(no subject)

[vicarz]

Comment poll:

Do you believe speed causes accidents? Y/N
For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on?
For either answer Y/N, compared to other things? For instance: cell phone use (handset), cell (no hands), dui, dwi, switching radio stations, eating, addressing kids in car, talking to a passenger?

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?
When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?

If you speed, is it safe when you do it?
When other people speed, are they generally being safe?

Comments

[have-inner-lady.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents?
--Yes.

For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on?
--Faster speeds = less reaction time and more momentum at impact.

For either answer Y/N, compared to other things?
--High rates of speeds in general are no worse than distracted driving, but individual conditions vary.

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?
--I have never received a speeding ticket. However, when I received a ticket for running a red light (long ago), this was how I ended up feeling.

When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?
--I have never received a speeding ticket.

If you speed, is it safe when you do it?
--If by 1-5 mph, generally I am being safe enough. Faster than that, it depends on conditions, but usually it is not as safe as driving the speed limit. Sometimes speed can be used to increase safety (as when a semi wishes to tailgate me; speeding up and changing lanes puts someone ELSE in the Russian Roulette chair).

When other people speed, are they generally being safe?
--It depends on conditions, especially road congestion, road conditions, the type of vehicles involved, and the speed of other drivers. When people speed en masse, as a whole they can be much less safe than if they were driving the speed limit en masse; however, a single non-speeding driver in a sea of speeding driver can cause surprise, and therefore accidents. Individuals can only make driving decisions based on the conditions they encounter. However, I suspect many individuals have worse driving reflexes than they believe they do.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Fair enough. I'm always curious that the speed limits are based on braking distances computed for 1970s cars, though I understand the better stop distances are not as relevant as the reaction time to stop. However, i don't know how this factor is used to analyze speed limits.

I suspect an economic analysis would find the speed limits cause more economic harm than any benefit even from saved lives. I don't know for statistical certainty, though.

[have-inner-lady.livejournal.com]

The economic perspective of high speeds would certainly be very interesting to know about. At the same time, though, safety is such a fundamental thing that it is difficult to have logical (rather than emotional) responses to it.

Would I drive faster because it's good for the economy? Probably not with my son in the car.

[eolh.livejournal.com]

I believe that speed can cause accidents. However, I also believe that speed limits are generally set arbitrarily low for two reasons, one good and one not-so-good:

1. The good reason: No matter what you set the speed limit at, some people are going to push it and exceed it, regardless of safety, because they can. If you set the speed limit at 55, people will do 70. If you set the speed limit at 65, people will do 80. If you set the speed limit at 85, people will do 100. Therefore, setting the speed limit at the actual maximum safe speed would result in some people pushing (well) beyond that safe speed. Setting the speed limit lower keeps those people within more reasonable and safe boundaries.

It's worth noting, too, that what is "safe" can vary significantly from one vehicle to another due to handling issues, etc. -- therefore, limits need to be set factoring in the lowest common denominator. Even if your vehicle still handles well at higher speeds, it doesn't mean that the other guy's does.

2. The not-so-good reason: Revenue -- speeding tickets generate a lot of money. Therefore, speed limits are frequently set arbitrarily low in order to increase the number of tickets generated. Likewise, speed traps are often not placed taking into consideration risk factors and safety, but rather are located in places where more tickets can be generated easily.

Most of the time when I'm speeding significantly (more than 5mph or so above the posted speed limit), it's because a majority of the other traffic around me is doing so too. I don't feel that it's safe to be going significantly slower (or faster) than the prevailing speed of traffic, especially when traffic is heavy. On the toll road and the beltway, in particular, I've noticed that despite the 55mph speed limit, the prevailing speed tends to be closer to 70mph. A car doing 55mph on those roads, while everyone is going around them at significantly higher speeds, is a hazard.

As far as tickets go . . . I can't say that I'm ever "thankful" for them, but when I'm speeding, I'm (generally, assuming well-marked speed limits) aware of the risk that I'm taking. What does make me angry is when it's clear that the speed limit has been set or the speed trap has been placed in order to raise ticket revenue rather than to increase safety. That is not the purpose which laws and enforcement should be serving.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

1. I have heard this but I don't know if I agree with it - speed limits were raised to 65 in many local areas and I haven't seen increases in speed overall, nor decreases in the areas that are still at 55.

