Being Harassed by Highway Cops?

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Sep 30 2007, 01:09 PM) [snapback]519465[/snapback]</div>

Driving 62 in a 75 is not unsafe and certainly it is not driving slow. If more people would slow down both gas and lives could be saved.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(efusco @ Sep 30 2007, 12:54 PM) [snapback]519454[/snapback]</div>

HEY MAN, WhaT KIND OF A RESPONSE IS THIS???

 

i can't say i will ever have a problem with being harassed for going too *slow* :blink:

being searched by the cops isn't a good feeling... DH got pulled over for driving next to a speeder with the same size and color car as his and caught the blame. then he was searched on the side of the road, work uniform on and all, down the street from where he worked. talk about insult to injury.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gupchurch1349 @ Oct 3 2007, 02:10 PM) [snapback]520758[/snapback]</div>

I guess that depends on how you define "unsafe". "Safe" really is a relative term. When comparing 2 activities, frequently one can be described as "safer" than the other, but to a certain extent everything is unsafe. No matter what you are doing, if you are alive there is always a potential for death or injury.

If there is a lot of traffic in all lanes, and they are all driving at the posted speed limit of 75mph and you are the only car driving 62, then you are probably more likely to be involved in an accident than most of the other cars on the road at that time. Does this make the behavior "unsafe"? Perhaps, but it certainly makes it "less safe".

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gupchurch1349 @ Oct 3 2007, 02:10 PM) [snapback]520758[/snapback]</div>

Again with the relative terms. Slow compared to what? By definition it is "slower" than the posted limit. Given the senario described above, it is "slowest" on the road. Fast for one person may be slow for another. This is probably at least part of why laws specify actual distance per time unit numbers when stating limits on speed.


<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gupchurch1349 @ Oct 3 2007, 02:10 PM) [snapback]520758[/snapback]</div>

Probably, and if more people would speed up both time and traffic congestion could be saved. Everyone has their own priorities, the law determines an agreed upon compromise.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gupchurch1349 @ Oct 3 2007, 02:10 PM) [snapback]520758[/snapback]</div>

Um, a humorous one? The idea being that Prius drivers are harassed by Highway Cops because they have a more of a reputation for thumbing their nose at the law than drivers of other vehicles. Of course, once humor needs to be explained, it typically loses it's humorous qualities.

 

Once upon a time, I lived in rural Minnesota.
When the states were allowed to change their own highway/freeway speed limits again (the national 55 mph was lifted), I94 went from 55 to 65 mph.
I was traveling on I94 one bright, sunny, dry, warm day, and came upon a veritable parade... all doing 55. Exactly 55.
I pulled into the left passing lane, and slid up the line, doing precisely 65... at the head of the parade, was a Minnesota State Hwy Patrol officer.
I glanced at my speedometer... yup, 65 mph. We passed a speed limit sign.. yup, 65 mph is the limit.
I glanced at the officer as I passed him. He grinned. I smiled, and pulled in front of him, and continued on my way, doing the speed limit.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(comtech5 @ Sep 30 2007, 03:25 PM) [snapback]519517[/snapback]</div>

How fast were you going? I travel it every day, and most people in HOV are doing 70 & never get looked at. There was an article in Newsday a while ago where a Highway cop stated that he wouldn't stop some one for doing 70 as long as everything else was OK, but over 70 he would.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Oct 1 2007, 05:09 AM) [snapback]519465[/snapback]</div>

Usually I can resist the temptation to say anything about this point of view (not wishing to make myself a target for flamethrowers). But, I've seen several similar ones on PC recently, and I guess I'm feeling increasingly obliged to say something that could save a life or two. (Kind of like PC members wanting to correct the many myths surrounding the Prius)(PS -- and I've picked a real moderate expression of this POV, 'cause I hope Hyo won't get too riled up at me)

The idea that cars moving slower than the flow of traffic have an increased risk of being in a crash came from a study in 1964 (Solomon's " Accidents on main rural highways related to speed, driver, & vehicle"). Basically Solomon found a U-shaped curve of crash rates, lowest for travel speeds near the mean speed of the surrounding traffic.

But -- this study was based on 1950s era roads which lacked turn lanes and passing lanes, and as a result many of the crashes included by Solomon involved stopped or slowing vehicles. When these vehicles are removed from the data (as Crowley showed in 1987, and by others subequently) crash risk is an increasing function of travel speed.

It also gets put about that the Autobahn is one of the safest roads because it is fast. The Autobahns are safe in spite of being fast (good cars + good drivers), and they have a recommended top speed of 130 km/h (80mph) and variable speed limits posted for traffic and weather. If you crash going faster than the recommended speed drivers are prosecuted and insurance companies withhold payment. And the fatality rates on the Autobahns are twice as high as that of UK motorways where the top speed allowed is 112 km/h.

