From: pat@rwing.UUCP (Pat Myrto)
Newsgroups: seattle.general
Subject: Re: Why CAN'T people drive 55?!
Date: 30 Dec 92 13:59:58 GMT
Organization: Totally Unorganized

>In article <3040@uswnvg.uswnvg.com> hcorbin@uswnvg.com (Harold Corbin) writes:
>>Why is it that people are always giving me dirty looks when they pass me on the 
>>highway and I'm driving 60 in a 55 MPH zone?  I get irritated and angry EVERY   TIME some jerk tailgates me and flashes his/her brights fo rme to move over justbecause I don't have a TOTAL DISRESPECT for the LAW and I don't want to drive
>>75 just to get the hell out of their way!
>>The scariest thing is.... NOBODY cares!  Sure, it's a piddly thing.... who caresabout the speed limit, there are more important things to focus energy on.
>>Nobody thinks it's dangerous to drive 70 in a 55, so why shouldn't we???
>>
>>Question:  Are we ALL experts in determining the safe speed limitations requiredon the roads we drive?  Does passing the Drivers Ed class and getting a license
>>guarantee instant expertise on road conditions and speed/velocity/gravity 
>>equations?  I think NOT!  The speed limits are LIMITS for a reason!

A reason, yes.  A safety related reason, not necessarily.  Often that
reason is REVENUE, and/or POLITICAL.  See explanation below.

Harold - don't you recall that the DESIGN speed limit was 70 when the
freeways were made?  The 55 speed limit was imposed supposedly to reduce
fuel consumption (something that it does not do in more than a few cars).
A reduction (temporary, mostly) in accidents and fatalities was a spin
off.  The posted limit on freeways really has nothing to do with maximum
safe speed, it was a POLITICALLY imposed limit, now pretty much unpopular
with everyone except a few extremists and the govt, the latter because
it is good for a lot of added revenue.  Other roads, the posted limit
is probably a toss-up between safety and revenue:  A school zone is
definitely safety, as are most neighborhood streets.  But a road with
no stop lights, straight as an arrow, good visibility, multi-lane, posted
at 30 mph is more than likely posted with revenue in mind.  Also, what
is safe at 3:00AM is not safe at 8:00AM.  What is appropriate for East
Coast freeways is not appropriate for a freeway across Nevada, for
example - those roads straight as an arrow for miles, with perhaps one
car per hour going by.

I can understand respect for a law, but to automatically consider oneself
totally ignorant in evaluating safe speeds, and the DOT opnipotent in
that regard doesn't make sense.  Do you really think the DOT does an
extensive analysis when they put up a speed sign?   For a freeway, the
limit is set by someone who has never even SEEN the road, let alone
evaluated its safe speed.  Standards (if any other than political) I
bet were based on the freeways in the Eastern Corridor around WA DC,
etc.  As far as a driver evaluating max safe speed, one is EXPECTED to
evaluate safe speeds; under less than good weather conditions, the safe
speed is usually less than the design speed for the roadway.  For example,
on icy roads, one is pushing their luck doing even 55 on many roads
designed for 70mph.  Also, posting unreasonably low speeds in some areas
is done sometimes for only one reason:  REVENUE.  Post a silly speed,
and write gobs of revenue-enhancing tickets.

Lighten up, if you are in the far left (passing/fast) lane, and cars
are accumulating behind you, YOU are creating an unsafe condition,
because YOU are blocking the flow of traffic.  If you want to drive
slower, fine.  Move to the slower lanes.  But you really have no right
to try to make others go the speed you feel is right by blocking the
road, and getting upset when someone flashes their lights at you.  On
the other hand, if you are NOT in the left/passing lanes, and they flash
their lights at you, when they could go on around, screw 'em - because
now THEY are trying to force you to meet THEIR standard (not to mention
trying to be obnoxious).  <insert 1/2 :-)>

However, if the traffic is heavy, all lanes are full, go what the flow
is.  Remember, a cop CAN write a ticket for blocking/impeding traffic,
EVEN IF YOU ARE GOING ABOVE THE POSTED LIMIT, if you are causing congestion
behind you.  I forget what the number is (six seems to come to mind,
but this is not certain), but the yardstick is if you have more than N
cars backed up behind you, you are REQUIRED to move over and let them
go around.  It is too common for a slow driver to precipitate wrecks that
they themselves are not involved in, because another driver got too
impatient and did something silly.  The other driver should lighten up,
and not take that risky chance, but still, the blocking driver is the
one that STARTED the chain of events, and IMO is culpable to a degree,
if one can ID the driver and the effect caused.  I think s/he should
get a ticket, too.  All too often, s/he continues on, oblivious to the
mayhem in the rear view mirror his/her activity caused.

Even more hazardous is the bozo that insists on diving into the safe
interval one is trying to maintain behind the car in front.  That is
what these chain-reaction accidents are caused by.  The yardstick for
following too close used by many cops is a two-second interval.  Sheesh,
its difficult sometimes to keep a HALF-second interval open.  And this
is for GOOD conditions.  It should be much larger if ice, etc is on the
roads.  Another hazard is the one who darts in and out, making sudden
and unexpected moves.

The driver who wants to avoid getting tickets (and accidents) is the
driver who will not drive so as to stand out (draw attention).  The
fellow who dives in and out of traffic, the one who is impatiently
raising a commotion to go faster than the flow, the one who is causing
cars to accumulate behind.  In other words, the car that ones eyes are
drawn to when  one casually observes the flow, that is the one that will
get an inordinate number of tickets.  Although it isn't right, even
COLOR is a factor - some colors, I am willing to bet, draw more tickets
than other colors on the average (perhaps someone can come up with some
figures?).  The one who quietly goes the rate the flow is going is pretty
safe.   Before I could afford a decent car, I had this wreck that didn't
have a working speedometer.  I drove this for 4 years, and got NO tickets.
I made it a point to pace with the traffic, when there was no traffic,
to drive conservatively.  And now with a half decent car, I still do.
I suggest you and others do likewise.  Cars that don't get noticed don't
get tickets.  Driving so as to not aggravate allready touchy tempers
resulting from a crawling mass of cars enhances everyone's chances of
getting to a destination in one piece.  Trying to be an unofficial
enforcer of an often arbitrary speed limit increases the chance of an
accident, IMO.  Incidentally, a side effect of driving to not be noticed,
keeping the intervals open, etc., not only is enhanced safety, but lower
insurance rates (not a trivial consideration these days).  The cost of
liability, collision, comp, etc. can be enough to give anybody a coronary.

BTW - a differing point of view is not a flame.  If all posts disagreeing
are regarded as a flame, that would suggest intolerance for differing
points of view.  Think about it.

-- 
pat@rwing.uucp                                  (Pat Myrto),  Seattle, WA
                      If all else fails, try:
         ...!uunet!{pilchuck, polari}!rwing!pat
WISDOM:    "Travelling unarmed is like boating without a life jacket" 
Newsgroups: seattle.general,pnw.general,alt.society.civil-liberty,misc.talk.poli