand that difference. If you think placing a human being behind the machinery of an automobile is automatically bad, think about what it might mean to place a human being behind the machinery of a fully automated law enforcement system, with that same lens of blanket sociopathy.
- Karunamon 12y ago
  Sociopathic? Maybe not, but scofflaw? Most definitely. Drivers have a really hard time with really basic things. Speed limits, red lights, turn signals, proper lane etiquette, and other common courtesies. Every single one of those things has a law attached. People either forget or think that the law doesn't apply to them.
  - scotty79 12y ago
    I'm a scofflaw every time when I approach the computer and/or (not) read terms and conditions or license.
    - Karunamon 12y ago
      As are most of us.. however there is no point at which ignoring the average EULA will endanger a life. People who speed, hang out in the left lane, run red lights, don't signal their turns and lane changes, and so on are a danger to themselves and others.
simias 12y ago
I'm not sure speed traps are preferred by voters over a 2 point system. I can say that as a driver I'd much prefer the 2 point system instead of the vast quantity of speed trap radars we have in france right now. I think the main difference is the price, especially since 2 point systems turn into n-point systems if you have a lot of intersections.
simias 12y ago
I'm not sure speed traps are preferred by voters over a 2 point system. I can say that as a driver I'd much prefer the 2 point system instead of the vast quantity of speed trap radars we have in france right now. I think the main difference is the price, especially since 2 point systems turn into n-point systems if you have a lot of intersections.

fossuser 12y ago

OR it could be because speeding isn't that dangerous and the current limits on most roads don't represent what speed people actually drive at or what speed people could safely drive at. It's different on residential streets, but on freeways I think the way Germany handles it is better. Speeding tickets (and most traffic violations really) are not about safety or curbing behavior they're about generating revenue for the town/city.

Liesmith 12y ago
Speeding is extremely dangerous. It's ludicrous to argue otherwise. A third of crashes (including fatal crashes) involve speeding, and the faster you are driving the more likely you are to die or fatally injure another. Also, changing the speed limits on roads have been studied and it doesn't make a humongous difference. The government usually sets the speed limit at slightly lower than the average speed people actually drive.
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- deleted 12y ago
  [deleted]
- vonmoltke 12y ago
  > Speeding is extremely dangerous. It's ludicrous to argue otherwise. Actually, blanket arguments like "speeding is extremely dangerous" are ludicrous. "Speeding" is exceeding a semi-arbitrary speed threshold. If that threshold is, say, 70 mph I'm OK at 70 but if I go to 71 I am being "extremely dangerous"? 71 is speeding in that case, after all. > A third of crashes (including fatal crashes) involve speeding, If a third or more of all drivers speed, that statistic is meaningless. > the faster you are driving the more likely you are to die or fatally injure another. Indeed, and that statement has nothing to do with speeding. It is a continuum from 0 to whatever the top speed of a given vehicle is. This statement is equally valid when you are under the speed limit. > Also, changing the speed limits on roads have been studied and it doesn't make a humongous difference. The government usually sets the speed limit at slightly lower than the average speed people actually drive. I have seen that happen before, but in my experience that is the exception rather than the rule.
- colanderman 12y ago
  A third of people driving are speeding. "The government usually sets the speed limit at slightly lower than the average speed people actually drive." I don't think you've ever driven on a US interstate.
reitanqild 12y ago
A Dutch engineer once told me (back before 2004 I guess ) that they once raised the speed limit on the roads in Netherlands only to find average speed decreased. His explanation IIRC was that 1. once people broke the limit it didnt matter how much and 2. when speed limits felt more correct more people respected them. I'd love to know if anyone has any pointers to research on this as around here speed limits are weird. (80 in places where you obviously can't even drive 80 and 80 on the highway, -four lanes)
- grndn 12y ago
  I used to live in Los Angeles. On the freeways, the speed limit was 55mph but I read once that the actual average speed was around 17mph. My (unscientific) theory is that with higher speed limits, you get more traffic waves, and people try to change lanes more often, causing delays. If the speed limit on LA freeways was only 25mph, I would hope that people would chill out and the traffic would flow more smoothly, resulting in a faster average speed than at present.
  - goodcanadian 12y ago
    Be careful with your average speeds. I often drive in excess of 70mph on the (65mph limit) freeway in LA, and I am far from the fastest car. The key difference is that I don't drive in rush hour. A 25mph speed limit would be absurd.
  - bri3d 12y ago
    Look up "rolling speed harmonization," an attempt to mitigate atrocious traffic to and from the mountains here in Colorado by using a pace car (effectively a strictly-enforced lowered speed limit). Initial "tests" with lighter traffic conditions proved that the system helped stabilize closing speeds and volume, but in the actually troublesome heavier traffic conditions the state has been unable to figure out when and where to deploy the pace vehicles effectively.
grndn 12y ago
> the current limits on most roads don't represent what speed ... people could safely drive at. If there's a sidewalk or any t-junctions, that's about 20mph tops. Anything faster, and you can't stop in time, plus in a collision, kinetic energy goes as the square of the speed. For local trips, with stoplights that slow you down anyway, driving slower adds only a few extra minutes to your journey time. Personally, I'm not seeing the need to be so hurried all the time. http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/driving/speed/inappropriate-speed.aspx http://www.rospa.com/roadsafety/adviceandinformation/driving... http://blog.americansafetycouncil.com/why-speeding-is-dangerous/ http://blog.americansafetycouncil.com/why-speeding-is-danger...
- colanderman 12y ago
  I think the GP is talking about speed limits on controlled-access highways, not on residential or commercial streets.

throwaway888888 12y ago

a person turns into a sociopathic scofflaw as soon as he gets behind the wheel Boo this man! That is an ideological position, and I could easily apply the same blanket label of absolute sociopathy to law enforcement, and I'd be just as wrong. But there's a difference between a mechanized, automatic law enforcement system and a law enforcment system that is implemented as a practice performed by living human beings. The human version is prone to imperfections and corruption, yes. But mechanized, automated law enforcement really COULD express a perfect ideology and attempt to enforce it perfectly, with an unforgiving brutality, which could not otherwise be accomplished with the complicity of human beings. Please understand that difference. If you think placing a human being behind the machinery of an automobile is automatically bad, think about what it might mean to place a human being behind the machinery of a fully automated law enforcement system, with that same lens of blanket sociopathy.

Karunamon 12y ago
Sociopathic? Maybe not, but scofflaw? Most definitely. Drivers have a really hard time with really basic things. Speed limits, red lights, turn signals, proper lane etiquette, and other common courtesies. Every single one of those things has a law attached. People either forget or think that the law doesn't apply to them.
- scotty79 12y ago
  I'm a scofflaw every time when I approach the computer and/or (not) read terms and conditions or license.
  - Karunamon 12y ago
    As are most of us.. however there is no point at which ignoring the average EULA will endanger a life. People who speed, hang out in the left lane, run red lights, don't signal their turns and lane changes, and so on are a danger to themselves and others.

simias 12y ago

I'm not sure speed traps are preferred by voters over a 2 point system. I can say that as a driver I'd much prefer the 2 point system instead of the vast quantity of speed trap radars we have in france right now. I think the main difference is the price, especially since 2 point systems turn into n-point systems if you have a lot of intersections.

simias 12y ago