“We are aware that there are those who say police should have better things to do, but this ignores the role speed plays in fatal and serious road traffic collisions”

53 Responses to “ “We are aware that there are those who say police should have better things to do, but this ignores the role speed plays in fatal and serious road traffic collisions” ”

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 » Show All Reverse Order

• Cody :
  May 8th, 2008 at 12:21 pm
  
  

  Alright Geotpf, I’ll give a better example, one for which I know the details. My dad was killed 3 years ago by a teenager who failed to yield. Totally the kid’s fault. He got off with a fine and probation.

  My point is that speeding itself is not a crime, so it shouldn’t be punished, the ends (an injury, damage to your vehicle, etc.) are crimes, and should be punished.

• TexasAg03 :
  May 8th, 2008 at 12:25 pm
  
  

  Okay, TexasAg03, can we agree that chewing gum is an innocent activity ?

  Now, if an ordinance is passed against chewing gum, does chewing gum suddenly somehow stop being an innocent activity ?

  Yes. If someone violates a law, they are not innocent. Now, the law may need to be changed, but if you violated it, you are guilty.

  I would actually be in favor of banning gum. I get tired of stepping in it. :)

• menno :
  May 8th, 2008 at 12:31 pm
  
  

  Yes, Britain has historically been about twice as safe to drive in compared to the US over the past several decades, largely due to the competency of the British drivers (which itself stems from the high standards of the British driving licence testing). Fully 56% of testees FAIL and fully 70% of those retesting FAIL. It’s nearly impossible to fail an American drivers license test, because the standards for passing are abysmally low in comparison.

  I know. I moved to the UK from the US 23 years ago and was required to take the British test 22 years ago. I passed first time. Before I did that, I swallowed my pride and took lessons from the British School of Motoring, and essentially re-learned how to drive - not just “the British way” but competently.

  Another point to ponder. I read a 1956 automobile test of a new Continental luxury car, and the specific orders for the writers were to drive on the then-new interstate from Chicago to New York, and obey the speed limit, and take copious notes. These notes indicated that their speed varied from 35 mph (construction zone) to 65 mph, and that between Chicago and the outskirts of New York City, they were only passed about a dozen times.

  The point is this: 52 year ago, most people obeyed the road rules. After the “temporary” 55 mph speed limit was not repealed as politicians promised (after all it was only “temporary” for use during the 1973 fuel crisis, or so we were told), this fact essentially made SCOFFLAWS out of 99.9% of the American public. Because, people no longer saw the need to go slow - and began to realize that “speeding tickets” were just another way of revenue generation by municipalities and states. Not forgetting that this has always been the case, and that even in the 1950’s speed traps in little towns (complete with speed limit signs strategically placed behind trees out of sight) were fairly common - and widely hated.

  So who was it that mentioned that only sheep get fleeced? Maybe if we the people took back control of our own government, we could change some of these activities, on either side of the pond.

• powerglide :
  May 8th, 2008 at 12:56 pm
  
  

  TexasAg03: As for ’stepping in it’, gum may be the least of your worries.

  In your view, ‘lawmakers’ may make any law they wish against whatever activity they wish.

  Moreover they would seem to have a magical power to change gold into lead, to make an innocent activity a guilty one.

  As an administrative, legislative act, it would take about five minutes for Congress to replace the U.S. Constitution with that of Cuba.

  Would, in your view, anything be lost ?

  We’d still have the Rockies, the Golden Gate Bridge, all of it. It’d still be called ‘The United States of America”.

  What place does Freedom have at all, in your understanding ?

  Why not remove “L I B E R T Y” from all the coins and replace it with the phrase, “LAW ENFORCEMENT” ?

  How, on the basis of your view, could the American Revolution ever occurred ?

  “I broke the law”, our 18th-century Patriot might say (if he wasn’t Patriotic, that is). “That’s on me. I should do always whatever King George decrees.”

  But thankfully, they said other things, like,

  “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants”

• menno :
  May 8th, 2008 at 1:16 pm
  
  

  Yes, powerglide, but the majority of people in the United States can’t even be bothered to vote

  and the VAST majority

  a) can’t even be bothered to learn what the Constitution and Bill of Rights say
  b) can’t even be bothered to think in terms of Liberty because they never bothered to learn what it means, either
  c) have no real clue about why people such as Ron Paul, the Constitution Party, the Libertarian Party and other patriots are trying to get us back on track
  d) and are far more interested in what the Repugnican and Dhimmicrat party flavors of the year are willing to “give” them while pandering for votes (of course, what is being given away is actually other people’s money)

  Say, does anyone know what time American Idol starts? (tongue in cheek)

  In a nation where voting is possible, the people get the government they deserve.

