🚀 go-pugleaf

DPH wrote:
> 
> E. Faubion wrote:
> 
> > Controlling Speeders
> >
> > Sunday, August 10, 1997; Page C06
> > The Washington Post
> >
> > The Montgomery County Council and County Executive Doug
> > Duncan just don't get it. First humps, then circles and now
> > beautiful (and expensive) flower islands that have no
> > speed-deterring effect whatsoever [Metro, July 23]. All have
> > failed to reduce speeding on most county streets and highways.
> > It is true that some individual streets with these devices have
> > benefited from slower traffic, but speeders still have an open
> > field on the rest of the county roads. Enforcement and
> > punishment are the only ways in which the streets of
> > Montgomery County will be made safer.
> 
> As often as the WP gets it wrong on so many issues, they got this RIGHT.  Good
> for them.
> 
> > The installation and approval of as many as 1,000 humps at
> > about $1,500 each totals $1.5 million. The circles add to this
> > cost. And now, with flower islands costing probably $6,000 to
> > $8,000 a piece, we are -- as they say -- talking real money.
> > And not a single speeder will be "calmed" on non-fitted roads.
> > It's your (and my) money, whether from federal, state or
> > county funds. Graham Norton, director of public works and
> > transportation for Montgomery County, has been given too
> > much money and is spending it quickly without any thought on
> > the part of the executive or the council to the real objective:
> > controlling speeding everywhere.
> 
> Did you know that these speed humps are credited with slowing ambulances down at
> 7 seconds delay per hump?  How many humps do you want between you're choking,
> asthmatic daughter and the ambulance?
> 
> Did you know that speed humps are credited with bouncing firemen off fire
> trucks, and giving them pernament injuries in the process?  What a moronic idea.
> 
> > It's far better to apply these funds to additional police efforts to
> > spot and ticket speeding motorists than to achieve a slower
> > pace on a few neighborhood streets where most accidents do
> > not occur.
> 
> Ain't nothing like a good radar trap on a 35 mph road that is there, then it
> ain't, then it is, to keep the A-holes at 60 mph guessing.  It has a great
> effect, and you can spread it over the whole county on different days.  If
> there's a partiuclarly bad road, don't trade in the old cruiser - set it out
> there as a "scarecrow".  Then, when doing real enforcement, drive it into the
> woods and place the real cruiser out there.  Drives the A-holes nuts.
> 
> Oh, I see at the bottom that it wasn't a WP editorial, but a letter to the
> editor from a private individual.  Shoulda known this was beyond the WP - they
> have such a problem being on the correct side of things, but of course they are
> a liberal as it gets, so....

Since when was speed humps a liberal/conservative question. 
Passive/aggressive behavior runs the political spectrum as far as I
know.  By the way, the Post has given alot of coverage to people
complaining about speed bumps--they could have ignored the issue if they
had the motives you suggest.

Best regards

Jim