2. Agree - like drug laws, many are in "school areas" but any map will show you every area is a school area. I love speed cameras / traps by a 6' chain link fence which prevents kids from even having access to the road.

I'm open far more in favor of raising taxes to pay the cops directly, and having them prevent crimes against person and property.

[eolh.livejournal.com]

Thing is, it doesn't have to be the majority of people that push those limits, so you won't necessarily notice an overall increase. It only takes one idiot who decides that 80mph really means 100mph to lose control of his vehicle and cause a fatal accident. Even if only a few percent of the population are that stupid, that's still a significant increase in incidents.

[eolh.livejournal.com]

I'm pulling that number, btw, from a personal feeling that 80mph is probably pretty close to the actual safety limit for most vehicles on a flat, straight stretch of highway with reasonable traffic, not from any kind of "official" number.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I tend to agree, again. I also have some cold views - I think the human life average right now by the courts is 4mil. I think we should use that or an adjusted figure to calculate the economic loss of slow speed limits compared to the actual cost caused by the few crashes that are fatal based solely on that speed difference. I also know they use a lot of stupid tricks to up the numbers now - such as automatically counting speed as a crash factor, like they count alcohol related crashes even if the driver is sober (based on an intoxicated passenger).

[eolh.livejournal.com]

The problem is the human factor. When you look at it from an academic, economic standpoint where it's all just numbers, sure it's easy to write off a few fatal crashes. When one of those numbers is your family member, your wife/husband/boyfriend/girlfriend, your friend, etc., it becomes a good bit harder to swallow. Get a few of those happening, and suddenly people start demanding that something be done about it. Other than lowering the speed limits to attempt to keep even the idiots within reasonably safe boundaries, what can be done?

If it were only the idiots getting hurt, you might be able to make that argument and get agreement. The problem is that they tend to take others with them.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

That would be the problem. I am cold though - if the economic impact is hitting the wrong person, then we need to up the consequence to the responsible actor in those cases. Sure it's huge when it is your relative, but those tearjerker breaks with logic are holding all of society hostage. So for 2 billion dollars we saved 4 lives? 2? I'd be curious to see reasonable figures.

[bentrazor.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents? Y/N
yes, like how guns kill people and mcdonalds makes people fat.

For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on?
There is a wide chasm of difference between doing 10 over the speed limit on a winding back road and doing 10 over the limit on an interstate at 4 am... and yet, the ticket costs the same.

For either answer Y/N, compared to other things? For instance: cell phone use (handset), cell (no hands), dui, dwi, switching radio stations, eating, addressing kids in car, talking to a passenger?

I think speeding, like cellphone usage, and yes even BA level is far too individualized to be across the board black and white. People talk about the evils of texting while driving because new boogeymen are always more interesting than old ones, but they said the same thing about accidents being caused by lighting a cigarette or changing tapes in the radio. Like I said, I understand that some people can't walk and chew gum at the same time, but I'd like to not suffer for it thanks.


When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?
I feel i deserve it in the sense of yes I was driving faster than the posted limit and a police officer caught me doing so.

When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?
I don't think it's ALL about money, nor do i get angry at the officer doing his job, but I get angry about the circular logic regarding traffic laws that most people hold (XYZ is wrong because it's illegal, and XYZ is illegal because the law says so, and since it's illegal it's wrong, and it's wrong because...)

If you speed, is it safe when you do it?
Always :) Any accidents I've ever been in had nothing to do with speeding

When other people speed, are they generally being safe?
you ever notice how everyone on the highway is doing the same speed and all 200 of them slow to a crawl when they see a police officer?

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I like the new boogeyman argument - another statistic they don't mention is how talking on a cell is as distracting as talking to a passenger, something never addressed in any proposed legislation I've heard of.

I never feel like I deserve a ticket - I feel like I was persecuted arbitrarily. I don't believe in the law when arguably there is no victim.

[sparklypoof.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents?
No

For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on?
Speed affects the impact of accidents, and reaction time as mentioned above, but it is not the CAUSE of accidents.

For either answer Y/N, compared to other things? For instance: cell phone use (handset), cell (no hands), dui, dwi, switching radio stations, eating, addressing kids in car, talking to a passenger?
Anything that distracts the driver from focusing on the road, the drivers around them, and their ability to react to the situation/road conditions at hand is a possible cause for an accident. All the examples you listed are possible distractions, some more severe/likely to cause an accident (ie: DUI, DWI, cell phone use/texting, putting on makeup) than others (talking to a passenger).

