There were accidents back in the day when there were two cars on California roads and their top speed was 18 mph... Limiting the top speed would prevent only a very small portion of accidents. If they limit the speed to the speed limit currently top in the US is in Texas, 80 mph, that still won't prevent some idiot doing 80 mph in a school zone or in a residential neighborhood or any other place with speed limit of 25 mph. Even if the car's limit is set to 60, that's still extremely dangerous if all the other cars are going 25 or 35 mph. So what will setting a limit on the car prevent, unless the limit is 25 mph? How many accidents have you heard on the news lately to have happened due to speeds of over 100 mph? Not many (not one in my case and I watch the news every day). Excessive speed is a cause of many accidents, but the excessive speed is in correlation to the speed limit, not in general. 65 mph in a 35 mph speed zone is a lot more likely to cause an accident than 140 mph on the Autobahn. It's all relative. You don't have to be Einstein to realize it.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 11 2007, 10:42 PM) [snapback]511010[/snapback]</div> This is why I like the idea of tying speed to speed limits on the roads. Speed differential is one of the biggest problems on busy roads and highways, so a system like this could be used to flag speeders and snails, both of which cause problems. Of course at present there is no way to implement such a system. We need to build the infrastructure of technology to make it work. Tom
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 11 2007, 10:42 PM) [snapback]511010[/snapback]</div> This is why I like the idea of tying speed to speed limits on the roads. Speed differential is one of the biggest problems on busy roads and highways, so a system like this could be used to flag speeders and snails, both of which cause problems. Of course at present there is no way to implement such a system. We need to build the infrastructure of technology to make it work. Tom
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 11 2007, 07:42 PM) [snapback]511010[/snapback]</div> High speeds increase both the number and the severity of accidents. The number of accidents vs speed is also affected by the road conditions. A well-maintained, dry interstate can accommodate higher speeds than an ice-covered side road. Jimmy Carter pushed through a national 55-mph speed limit, and people had a fit. He also told us that we waste more energy than we import, and that really gave people a fit. Most people don't believe they will have an accident. Most people feel that their person energy usage is too small to affect the economy. And most people (at least in America) believe that speeding is not a "real" crime, like theft or aggravated assault. And when they kill someone through speeding, they are convinced that it wasn't "really" their fault, because if only someone else hadn't [fill in the blank] the accident wouldn't have happened. Most people will refuse to admit that if they had been going slower, the accident (which presumably someone else caused) would not have been fatal. Most people never accept responsibility for their actions. Which is why I'd support much lower speed limits with vigorous enforcement and serious penalties.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(PriusOwner004 @ Sep 11 2007, 07:42 PM) [snapback]511010[/snapback]</div> High speeds increase both the number and the severity of accidents. The number of accidents vs speed is also affected by the road conditions. A well-maintained, dry interstate can accommodate higher speeds than an ice-covered side road. Jimmy Carter pushed through a national 55-mph speed limit, and people had a fit. He also told us that we waste more energy than we import, and that really gave people a fit. Most people don't believe they will have an accident. Most people feel that their person energy usage is too small to affect the economy. And most people (at least in America) believe that speeding is not a "real" crime, like theft or aggravated assault. And when they kill someone through speeding, they are convinced that it wasn't "really" their fault, because if only someone else hadn't [fill in the blank] the accident wouldn't have happened. Most people will refuse to admit that if they had been going slower, the accident (which presumably someone else caused) would not have been fatal. Most people never accept responsibility for their actions. Which is why I'd support much lower speed limits with vigorous enforcement and serious penalties.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(qbee42 @ Sep 11 2007, 10:28 PM) [snapback]510987[/snapback]</div> You people scare the hell out of me. Talk about big brother. Almost enough to make me go back to voting republican.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(qbee42 @ Sep 11 2007, 10:28 PM) [snapback]510987[/snapback]</div> You people scare the hell out of me. Talk about big brother. Almost enough to make me go back to voting republican.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(billynjoanna @ Sep 11 2007, 06:07 PM) [snapback]510940[/snapback]</div> I submit to you that when you are doing 65-70 in the fast lane of a moderately congested freeway, glance at your mirror and see flashing lights on the horizon, look quickly at the lanes around you and back to the mirror and the lights are half way closer from the horizon, it's on you to get the hell out of the way, and fast. It was actually pretty darn scary. I have no idea what he was responding to, but the shock wave from the displaced air as he blew past was pretty impressive too.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(billynjoanna @ Sep 11 2007, 06:07 PM) [snapback]510940[/snapback]</div> I submit to you that when you are doing 65-70 in the fast lane of a moderately congested freeway, glance at your mirror and see flashing lights on the horizon, look quickly at the lanes around you and back to the mirror and the lights are half way closer from the horizon, it's on you to get the hell out of the way, and fast. It was actually pretty darn scary. I have no idea what he was responding to, but the shock wave from the displaced air as he blew past was pretty impressive too.
