Change Speed Limit?

[Lazarus]

I used to be in favor but voted no. This is a good thread on the subject which changed my point of view. There are a couple more floating around the site if you do a search.

[DifferentPointofView]

What I don't get is how large cities don't pull people over.

You go any speed over 5 over here... you get a ticket and its always over 100 bucks.

Population of largest city in the county: 8000
Population of my village in the county: 550

I do get why people don't get pulled over on highways like Indy or St. Louis... 1 thing.. No place for cops to hide

theres no place for a cop to park his car to scan people because when you have a concrete devider on one side and another on the other side, its kinda hard to catch people off guard with the radar gun.

Here, every half mile there's a country road for a cop to sit and hide behind the trees to get people's speeds. You don't have that in big city highways.

My cousin got pulled over for doing 67 in a 55. which comparing to large cities no where near as fast as they travel

Safety here with speeds isn't an issue, you have a greater chance of hitting a deer than another car.

Its just the cops trying to meet their stations expectations, not that you were endangering other drivers.

The biggest traffic jam we have is when I'm driving 45 in a 55, and when its clear for other drivers to pass, I just use the rear wiper to signal its clear. I Think its catching on

[dentprone]

Of course, it doesn't really matter what the limit is if there is no enforcement.

[Frank Lee]

Strict enforcement? Not a problem around here.

[wagonman76]

I say no because more good would be done by actually enforcing the laws we have. Here they have been raising speed limits. This summer they raised the minimum speed on the freeway from 45 to 55, and the trucker speed from 55 to 60. Ive seen no new speed restrictions, but several on odd strecthes of road that have increased. Theyre proposing for a few more to go up, I read in the paper today. Their claim is that speed limits are not set by safety (in the good old days it used to set by safety based on the immediate area) but lately they say its based on the way 85% of the people drive. Well 85% of people around here drive like a bat out of hell so I guess thats whats going to become legal here.

From what Ive seen and heard about Ohio, Id rather drive there anyday. When I was there a couple years ago it seemed like a cop for every 50 cars, and everybody drove sensibly. I could drive the speed limit and be left alone. My friend calls it Slow-hio. I also noticed gas was lower there. I wonder if it could be because of the decreased consumption from going slower.

Its all so screwed up here. Everything is based on trying to encourage the almighty tourist dollar. They rule the roads and everything else and they know the cops wont touch them no matter what. It gets worse and worse every year. Ive lost track of all the people Ive seen get run off the road by these jerks as they charge down the road and into oncoming traffic like wild animals. Im also seeing a lot more people with Illinois plates, which are some of the worst I see. If the cops actually were to protect and to serve, tourist dollars would go down. But if they let the tourists be as rude, careless, brutal, and wasteful as possible, they spend more and tourist dollars go up.

Awhile back a guy from Illinois crossed 2 lanes of traffic and hit a motorcyclist head on and put him in intensive care, no citation issued. Another guy from Illinois tried to pass my aunt on the right while she was turning left and totaled her van, cop said "lets just say nothing happened". 2 downstaters, one in a Corvette, another in an Audi, going well over 100mph in a road race, blew past me on the freeway, past a state cop a mile up the road who was sitting in the median watching cars with a radar gun, they didnt slow down and he did absolutely nothing. A guy from Detroit, driving without insurance, slammed into my 6000 wagon earlier this year, no citation issued according to the police report. Couple downstaters with a snowmobile trailer pulled out in front of me and I clipped the trailer, police said it was my fault. Out of stater with a huge boat pulled right in front of me, I laid on the horn with 4 wheel disk locked hoping theyd at least stop, I missed him but the cop who was watching the intersection came after ME with blue lights and said "next time use your head". An out of stater with a boat pulled right in front of my coworkers motorcycle last summer and put him in the hospital, no citation issued.

Anyway thats my soapbox. Lowering speed limits wont do any good. Enforcing the laws we have would do more good than anything, both for reduced oil consumption and safety. And heck, maybe it would force Michigan to build a real economic base instead of relying on tourist dollars.

[superchow]

I voted no - I stand divided on the issue to some degree, here's why:

1. Anyone who has travelled at 60 mph through southern Idaho, or Montana or eastern Wyoming or North Dakota for hours on end is probably the most excruciating thing I have ever experienced. The mind-numbingness of such an undertaking was in the interest of better fuel economy, but arriving many hours later at your destination does not offset the savings. In fact I figured that 60 minutes longer at work paid for the gas I would have saved.

2. Cars these days are much safer than decades ago when 100 mph was actually unsafe - even on a straight road. Modern cars can go faster, and the driver often feels like the car could and should go faster.

However! These arguments only apply to cross-country drives with low traffic density. Once you want to go 100 mph on, say Seattle freeways, then the sheer volume of traffic makes this just plain dangerous. Instead, urban freeways should have lower speed limits to discourage the illusion of "high-speed interconnects" between your home and work via automobile. Would you like to commute to work if you knew you'd be breaking the law if you went faster than 40 mph on the freeway? (The fast that with congestion sometimes the average speeds are quite close to that is subject to another thread...)