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?
I actually just got one from a speed camera that snagged my car doing 50 in a 40 on the ...I guess it's the southwest freeway near DC? if you veer to the right going over the bridge to 14th street? I was just going along w/the traffic, and imho everyone around me should've gotten a ticket too. To that end, yes, I was speeding, so I deserved a ticket for breaking the law, but I would hope everyone else got one too :P

When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?
The one I just got, yeah, it's all about the money. Especially when they're on the highway and all the traffic is going along at the same speed. Especially cuz it was a camera that "caught" me. And also cuz 've had a time or two where 've needed a DC cop to come help (car broken into) and never gotten a response. It just makes me mad to give dollars to a city that doesnt seem to return the favor. :P

If you speed, is it safe when you do it?
I generally go no more than 10mph over the speed limit. Usually at least 5mph over, unless it's a school zone that's active, or a neighborhood. I check my mirrors and windows & signal when I change lanes, and try to maintain awareness of my vehicle in relation to others on the road at all times. That's about as safe as I can get w/o just bumbling along...

When other people speed, are they generally being safe?
For the most part, we're all just going along w/traffic. The extremes of the spectrum are what eff it up for the rest of us. Those who exceed the speed limit by 20+mph and drive aggressively (constantly changing lanes, no signaling, cutting other driver's off, tailgating), and those who go the speed limit exactly, who end up causing a backup behind them, and then folks who want to go w/the flow of traffic have to wait their turn to merge into the 5mph+ lanes, and THAT is an accident just waiting to happen.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I'm afraid I'm with you except for the part where you don't mind the ticket for breaking the law. I disagree with the law.

I had some friends who worked for DOT while I was in grad school - they joked that the standard for setting speed limits wasn't just worst case scenarios safe...it was drunk driver in a 1970s all drum car on an icy surface with children nearby.

[sparklypoof.livejournal.com]

oh I definitely disagree w/the speed limits in most areas. someone back in hs once told me that the usual speed limit is 45 cuz you get better gas mileage at that speed and they were just doing it to help you out. I called bs on that, cuz gas mileage fluctuates a great deal based on make/model/year not to mention what you've got in the car to weigh you down or if you're towing something.

but what can we do to change the speed limits? there's enough fear-mongering mingled w/statistics skewed this way and that out there about what is and isnt safe that... well, it's enough to kill any modifications nearly from the get-go, isn't it?

[vicar.livejournal.com]

That's actually a good question - I often ask "Why is there such disjoint between the law and the belief system of the populace?" I'm not sure how we got the law on highways changed back from 55 to 65 (it was 70 before 55, lowered allegedly for mileage issues)

I suppose the political problem is that the minute you propose it, some life-wounded mom will parade about with her dead-baby picture and all logic will be put aside for another photo-op. "I voted for SAFETY!"

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents? Y/N
-Y, potentially. In some cases, where something suddenly comes out in front of the car and the speed that car is going makes avoidance impossible, yes. In others, excessive speed can exaccerbate the negative outcome of an accident.

For either answer Y/N, compared to other things? For instance: cell phone use (handset), cell (no hands), dui, dwi, switching radio stations, eating, addressing kids in car, talking to a passenger?
-Most of the above enhance the risk more than speeding, but speeding enhances the result more than most of the above. Getting into an accident while on a cell vs not on a cell is likely to have the same end result. Getting into an accident going 30 vs going 60 could mean that some one dies.

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?
-No

When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?
Yes, but the biggest way to make an impact on people is in their wallets, so I don't think it's some big conspiracy of racket.

If you speed, is it safe when you do it?
-I generally only speed on highways, and usually only at similar or slightly above speeds as those around me. Keeping up with the general flow of traffic is safe driving, imho. Doing 40 on a busy highway where everyone is going 75 makes you just as much a risk factor as doing 75 when everyone else is doing 40.

When other people speed, are they generally being safe?
-If they're keeping with the general flow of traffic, yes. If they stand out from the general flow of traffic, no.

[eolh.livejournal.com]

Yes, but the biggest way to make an impact on people is in their wallets, so I don't think it's some big conspiracy of racket.