• Wolven :
  May 8th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
  
  

  At what speed would you say people should be ticketed? I am curious. At some point there has to be a limit.

  Really??? Why? As most everyone in the world is aware, Germany has highways WITH NO SPEED LIMITS. And they have had for decades. According to your thinking, How can that be? Certainly they should all be dead by now.

  The most depressingly ignorant assumption behind the “need” for speed limits is that human beings are SO STUPID they would kill themselves if the ultra intelligent guv’ment didn’t tell them what speed was safe. (If only it were that simple…)

  Seriously folks, how many people would kill themselves if it weren’t for the posted speed limit? (Hint: not enough… :)

• Wolven :
  May 8th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
  
  

  @ menno;

  Right on, except for the voting part. The problem in America is that EVERYONE gets to vote. Now if you stop and think about this for a minute you’ll realize what I’m saying is true. The fact is, as you pointed out, MOST Americans are IGNORANT. And in a country where the MAJORITY rules, and EVERYONE gets to vote, and the MAJORITY is IGNORANT… Do you see the problem?

• TexasAg03 :
  May 8th, 2008 at 1:40 pm
  
  

  Powerglide,

  I made the point in a prior post. If you want a law changed, then change it. Until then, if you violated it, you are not innocent in a legal sense. You may well be innocent morally, but not legally.

  In your view, ‘lawmakers’ may make any law they wish against whatever activity they wish.

  There’s no “may” about it; they can and, unfortunately, they do. If 70 mph is truly too slow, then vote people in who will change it.

  I am against gun control, in general. I know that, even with a concealed carry license, if I carry a gun into a school or a hospital in Texas, I can be cited and arrested. I don’t agree with the way the law is written since the Constitution actually guarantees my right to bear arms, but the law is what it is.

  I think it should change and I have written my senators and my representative to express that opinion. I have also asked them to do new studies on speed limits. I don’t believe that “speed kills” and I think that, in some cases, speeds are too low; in some cases, too high. I have also asked my senators and representatives to make it more difficult and more expensive to get a driver’s license.

  It’s harder to get a license to sell insurance than it is to get a license to drive a 6,000 pound truck.

• TexasAg03 :
  May 8th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
  
  

  Really??? Why? As most everyone in the world is aware, Germany has highways WITH NO SPEED LIMITS. And they have had for decades. According to your thinking, How can that be? Certainly they should all be dead by now.

  Remember, I am talking about America, where people can’t be bothered with paying attention to what they are doing while driving. They may need to text their kid while eating a Jumbo Jack and drinking a 44 oz. Coke. It’s all about the skill level and, in Germany, they’ve got the skill level to do it.

  It is also much harder and more expensive to get a license in Germany. They take driving seriously. I think that if the typical American treated driving the same way the typical German does and the training was more rigorous, then we could have places with no speed limit.

• David Holzman :
  May 8th, 2008 at 1:54 pm
  
  

  Menno: Another point to ponder. I read a 1956 automobile test of a new Continental luxury car, and the specific orders for the writers were to drive on the then-new interstate from Chicago to New York, and obey the speed limit, and take copious notes. These notes indicated that their speed varied from 35 mph (construction zone) to 65 mph, and that between Chicago and the outskirts of New York City, they were only passed about a dozen times.

  65 was reasonable in the ’50s and ’60s, given the handlng characteristics of the cars of the times. Also interstates were almost non-existent in 1956–the program was inaugurated by Eisenhower on June 29, 1956–although a few of the roads that became part of the interstate system were already built–PA tpk, NJ tpk, Maine tpk, and maybe others. Bottom line: 65mph would have been quite fast most of the way from Chi to NYC.

  I can remember driving the Merritt (from close to New Haven to NYC) with my family of origin in the late ’50s and early ’60s in the 57 Chevy. It was twistier then than it is now, but there were curves where between the car and the road, you really didn’t want to exceed 45mph. Very different in my Accord.

Pages: « 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 » Show All Reverse Order

Leave a Reply Back to Top

You must be logged in to post a comment.