Have low speeds in cities and urban areas where trains whiz by at twice your speed, and high speeds links starting many miles outside of the city limits to enable quick transit between urban areas.

Who knows, here in the western USA this could turn the spark of the idea of "Park and Ride" into a real blazing boom!

So a national blanket speed limit, IMHO, is too simple. Lower the speeds in cities to encourage public transport and reduce accidents, and increase the limit (or get rid of it - Germany FTW) to enable high speed personal transportation between far away urban areas. (Really, I'm just thinking of the USA/Canada here.)

[cfg83]

superchow -

I voted yes but I like your ideas. I agree that urban areas are better off with lower speed limits.

CarloSW2

[Greenblazer]

Absolutely not. Many of you are too young to remember how bad it sucked to drive accross country when the national limit was 55MPH, but you may have heard the song inspiried by that speed limit "I can't Drive 55" by Sammy Hagar. The 55MPH limit sucked, and I do not support lowering the limit.

Later,

Allan Greenblazer

[DifferentPointofView]

Originally Posted by wagonman76

I say no because more good would be done by actually enforcing the laws we have. Here they have been raising speed limits. This summer they raised the minimum speed on the freeway from 45 to 55, and the trucker speed from 55 to 60. Ive seen no new speed restrictions, but several on odd strecthes of road that have increased. Theyre proposing for a few more to go up, I read in the paper today. Their claim is that speed limits are not set by safety (in the good old days it used to set by safety based on the immediate area) but lately they say its based on the way 85% of the people drive. Well 85% of people around here drive like a bat out of hell so I guess thats whats going to become legal here.

From what Ive seen and heard about Ohio, Id rather drive there anyday. When I was there a couple years ago it seemed like a cop for every 50 cars, and everybody drove sensibly. I could drive the speed limit and be left alone. My friend calls it Slow-hio. I also noticed gas was lower there. I wonder if it could be because of the decreased consumption from going slower.

Its all so screwed up here. Everything is based on trying to encourage the almighty tourist dollar. They rule the roads and everything else and they know the cops wont touch them no matter what. It gets worse and worse every year. Ive lost track of all the people Ive seen get run off the road by these jerks as they charge down the road and into oncoming traffic like wild animals. Im also seeing a lot more people with Illinois plates, which are some of the worst I see. If the cops actually were to protect and to serve, tourist dollars would go down. But if they let the tourists be as rude, careless, brutal, and wasteful as possible, they spend more and tourist dollars go up.

Awhile back a guy from Illinois crossed 2 lanes of traffic and hit a motorcyclist head on and put him in intensive care, no citation issued. Another guy from Illinois tried to pass my aunt on the right while she was turning left and totaled her van, cop said "lets just say nothing happened". 2 downstaters, one in a Corvette, another in an Audi, going well over 100mph in a road race, blew past me on the freeway, past a state cop a mile up the road who was sitting in the median watching cars with a radar gun, they didnt slow down and he did absolutely nothing. A guy from Detroit, driving without insurance, slammed into my 6000 wagon earlier this year, no citation issued according to the police report. Couple downstaters with a snowmobile trailer pulled out in front of me and I clipped the trailer, police said it was my fault. Out of stater with a huge boat pulled right in front of me, I laid on the horn with 4 wheel disk locked hoping theyd at least stop, I missed him but the cop who was watching the intersection came after ME with blue lights and said "next time use your head". An out of stater with a boat pulled right in front of my coworkers motorcycle last summer and put him in the hospital, no citation issued.

Anyway thats my soapbox. Lowering speed limits wont do any good. Enforcing the laws we have would do more good than anything, both for reduced oil consumption and safety. And heck, maybe it would force Michigan to build a real economic base instead of relying on tourist dollars.

Yep, thats northern Illinois drivers for ya heheh.

Good thing I live in Southern IL. Much nicer down here. No chicago drivers.

[tasdrouille]

I don't get why it's not enforced to a point that people don't speed because they know they'll get caught and get a hefty fine if they do. Around here, speed tickets are a significant source of revenue for the government and I don't see why a government would leave that money on the table.

I used to drive "fast", my tdi fuel log is there to prove it. At first I found it really hard driving 55 mph or less. It took a couple of weeks but I got used to it. Now 55 mph just feels normal and 75 mph feels like I'm driving really fast. Not so long ago I drove 8 hours at 40 mph on rural roads. I could cross Canada at 55 mph no problem now. It's all a matter of perspective and getting used to it.

It is my opinion that when addictive elements are involved (speed, oil, drugs...) people need to have a very strong external incentive to quit. Gradual price increases (frog in raising temp water analogy) or personal health and safety are usually not strong enough to get people to quit until it's too late.

More efficient cars or the lack of enforcement are no excuses to drive fast. You are wasting energy versus driving slower. IF it becomes a society choice to reduce energy consumption, sacrifices should be made accordingly at an individual level and infractions should be repressed.