I wish that I could agree with you, but I've seen too many examples to the contrary. To name two:

1. A friend of mine lives up in Maryland, where speed cameras are legal. Near her house there's road with a hill. It's 40mph all the way down the hill, until right at the bottom, where the speed limit suddenly drops to 30mph and there's . . . you guessed it, a speed camera. It remains 30mph for exactly one block, and then becomes 40mph again. There's nothing on that block -- no houses or anything, just woods. You tell me how that's legitimate. Apparently, there are regularly accidents there due to people slamming on their brakes in order to slow down before the camera.

2. Not speed, but another example of sketchy enforcement -- I live on Washington Blvd, right near where it intersects Lee Highway. There are frequently days where there's continually a cop car with someone pulled over right out in front of my apartment, because they sit there grabbing people who make a right turn on red without coming to a full stop. Sure, those people are technically breaking the law, but very few, if any, of them are truly being unsafe in doing so. But it's an easy money grab for Arlington County. The cop who spends all day sitting there could easily be doing something more useful, but it wouldn't generate nearly as much revenue for him to be doing so.

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

I know there are examples of speed traps with seemingly no purpose other than collecting fines. I'm not saying those don't exist, just that I don't think the concept of the speeding ticket in general revolves around that premise.

And to be honest, I'm not entirely opposed to some of the routine infraction checks like your #2. Virgina drivers are the absolute worst I have seen of anywhere I have ever lived or been. I can't drive a few miles to the grocery store during rush hour without seeing people going the wrong way on 1 way roads, gridlocking intersections because they didn't wait at the light, turning from non-turn lanes, etc. If the police really are just looking to make revenue, then they would go the the areas with the highest amounts of infractions. If their presence makes people do a smaller amount of all the dumb shit I see on a daily basis, in the areas where the most amount of dumb shit occurs, I'm fine with it.

[eolh.livejournal.com]

If they were doing it only during rush hour or at other high traffic times, I'd agree with you, but I've seen them doing it at times when there were practically no other cars on the road. And I'm not talking about people that fly through the intersection without even looking, I'm talking (mostly) about people who slow down, assess the situation, and then go, but perhaps don't actually pause for long enough for their wheels to completely stop turning for a few seconds (i.e. a "rolling stop"). Again, sure it's illegal, but there are much better uses of the officer's time.

[eolh.livejournal.com]

And, yeah, I'll agree that the concept of the speeding ticket doesn't revolve around revenue, however I do feel that since municipalities have discovered the great revenue potential in them, they're being used more and more in that way.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I am opposed to those routine stops and my experience is not the same, or my resultant opinion about VA drivers is not the same as yours. While I'd love to ticket everyone that goes the wrong way up a one-way (though I'll admit it happens and sometimes you can't tell at a glance) the examples he gave were not of the types of issues commonly associated with accidents.

Where i live they have a speed trap at the end of the block, and I've repeatedly asked the county to leave it/us alone. I've been here over ten years and in that area there has never been an accident of any type. However, on the other side of the street there are accidents daily in two places (based on touch merges) and a bridge with frequent accidents.

Now if they gave out tickets for gridlocking idiots who failed to clear the intersection - I'd support that (though that doesn't cause accidents, it does cause harm in the form of inconveniencing dozens to hundreds). Turning from non-turn lanes might cause accidents, but again I suspect it's more just an annoyance and rude than a safety issue.

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

So are you against the routine stops full stop, or just against their inefficient/ineffective use?

[vicar.livejournal.com]

If any stop falls into the category of "routine," I'm probably against it. Speed traps, single area stop sign/red light right turns, anything that just hawks one area for enforcement is inappropriate to me. I'd rather they were protecting against violence or property crimes generally - when doing traffic if they would get the people that actually cause accidents.

No cameras ever except to identify serious criminal activity.

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

If you'd love for people to be ticketed for the more egregious offenses, but don't like that cops waste their time in isolated areas...it would seem that cameras would be the perfect solution to that. They ticket all offenders rather than just the ones who commit something in the presence of a cop, and they don't tie up a cop's time from doing more serious police work.

Is your issue with cameras a matter of privacy? I don't think we should have them to the extent that the UK does, and definitely think that "if you're not doign anything illegal, you have nothing to worry about" arguement is a terrible one, but speed/intersection cameras solve the exact problems you mention, but you're against them. Why?

