🚀 go-pugleaf

On Tue, 30 Jun 1998 07:09:21 GMT, E. Faubion <in@the.sig> wrote:
>whorning@pipeline.com (Walt Horning) wrote:
>
>>>No true professional driver is going to endanger others for the sake of a thrill. 
>
>>No? Then why do their racing cars sometimes go flying into the stands
>>despite retaining walls?
>
>Good point.  Maybe those are the ones that aren't professional. :-]
>Professionalism isn't necessarily a permanent thing.
>
>>Both the cops and courts are the wrong forum. Politicians are to blame
>>for higher deaths by not raising limits to the optimum.
>
>In OK they were raised to the optimum in December 1996 and our
>fatality rates went right up with them until we increased our seatbelt
>compliance. 
>
>>Former
>>Governor Shaeffer even posted his opinion in newspapers as to why he
>>vetoed the law to raising limits in MD. Then the next governor passed
>>the law. Guess what? Death rate actually went down.
>
>And enforcement went up.  There you go.  A good argument for strict
>traffic enforcement.
>
>>Traffic dynamics is dynamic, not static.
>
>And crashes are caused by law breakers, not law abiders.  That one
>fact has remainded constant for decades.
>
>whorning@pipeline.com (Walt Horning) wrote:
>
>>Well I agree that increases the chances of death. I do not think you
>>have stats though that exceed 50% and thus your statement "more often
>>than not" is just not true. It just sounds like an overstatement, to
>>win your case.
>
>You're right.  I don't have the stats nationally.  What I do have is
>26 years of investigative experience which includes hundreds of
>fatality crashes and here at least the odds are the driver causing the
>fatal crash will not be the fatality victim when more than one person
>is involved.
>
>>Funny, hard statistics show red cars, regardless of type, get stopped
>>more often than other colors. Some argue its the driver. Some argue
>>its the car color.
>
>That argument is typically used by someone in a red car who got caught
>and won't admit the real reason.  Why an officer would rather ticket a
>red car over any other beats me.   Lots of cops own red cars.   This
>reminds me of the guy who in traffic court accused me of stopping him
>solely because of the kind of car he drove.  I let him rattle on then
>causually mentioned I owned and drove an identical make and model.
>The judge fined him the max.

So, you are saying a large red fire engine appears to you to be just as
noticeable as a small brown Fiat.

Please do not drive in California.

Some fire engines are yellow here.

>
>>Then what kind of risks are those people in "low performance",
>>gas-misers taking when they are being tailgated by an 18-wheeler.
>
>This has absolutely nothing to do with the original statement. 
>
>>Yes, I agree that at higher speeds death is more likely in an accident.
>
>Bingo!  That's the only point I'm making.
>
>>But here's one for you. If 55 is "safe".
>
>You digress again.  It's no safer or dangerous than we motorists make
>it or any other speed limit.  Speed limits are regulatory laws just
>like stop signs and signal lights.   If you can speed 'safely' then I
>can run stop signs safely and I dare you to criticize me for it.
>After all, if I'm hurting no one what's the harm?

If you don't see the difference between someone crossing your path at a 
90 degree angle with the expectation that you will stop at a stop sign
and you overtaking someone at a small differential in speed, please do 
not come and drive in California.  Stay in Oklahoma in your herd.
Moo occasionally if it turns you on.

>
>
>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!