The finding that does stand up across all the different studies is that every 5% increase in speed results in a 10% increase in crash risk and a 20% increase in a fatality resulting from a crash.

Unfortunately the *myth* about relative speeds apparently gets repeated in various driver training courses to this day.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Danny Hamilton @ Oct 4 2007, 07:28 AM) [snapback]520769[/snapback]</div>

OK, one more.
I often hear people say that safety is expensive because slowing down increases travel time and all the costs associated with that. It is true that mathematically speaking, higher speeds lead to reduced travel time, however, the effects of speed in reducing travel time are grossly overestimated by road users (in urban areas the time savings are small or negligible because of intersections and traffic lights). On an urban highway maximum flow rates are obtained at a speed of about 60-70 km/h (37-43 mph). Speeds above that interestingly and paradoxically reduce traffic flows due to speed (and flow) instability (and conversely, the lower the traffic density the higher the speed, etc). These data are from a recent report produced by the Joint Transport Research Centre comprised of members from Asia-Pacific, Europe, & North America).
<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(gupchurch1349 @ Oct 4 2007, 07:10 AM) [snapback]520758[/snapback]</div>

Right on the money.
So maybe some of you will want to take issue with what I've said. Fine, I hear it all the time. Others though, might want to have some of this information so they can make up their own minds about how to drive or engage in an intelligent conversation with others about road safety. There are many more myths and misconceptions that we could chat about, but for now (you will be relieved) I will leave it here.

 

If you are going that slow make sure you are in the right lane, and if for some reason you happen to be in the left lane, watch out for the black prius with a roof rack that might catch up to you going 95. That is all.

Yeah, if you are going that slow, you stick out more than someone speeding, by far, because everyone is going around you and you basically look sitting still.

 

"I know that in CA/NV it's legal to do 20 mph below the speed limit on the highway, so I knew he couldn't issue me a ticket,"

Not true. You can be cited for impeding the flow of traffic.

There is a minimum 45mph lower speed limit on freeways when there is no traffic, but even then, you CAN be cited for driving too slowly. From the California Vehicle Code:


Slow-Moving Vehicles
21654. ( a ) Notwithstanding the prima facie speed limits, any vehicle proceeding upon a highway at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time shall be driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, except when overtaking and passing another vehicle proceeding in the same direction or when preparing for a left turn at an intersection or into a private road or driveway.

( b ) If a vehicle is being driven at a speed less than the normal speed of traffic moving in the same direction at such time, and is not being driven in the right-hand lane for traffic or as close as practicable to the right-hand edge or curb, it shall constitute prima facie evidence that the driver is operating the vehicle in violation of subdivision (a) of this section.

( c ) The Department of Transportation, with respect to state highways, and local authorities, with respect to highways under their jurisdiction, may place and maintain upon highways official signs directing slow-moving traffic to use the right-hand traffic lane except when overtaking and passing another vehicle or preparing for a left turn.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(samiam @ 2007 10 03 15:43) [snapback]520865[/snapback]</div>

No worries, Sam, you'll have to try much harder than that to get my goat.

Let me explain my thinking a little more, and see if maybe we're in closer agreement than it seems.

I'm definitely not saying faster is always safer than slower. Driving too fast for the conditions, overdriving your headlights at night, and cornering at speeds too close to limits of traction are not safe. Braking distances increase with velocity, and even the posted speed limit can be dangerously fast, depending on the season and the road conditions. It's not just my driving skills I need to be concerned about, it's everyone else's, too.

On a multi-lane highway, it's safest if the slower drivers stay to the right, and the faster drivers stay to the left. (Assuming right-hand driving, of course. YMMV) Problems arise when speed demons tailgate, pass on the right, or use slower moving vehicles as pylons in a slalom. Problems also arise when grannies insist on doing 10 under in the fast lane, causing people to swerve around them and generally raising everyone's ire.

Sometimes, theory doesn't work. In congested urban traffic, I find it's safer to push the limits of tailgating than to leave a 'safe' gap the person in the next lane inevitably assumes is for them.

Taking the above into consideration, I still think there is such a thing as driving too slow, and that the overall risks are lower if most people are going about the same speed.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(hyo silver @ Oct 4 2007, 03:03 PM) [snapback]520997[/snapback]</div>

I think we are quite possibly in violent agreement after all. B)

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(samiam @ Oct 3 2007, 03:43 PM) [snapback]520865[/snapback]</div>

Thank you, Samiam, for introducing an unaccustomed level of scholarly common sense into this subject!

As my Xebra dealer (a county sheriff when not selling EVs) is fond of saying, out of his very unhappy personal experience scraping bodies off of the pavement: SPEED KILLS.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(daniel @ Oct 4 2007, 09:08 AM) [snapback]521203[/snapback]</div>

Actually, it isn't the speed. It is the sudden deceleration from that speed that usually kills