[vicar.livejournal.com]

My issue with cameras is a lack of congruence between accidents (some studies find they increase the number of accidents - but lower the injuries from same) and where the camera goes. Cameras on 6 lane divided highways for speed are absurd - the speed limit is just too low for the conditions. They are not there for safety but to generate revenue.

I do not believe that egregious offenses are taking places in isolated (particular) areas as opposed to others. I'd support police ticketing lane swervers, tailgaiters, and other aggressive conduct OTHER THAN speed (unless outrageous for the conditions).

I think if you can just put a camera up and blanket an area with tickets, you better have a darn good reason why. Theft, assault? Sure. Accidents? Inappropriate and unlikely to parallel the area with accidents compared to where the camera (or speed trap, or red-light/stop-sigh rolling stop) goes.

[ex-dasboot.livejournal.com]

They are not there for safety but to generate revenue.

That's more of a bureaucratic issue though. I've seen articles noting that stations have taken them down because they were essentilly too effective, and speeding, as well as accidents, were reduced so much that the station's budget was being too adversely affected. While some may be put up for that reason, it does illustrate their effectiveness at lowering accident rates as well as the absurd ways police forces are funded...though "studies have shown" is practically anecdotal these days.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I don't consider that beurocratic - I think the issue is a lack of congruence between the safety goal as stated and the camera enforcement. I do not ahve tons of statistics to back that up - it woud be inefficient for me to put that much time into it without a larger direct financial interest (by the same logic, why vote, but that's another story)

As noted: http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/22/2267.asp
(noting studies had design flaws)

http://www.motorauthority.com/blog/1024808_red-light-cameras-found-to-cause-more-accidents

[curvemudgeon.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents?

Yes. As do barbiturates.

For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on?

"Reefer Madness"

[vicar.livejournal.com]

You must be in congress!

[(Anonymous)]

Yes, speed causes (or to put it better, "contributes to") accidents. By definition, it reduces reaction times and increases stopping/deceleration times.

When I get a speeding ticket I'm not thankful, but yes, I deserve it. I've gotten angry, but no, it's not only about money (although revenue is a factor).

On those occasions I do speed, I believe I do it safely, and I believe most others try to do so as well. Speed limits are set conservatively, for the worst-case scenario. For instance, the speed limit on banked curves in roads (and they may be much more steeply banked than you realize while driving) are set partly based on the speed at which inertia would carry a car off the outside of the curve without friction -- i.e.: on ice.

[bluvampr.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents?
no.

For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on?
inattention causes accidents. people who can't drive cause accidents. speed can be a factor, as can ice, rain, the fact that you just took a bunch of advil because you've got menstrual cramps, the fact that your wife just left you, the fact that your dad just died, the fact that you came over a hill and the sun shone in your eyes. also, i agree with the comment that speed and cars kill people the same way guns do - you're putting a lethal object in the hands of people who aren't always equipped to deal with it.

For either answer Y/N, compared to other things? For instance: cell phone use (handset), cell (no hands), dui, dwi, switching radio stations, eating, addressing kids in car, talking to a passenger?
alcohol, drugs, cell phone usage are all contributing factors, but as always the magnitude of their effects depends on the individual. some people can have one drink and swerve all over the place, some people can drink a case of beer and be fine. but i suppose they have to, as always, base the laws on the lowest common denominator. really, it's a question of being willing and able to concentrate on the task at hand.

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?
never thankful, but i absolutely know i deserve it. there are laws, and choosing to break them is my choice, decision, and responsibility.

When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?
no, i don't get angry. yes, to a certain extent i know it's all about money. if they were concerned with safety when handing out speeding tickets, there are myriad other ways they would go about it.

If you speed, is it safe when you do it?
depends who you ask ;) we all know how i drive. the last time i was in an accident was... 1999? didn't get a speeding ticket from 2000 to last year, when i got one. i am aware of my limitations, i push myself to the edge of them, but in my eyes i am always safe. others might (and have) disagree(d).

When other people speed, are they generally being safe?
depends. there are some idiots who get all aggro about it, it's about dominance and ego and anger. they are not safe. there are ambulances who speed and are safe, there are ambulances who speed and are not. same applies to police officers, and the average joe and jane.
in my eyes, it comes to responsibility again. if you're going to take your life, and possibly the lives of others, into your hands and speed, then you damn well better be paying attention to the road while you're doing it.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Odd - yes I know your driving, and I would have guessed you felt the limits were arbitrary or too low. I thought everyone found the limits too low and am shocked to find otherwise. So, most people are doing something they think is wrong? Weird.

