🚀 go-pugleaf

nkibe wrote:
> 
> Lane discipline is courtesy, and courtesy begets courtesy. Only an oaf,
> a boor, a vigilante, a legaliste, a psychopath, an uninformed, untravelled
> know-nothing triumphalist will refuse to yield to others when all yield to him.
> But such people are few...For the rest,  lane discipline creates a
> virtuous and ever widening circle of voluntary compliance. Drive in most
> parts of Western Europe and see for yourself.

> If low speeds are safe, lower are safer. So spend $5m of taxes to build a lane
> mile of inherently high speed superhighway, and then underpost it. Then spend
> more to enforce the limit, create bizarre driving habits unrecognisable in other
> advanced motoring countries and conflicts between every driver. All on empty
> roads!
> 
> Personal views, of course.
> 
> Nitin Kibe.
I agree with what Nitin says..... although I would disagree on lane
discipline being a courtesy. Lane discipline must be strictly enforced.
It is plain to see that good lane discipline reduces the number of
accidents dramatically, even at faster speeds. So there would be less
accidents at 75mph speed limit with lane discipline that at a 65mph
speed limit with the argy bargy that goes on on US roads these days.

It always struck me as ludicrous that in a country about 2000 miles wide
you could drive no faster than 65, 55 on ordinary roads.

Now of course the conservative among us will completely turn away when
thy even detect a note of increased speed but maybe one the politicians
in this country will see sense.

Vince