From: mennie@bcrki39.bnr.ca (Bill Mennie 3-4473)
Subject: Re: Change the speed limit
Reply-To: mennie@bcrki39.bnr.ca (Bill Mennie 3-4473)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Ottawa, Canada
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:56:39 GMT

In article <1992Aug16.200311.22480@bmerh85.bnr.ca>, myhui@bnr.ca
(Michael Hui) writes:
> Use the political system to change the speed limit, rather than waste
> your energy teaching other drivers to drive on the right if they're
> travelling at or above the speed limit. By law, if they're slower than
> the speed limit, they must move over to the right.
> 
> If I'm elected, I will change the speed limit on Ottawa's 417 and most
> safe sections of the Trans Canada Highway to 160 km/h, and also review
> related laws comprehensively to make it easy for police to discipline
> dangerous drivers without penalizing safe and fast drivers. Easy
> meaning the type of maneuvers that can be called dangerous, not easy
> when there's evidence lacking. I would consider a videotape of the
> offensive maneuver to be the bare minimum evidence to get a conviction.
> 
> Michael MY Hui          myhui@bnr.ca           Ottawa Canada

At the risk of being accused of being an "eco-terrorist" or something
equally stupid, I wish to ask the following question. ;-)

How is it possible that so many Canadians express grave concern about
the environment and still want to drive cars at higher speeds?  Have we
forgotten why speed limits in the U.S. were dropped to 55 mph during the
first energy crisis and Canada followed by dropping them to 100 km/hr?  

While significant gains were made in overall gas mileage during the late
'70s and early '80s, the last two cowboy presidents decided that it was
more important to let automobile manufacturers get on with the job of
plundering by permitting overpowered cars, more useless,
energy-consuming gadgets, etc. which have since reduced efficiency
drastically.  Of course, Canadian politicians wouldn't want to stand out
by enforcing their own standards because the "market isn't big enough." 
Funny how California seems to be able to pull it off. ;-)

Anyway, I agree that, for long distance, inter-city travel on 4XX-like
highways, the speed limit could be increased as has been done recently
in some U.S. states.  I also recall that studies done when we first
raised the speed limit to 70 mph showed that accident rates were
decreased due to factors such as reduced boredom and less frustration
(although accident fatalities increased due to higher speed impacts). 
However, I question the general need for higher speeds, particularly in
large urban centres.  We need to think beyond our petty individual needs
to save 96 seconds on a 16 km trip by going 120 km/h instead of 100
km/hr.  Any gains made will be consumed by the first red light you
encounter at the and of the exit ramp. 

What about the environment that we claim to care so much about?  BTW,
that includes our sense of well-being due to less stress. ;-)

Let the flaming begin ....


Cheers,

Bill
  
William E. Mennie        | Phone:    (613) 763-4473 | BNR is in no way
Bell-Northern Research   | Internet: mennie@bnr.ca  | responsible for the
P.O. Box 3511, Station C |                          | preceding ideas or
Ottawa, Ont. K1Y 4H7     |                          | opinions
Newsgroups: can.general