🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 05 Jul 1998 17:57:43 GMT, E. Faubion <in@the.sig> wrote:
>danthman@umich.edu (Daniel I. Manes) wrote:
>
>>Well, the 70-0 figure is from Car and Drive and the 80-0 figure is from
>>AutoWeek. 
>
>That explains the mismatch.
>
>>But my car wouldn't "slide to stop" because it has ABS, which prevents the
>>wheels from locking up and sliding. 
>
>Decelerate to stop is a better term for what we're talking about.
>The results are the same.
>
>>Your computer program didn't use more precise figures, it used
>>lowest-common-denominator figures.
>
>Such as?....
>
>>My whole argument is that my car's
>>braking is well above average, so my stopping distances at 80 are no worse
>>than many cars at 70.  Hence, by going 80, I'm at no greater risk than
>>many cars going 70.
>
>Okay.  It'll be interesting to see how the courts accept this when you
>are ticketed.
>
>>That's just because speed is so darn easy to measure. 
>
>There's always an excuse isn't there?  
>
>>The bottom line is: police departments, city/state governments, and
>>insurance companies collect money from speeding tickets, and that's not
>>anything they're going to want to give up. 
>
>One more excuse.   Perhaps you'd like to ask me how much I make from
>writing speeding tickets? 

Actually, what I would like to know is how many accidents you cause by
being on the side of the road, so people _stop watching where they are
going because there is a police car at the side of the road_ and hit the 
brakes.  I'll bet there are many more accidents than that than from 
trivial speeding (ie, 8 over speed limit on freeway).

I know I've seen plenty of rubber necker accidents, and the only ones I've
seen where someone loses control while moderately speeding have been DUI
(and ocassional mech failures).

Maybe your OK traffic volume makes these observations different.

>
>>No matter how much evidence
>>stacks up against speeding as a major source of accidents on interstates,
>>police departments will continue to preach the evils of speeding because
>>there's a financial incentive in it.
>
>So say the people who speed.  Not exactly the most unbiased of sources
>wouldn't you say?  
>
>>Let's face it, if your exaggerated notions of speed were really true, the
>>whole population of Germany would have been wiped out long ago.
>
>If your exaggerated notions of speeding tickets was true, my city and
>state would have become wealthy beyond all imagination long ago.
>
>(makes just as much sense so I thought I'd toss that in)

No, they are much too wiley to lose such a good thing.

>
>>The faster we can go, the more time we can spend at our
>>destination and the quicker we can back.
>
>That is without doubt one of the most selfish self-serving bullshit
>excuses I've ever heard.   
> 
>>Now, obviously this high degree of
>>mobility comes at some risk, but it's a risk the vast majority of
>>Americans are willing to take every day.
>
>Until it's you.  Then you'll be hiring that personal injury attorney
>to sue that s.o.b. speeder who nailed you and he'll be more than happy
>to take the case and pay someone like me the big bucks to prove it for
>you.  Been there, done that, still doin' it in fact.  
>
>>My whole argument in this debate is that the Interstate speed limits in
>>this country don't reflect the balance of mobility and safety that the
>>American people really want.
>
>Baloney.  You just want to drive fast and don't like tickets.  Let's
>call this what it really is and cut the nonsense.  

Hey, that suits me.  But I don't see the mutual exclusivity here.

>
>
>efaubion@oklahoma.net
>http://www.geocities.com/Heartland/Prairie/6123/


-- 
These opinions are my own and not necessarily those of Information Quest or 
Pebble In The Sky http://www.informationquest.com mailto:jgarry@nospameiq.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/joel_garry   Remove nospam to reply.  
mailto:joel_garry@compuserve.nospam.com  "See your DBA?"  I AM the @#%*& DBA!