🚀 go-pugleaf

Mark Folsom (folsomman@redshift.com) wrote:
: Robert S. Frangooles wrote in message <6n95au$1p8$1@brokaw.wa.com>...
: >
: >OK, I have no problems believing that on freeways, there is correlation
: >between drivers who exceed the average speed by a certain amount having
: >fewer accidents, but what's the point?
: >
: 
: The point is to stop uncritically repeating the mantras and slogans of the
: safety nannies and the insurance lobby and start thinking rationally.
: 

Ok, so really the only point is that you feel villafied and don't want
people calling you names anymore :-)  

We obviously have to have some sort of speed limit.  If you want to
continue driving at 12 miles an hour above average highway speed, go for
it.  If you happen to get tickets for that it's obviously a risk you are
willing to take in order to get a increase in safety and get there faster.
I personally tend to think that safety reason is really not a motivating
factor, since you have probably been speeding since well before such a
study came out.

It sounds like this really little more than airing pet peeves about
highway travel and the frustrations involved in it.  The only real rule I
try and follow is to maintain as a large a buffer around me and all
other vehicles...I could care less if I save or lose five minutes of
travel time.

Bob

: >I would think that if more people started driving at this speed, the risk
: >of accident would increase, in other words, only a certain number of
: 
: West German autobahns have about the same fatality rate as US freeways.
: Montana's average and 85th percentile speeds went up by only about 2 or 3
: mph when they changed their daylight freeway limit from 55 to "safe and
: prudent."  I don't think you can reasonably defend demonizing drivers whose
: only offense is driving faster than average on freeways.  I don't recommend
: that everyone start driving 12 mph above the average speed of
: traffic---because it's impossible.  I do recommend that people stop acting
: like those of us who drive faster than average on freeways are the main
: cause of accidents and fatalities, because we are not.  I also recommend
: that traffic enforcement be concentrated on the really dangerous
: drivers---zombies, readers, unsafe lane changers, clueless mergers, macho
: crazies and tailgating semi's---not on the easy ticket money, namely
: speeders.
: 
: >people can benefit.  Are you saying we should have a lottery, and a
: >certain group of people should have an exemption from the speed limit and
: >be able to drive 12 miles an hour faster?  Or that insurance companies
: >should lower rates if you state that you trabvel that speed above the
: >average?
: >
: 
: As the Montana example shows, most of people wouldn't go significantly
: faster if speed limits were removed or just advisory (on freeways only) or
: were raised above the 90th percentile.  Then the self-righteous left lane
: blockers would likely move to the right (and mope and sulk because the world
: had gone to hell in a handbasket) and the rest of us could get on with
: getting somewhere more safely than we do now.  Also, some enforcement effort
: would be well spent on educating or removing those who obstruct traffic or
: aren't aware enough of their surroundings to avoid being a hazard.
: 
: >I'm coming into this discussion late, but i I guees I just don't
: >understand the relevance of the study.  Not, flaming just curious.
: >
: >Bob
: >
: >
: 
: The citation of the study was relevant when it was first posted.
: 
: --
: Mark Folsom, P.E.
: Consulting Mechanical Engineer
: http://www.redshift.com/~folsom
: 
: 
: