Try telling that to the cell phone users. They think they are in perfect
control. There have been problem doing any studies of accidents with phone
users because of privacy laws and the phone companies fighting it. There
are some studies being done in Australia though, and they point to problems.
Younger drivers have not gotten enough experience to recognize potential
hazards,and also feel "invulnerable".
And past some point,older drivers mental processes slow down enough to not
react fast enough for sudden occurrences.They compensate by driving more
slowly,stopping earlier,thus becoming an obstacle themselves.
About a year ago I was in the waiting room of a medical facility in
Worcester, MA. An elderly man, probably about 80, came out of the office
with the assistance of a nurse. She had to help him on with his coat, walked
holding him to keep him steady even with his cane. When he headed to the
door she asked if he wanted her to call a cab or a ride. He replied, "no
thanks, I have my car." I was glad he left well in advance of me, but felt
bad for anyone that was exposed to him as reaction time was probably 20
times anyone else.
You oddly ignored the part about more strict training requirements for drivers,
strictly enforced traffic laws. Speed isn't directly related with the _number_
(fewer accidents occur per mile of highway than per mile of city street), but it
related with the _severity_ of accidents. While many city accidents may be
highway crashes are much more likely to end up in deaths and severe injuries.
Ask at any hospital whether high speeds are correlated with more severe
injuries, and I suspect
you'll get the same answer anywhere.
God forbid that Americans might have to _pay_ for their roadways...
People that speed are, quite often, unsafe drivers.
I would disagree with this.
Most EVERYBODY speeds,if only -one- MPH over the posted limit.
Which IS speeding,and you CAN be ticketed for it.
Unsafeness is more related to the lack of following other rules of the
road,such as signalling lane changes,improper lane changes,running red
lights and stop signs,and distractions such as,but not limited to,
cellphones. The REAL causes of "accidents".
Speed is not one of them. Speed by itself does not cause "accidents".
In line for clarity:
: "-- Insurance is VERY expensive.
: -- a driver's license is VERY expensive. And almost
: to get back if you lose it, which is very easy to do.
: -- Training requirements to GET a driver's license are
: extensive, and a lot more than driving around a few barrels
: markers as most places here are. And, they'll cost you a
: too. Lots and lots of taxes on such things.
: I got it Pop! The solution to traffic safety is to make
: very expensive and have lots and lots of taxes!
Unfortunately, I think that's right. People barrel around in
$20,000+ cars and trucks without care, yet they have their pets
insured against mange. The car is really perceived as a right in
N.A. and it shouldn't be. I didn't say I -liked- their methods,
I was just spouting what experience I have.
: "You need an education for your misinformation. "
: Seems like I have the info correct. Traffic safety on the
: just fine, despite no speed limits on major portions of it.
: positive that speed and the incidence of accidents on highways
: directly related.
===> I'm not so sure they're not directly related but that's hard
to prove any way one looks at it. I just think it's not the ONLY
important item in the overall list. Apparently, when there is an
accident on the auto or M or whatever it's called where one is
driving, it's also much more deadly (duh!). Even the tires on
their cars over there are different: You can still drive on a
flat long enough to get slowed to a stop. Actually, at 100 mph
with those hi-speed tires, they don't need air anyway -
centrifugal force keeps them working - until you slow down, that
is. Their tires don't fly apart like ours do and leave you
riding on steel.
Even you seem to agree with this, listing a whole
: lot of reasons why the autobahn is safe that have nothing to do
===> I do agree pretty much with what's stated in this posting,
not necesarily what was in the other posts.
Maybe we should work on doing some of those things here. Not
: the tax and make things expensive part. But doing a better job
: driver education and testing, getting after left hand dicks and
: who drive unsafely would be a good start, instead of handing
: speeding tickets to raise revenue.
===> Yeah, I sort of agree, except that speeding tickets aren't
handed out to raise revenue, and there is no direct quota other
than statistical records. When one set of troopers hands out x
tickest on the M1 on Sunday and one other one never hands any
out, it's pretty obvious something's wrong with his performance.
That's the only quota-like thing that goes on, and I also agree
that some will make the "norm" into their own quota; there are
bad apples in every barrel but fortunately not that many IMO.
===> My apologies for that rude comment: It doesn't say what I
meant and even sounds rude to me on rereading it. I really
intended to say that I wish there were more verifiable means of
explaining things instead of just my words. Sorry!
And, FWIW, I agree with your synopsis above. And if you
think OUR gas is expensive ... !!
Because people take advantage of the situation. You know that drivers will
always want to drive a litlle faster than the speed limit. So before peole
were maybe ding 60 while now they will want to do 70. People weren't
probably ticketed doing 60 in a 55, but were if they did 65 and 70.
Depending on the way the finess were structured, doing 15 over in a zone was
pretty hefty, so someone doing 70 in a 55 was hit hard. Someone doing 5
over in a 65 wouldn't be hit hard under old rules but should be under the
new, wo they upped the fine.
Think that was done for safety and not to take more hard
Well, when people start driving like Germans we can all drop the speed
limit. Let us know when that happens.
Possibly because most of the people driving on the Autobahns had to fork
out about US$2000 and go through extensive training to get their drivers
Don't get me wrong, I believe that DIFFERENCE in speed is a far greater
danger on the roads than speeding itself, and it pisses me off that
people who are driving unnecessarily slow are not pulled over and charged
as they should be. But to simply use Autobahn statistics to back up speed
being safe does not take the big picture into account.
"Never ascribe to malice what can equally be explained by incompetence."
Even in police work the bottom line is mighty $$$$ and the value of
publicity. Police is not only one less than what it used to be with more
high tech abilities than ever. Look at today's media, they make me puke.
Thank George W. Bush and his Republican idiots in D.C. for
this absolute mess. They're pulling the same stunt as Reagan:
starve the states of federal funds, and force the states to make
up the shortfalls themselves.
States are broke. Counties and cities are even more broke.
And police are told to focus on maximizing income instead of
protecting the public.
This is not a "lack of funds" problem. This is a priorities problem.
There are so many funds available that each tenant family I have
averages receiving ~$1000/mo from the government. There are so many
police that I saw five of them on my way back from lunch today - but
none were fingerprinting. They focus on raising funds because they get
to keep the money they raise. Money raised by the police should NOT go
to the police. They can't handle the honor system.
Much as I'd like to blame everything on the BCF*, this long predates
Bush, neo-cons, modern "conservatism", Reagan, even Nixon. I'm old
enough to remember such incidents in the 1960s, with Johnson and
Kennedy in the WH. My parents told of such things under Eisenhower,
Truman and Roosevelt. One instance of true bi-partisan cooperation
;-). So, though Bush has indeed cut funding to the states and the
Republicans have enacted unfunded mandates for state and local law
enforcement, the OP's particular problem is not of their doing.
Bullshit! This crap started back with Kennedy, then Johnson, and right up
the line with both parties. Get rid of the commie liberal lawyers and
judges and you'd have a shot at real justice.
States are broke because they spend the money on crap that makes politicians
look good, not what we need. This goes for BOTH parties.
If you want to know the true reason analyze the growth of government
(fed too) and its bloated bureaucracy relative to population over the
last 5-6 decades.
dadiOH's dandies v3.06...
....a help file of info about MP3s, recording from
LP/cassette and tips & tricks on this and that.
Get it at http://mysite.verizon.net/xico
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.