[bluvampr.livejournal.com]

weeeeeeell... i think they are too low for my own preferences. i do realize that most of the world is not comfortable with risk (otherwise we would be a world full of mountain bikers, not couch surfers), and that most people are easily distracted, don't take driving seriously, etc, and so can't be relied upon to drive safely. in some cases, at any speed.

in my ideal world, it would be a lot harder to get a drivers license (see europe). people would have to actually learn how to park, learn the dimensions of their car, learn the capabilities of their car wrt to speed, braking, etc, and have it driven into their little skulls that driving is a privilege, not a right.

once that occurred, there would be a lot fewer idiots on the road, and speed limits could safely be increased.

in the meantime, i will continue to break the speed limit on a daily basis, keep my reflexes and observation skills highly honed while avoiding the people who keep trying to turn into my lane without first looking to see if there is anyone there, and be eternally vigilant for men with radar guns.

also, fwiw, i don't think i am doing anything wrong, not in the least. but i am fully aware that i am breaking the law. two very different things :)

[vicar.livejournal.com]

Breaking the law doesn't mean you're doing anything wrong when the law is wrong. Drugs and hot gay sex - illegal, not wrong. Speeding on drugs and gay hot sex - possibly more distracting than a cell phone.

[alumiere.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents? sometimes yes (when speed is more than reasonable and/or driver is an asshat), in most cases no (some states in the mid-west now have no posted speed limits at off-peak hours, reasonable and prudent driving is still required and you can get a ticket for recklessness even though you're not breaking a posted limit)

For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on? too many years driving in and around asshats and the increased awareness of riding a motorcycle - although speed in ca is handled differently than in the dc area; almost everyone breaks the posted speed limit on the highway and in the city by at least 10 mph, and i see fewer speed traps by far; instead i see people being ticketed for unsafe driving, carpool violations, failing to yield or stop fully, etc - and more police actively patrolling rather than sitting at speed, etc traps (although the one thing i actually wish i saw more of in ca is the random dui checks - post club on the highway is fucking scary, and i suspect that is in part because fewer people get caught so they keep drinking and driving until they wreck)

For either answer Y/N, compared to other things? For instance: cell phone use (handset), cell (no hands), dui, dwi, switching radio stations, eating, addressing kids in car, talking to a passenger? i think speed is less frequently a cause of accidents than any type of distracted or impaired driving; however, speeding can make accidents much worse (and see above regarding dui in ca vs dc area)

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it? thankful? are you kidding me? i may deserve it by the posted signs, but if i'm going only 5-10mph over the posted limit and moving with the rest of traffic i don't feel it's right

When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money? i often felt that way in dc, even when i didn't get a ticket (i cannot tell you the number of times i've been pulled over for 5 mph over the limit, but then they decided to search my car for drugs (cops can't distinguish between clove cigs and pot) and felt bad about that so let me off w/ a warning), and the red light and speed cameras are solely about the money for sure; haven't ever been pulled over here though - it seems at least in my area that parking violations are the biggest revenue stream, and those don't tie up police officers so...

If you speed, is it safe when you do it? yes (i rarely hit more than 15 over the limit, and on the motorcycle i tend toward limit or limit +5 - when there's no car, too much speed is scary)

When other people speed, are they generally being safe? yes, as long as it's within reason and with traffic

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I love that idea of CA - enforcing real traffic laws and not just making money by that basic fuzzy "speed" issue.

[http://users.livejournal.com/_blackjack_/]

Do you believe speed causes accidents? Y/N

I believe that rapid loss of speed causes accidents, but the severity of the accident increases with higher speed and more rapid loss thereof.

For either answer Y/N, what do you base this belief on?

Newton.

For either answer Y/N, compared to other things? For instance: cell phone use (handset), cell (no hands), dui, dwi, switching radio stations, eating, addressing kids in car, talking to a passenger?

I think any of the above, in combination with speed, can lead to sudden loss of speed. However, they rarely do so when the car is not moving...

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?

I have gotten one speeding ticket in my entire life, when I was trying to get down to Danville to visit my dying father. I deserved it and had budgeted for it.

When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?