In Europe the insurance companies won't insure a car that will exceed 155mph (I believe that's 200 k/h.) Very fast cars such as the tuned Mercedes, Porshes, etc have electronic limiters which won't allow them to exceed that pace. Those cars have the same limiter when sold in the US. The Bugatti super car VW is now producing doesn't have such a limiter. I guess they figure if you can pay over $1 million for a car you can self insure.
In Europe the insurance companies won't insure a car that will exceed 155mph (I believe that's 200 k/h.) Very fast cars such as the tuned Mercedes, Porshes, etc have electronic limiters which won't allow them to exceed that pace. Those cars have the same limiter when sold in the US. The Bugatti super car VW is now producing doesn't have such a limiter. I guess they figure if you can pay over $1 million for a car you can self insure.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 12 2007, 06:29 AM) [snapback]511206[/snapback]</div> The 55 mph national speed limit was signed into law on January 1, 1974 by President Richard M. Nixon. Jimmy Carter did not assume the office of the presidency until three years later in January 1977.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Sep 12 2007, 06:29 AM) [snapback]511206[/snapback]</div> The 55 mph national speed limit was signed into law on January 1, 1974 by President Richard M. Nixon. Jimmy Carter did not assume the office of the presidency until three years later in January 1977.
Well, what I can say the biggest problem is isn't speeding. Speeding is a problem, but only if the moronic driver doesn't know what the hell he/she is doing. That's no excuse to speed if you can handle higher speeds though. It's sad to know that most, if not all, of the near accidents I've had weren't because I was speeding. They were because the driver in front of me did something they shouldn't have done. Off the top of my head there were two people that ran red lights, one that stopped the exact second the light turned orange, and countless others that take all turns at 5MPH. I'm sure there are a ton more to add to that too. What we need are harder driving tests, nothing more. That and higher fines for things like tailgating, speeding, and running red lights.
Well, what I can say the biggest problem is isn't speeding. Speeding is a problem, but only if the moronic driver doesn't know what the hell he/she is doing. That's no excuse to speed if you can handle higher speeds though. It's sad to know that most, if not all, of the near accidents I've had weren't because I was speeding. They were because the driver in front of me did something they shouldn't have done. Off the top of my head there were two people that ran red lights, one that stopped the exact second the light turned orange, and countless others that take all turns at 5MPH. I'm sure there are a ton more to add to that too. What we need are harder driving tests, nothing more. That and higher fines for things like tailgating, speeding, and running red lights.
Of all the accidents and car collisions I've been involved in in all types of cars, none of them have been at high-speed. I think the fastest one was at 40 mph before the brakes were applied. Of all the accidents and car collisions I've been involved in in all types of cars, none of them have been at high-speed. I think the fastest one was at 40 mph before the brakes were applied.
Of all the accidents and car collisions I've been involved in in all types of cars, none of them have been at high-speed. I think the fastest one was at 40 mph before the brakes were applied. Of all the accidents and car collisions I've been involved in in all types of cars, none of them have been at high-speed. I think the fastest one was at 40 mph before the brakes were applied.
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SW03ES @ Sep 12 2007, 11:13 AM) [snapback]511339[/snapback]</div> I FULLY agree with you on the first point. but The Republicans are hardly "smaller" brother. You need a Libertarian for that...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(SW03ES @ Sep 12 2007, 11:13 AM) [snapback]511339[/snapback]</div> I FULLY agree with you on the first point. but The Republicans are hardly "smaller" brother. You need a Libertarian for that...
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(n8kwx @ Sep 12 2007, 06:06 PM) [snapback]511609[/snapback]</div> Bill Maher for President! ;-)
