Change Speed Limit?

[Doofus McFancypants]

I voted NO for one reason only -
Enforcement...

if we cannot enforce the limits as they are now - would lowering the speed limit really save anything? we would still have individuals speeding for what ever reason and you would have those "paying attention" wanting to save fuel.

the Risk is now there is a bigger delta in speed between the Speeders ( still doing 81 mph) and the people who follow the law.Could result in MORE accidents and MORE gas consumed in "gridlock"

I know you should NOT argue that we should make the law fit the people who are breaking it - but if we are NOT enforcing the limits consistantly now - would reducing it be benifitial?

[tasdrouille]

It's clear that reducing the speed limits would not gain acceptance in the general public, even though it have benefits. After all, you're here asking the people most likely to vote yes, but it's still a close call.

[c0da]

I voted no, but I think they should post a minimum speed limit of 55 to remind people they have the option to drive slow or to go the max of 65 (or 75 for interstate). I'd rather that people are given a choice so the ones that do choose to go 55 will not be harassed for deciding to go slower.

[klrv6]

I think it would be better to give a one time tax break to buyers that purchase a car with much higher than mandated highway economy. That would #1 turn more profit for the automakers who set out to make more fuel efficient cars. #2 the car buyer would see the benefit of buying a more aerodynamic car and make non-purchasers aware of the improvements that can be had by improving aero. It would suck if we fixed the problem rather than just tell people we can't drive 55.

[mavinwy]

How about rather than changing the speed limit, we actually enforce the ones we have. Putting up a different sign makes no change unless people choose to slow down. If we started actually stopping people for speeding (as opposed to going under the limit as I have seen some on here) it would make more sense....

Jim

[BrianAbington]

I think that if they dropped it again that alot of people would be unhappy.

Our modern vehicles are more efficent at high speed than the old cars from the 70's
Back then the average engine was a carbeurated V-8. My '69 continental sounded like it was running at about 3,500 RPMs at 75 mph.
Yet how many cars now days are close to IDLE at highway speeds? Not all of them but there are some companys that are puting in some tall final gears that drop engine speeds alot at highways speeds.

[DifferentPointofView]

People here only go 5-10 over, anything over that, and they're too scared to get a ticket..

Wouldn't changing the limit to 55 scare people (atleast everyone around here) to max out at 65? I know in big cities no one would care cause theres no cops that really pull over anyone, but alteast a couple thousand would slow down a little bit. every bit counts.

[Figjam74]

I voted yes, but I believe speed 'limits' should be replaced with speed 'recommendations' on highways. Limits are essentially unenforceable on highways anyway.

[ptsmith24]

Has anyone driven on I-285 around Atlanta?

Speed limit = 55 MPH
My speed = 55-60 MPH
Speed of everyone else = 65-75+



Kinda a weird "No option". Maybe there should be the no you have, plus a flat-out no. I voted no, but not because it would make people unhappy.

| (me-->) |
| |
| |
| |
| |

LOL, that's supposed to be a road...

[jamesqf]

How about putting some thought into the poll answers? Or if you did think about them, how about answers that aren't so obviously loaded?

"No" is a good option. "No because..." is bad, when there's only one choice of because. In this case, I'd vote no, but not because the public would be unhappy. It's because A) It was tried before, and didn't work; and B) It ignores the real problem. The way to save significant amounts of isn't to drive oversized gas-guzzlers a bit slower, it's to drive cars that get decent fuel economy - 75 mpg at 75 mph! - or which don't even use oil as their primary "fuel" source.