No, but I did burst into tears when I couldn't find the registration to the car (it was my dad's).

If you speed, is it safe when you do it?

I certainly do not speed when it is unsafe to do so, and rarely speed unless it is unsafe NOT to do so. I stick to the speed limit or lower when driving 29-S at night, for instance, because of woodland creatures.

Interestingly, doing 55 or 65 instead of 65 or 70 does not add noticeably to my commute time, which I think is the best argument against speeding: the time it saves you does not justify the increased risk. What's your hurry?

When other people speed, are they generally being safe?

I think it is safe to say that I am a more careful and attentive driver than most (I have had only one accident involving another car, and that was 20 years ago, and I'm pretty sure the deer I hit lived) so I am less confident in their judgment than I am in my own. One of the reasons I dislike driving in I-95 between DC and Richmond isn't the speed, but the density, of traffic. I have no doubt _I_ can safely navigate a dry, straight road in daylight at 80, but I am less sure about the guys in front of and next to me.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I think that the speed vs. damage from a crash is drawing arbitrary lines - 55 vs. 60, or 75...unless there are significant jumps in one place to another it's not clear why they picked this line in the sand.

Woodland creatures are an oft-missed point.

The argument against speed also pushes the idea that we could just make our maximum speed limit anywhere 35mph as well - just change our gear ratios and it becomes efficient. If one arbitrary point, why not another?

[http://users.livejournal.com/_blackjack_/]

I think there is a point of diminishing returns. The likelihood and severity of accidents increases with speed to the point that the time you save simply isn't worth the increased risk. I'm pretty sure there are some exponents involved. (Also, at night, there is a very definite point at which you are out-pacing your headlights.)

Quite honestly, considering the number of people who die in car crashes (far more than die from guns, drugs, terrorists, or swine flu), I would think the government would be entirely justified in placing much greater restrictions on who can drive and how they have to do it than they already do. Driving is far and away the most dangerous thing most people ever do.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I think I'd be in favor of more restrictive issues with licensing and use/abuse of cars. We all know bad and dangerous behavior when we see it, but a drunk or texter scares us more than a person reaching the kid in the seat behind them or singing to the radio.

Exponents, hmm. Then I wonder how this is affected by design for those figures too.

Let's work in a phrase about "Logarithmic scale of stupid"

[http://users.livejournal.com/_blackjack_/]

Here we go:

"the number of injury accidents after the change in speed (A2) equals the number of accidents before the change (A1) multiplied by the new average speed (v2) divided by the former average speed (v1), raised to the square power."

and

"The braking distance is proportional to the square of speed."

So yeah, exponents.

[shadow27.livejournal.com]

Do you believe speed causes accidents? Y/N
Yes. Personal experience, anecdotal stories, working for the trucking association and governmental research. It's possible to drive safely at higher speeds, but it would require re-education of the nation, changing and diligent enforcement of motor vehicle laws. A'la the autobahn where it's illegal to pass on the right but also illegal to just hang out in the passing lane.

Compared to other things?
DUI/cells/txting are probably more dangerous, but when you consider most of these things (talking, screwing with the radio et al) are done whether the person is going 35 or 120 it's a wreck-around-a-tree waiting to happen.

When you get a speeding ticket, are you thankful? Do you feel you deserve it?
When you get a speeding ticket, do you get angry? Do you feel it's only about money?
I am generally annoyed, but know it's my fault.


If you speed, is it safe when you do it?
When other people speed, are they generally being safe?
I'd say it's "safer" when I do it since I've had instruction on how to handle a car at high speeds and practiced on a track. That said at 120 mph things go by REALLY fast. Even for experienced drivers it's more unsafe than at 55.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

I knew you liked and equipped for speed, but didn't know you were trained. Neato!

[shadow27.livejournal.com]

Birthday present from Lori a few years back. A day on the Summit Point track in a Corvette.

I learned where a lot of the flaws in my driving were, especially in cornering. I also found I was lapping some of the other drivers.

It also runs in the family. My grandfather (pappy shade) raced Corvettes up mountains, my mom learned to drive from a racer on the Autobahn, my brother was a speed freak and I've learned from a LOT of my own mistakes.

[vicar.livejournal.com]

That's more than a little cool. I learned from playing on backroads in borrowed cars (from parents and parents of friends). I would not want to put my skills to the test, however.