🚀 go-pugleaf

In <slrn74f7i8.e4.joel-garry@home.com> joel-garry@nospam.home.com (Joel
Garry) writes:

>>Now consider the situation where we keep speed limits based on the
>>actual physical conditions, but greatly increase other maximum limits.
>>E.g., the 65 mph California statewide limit could be increased to 90
>>mph.  Limits in residential zones, school zones, sharp curves,
>>construction zones, etc.  would be based on actual conditions.

>The problem with this "actual conditions" is, the conditions may change
>rapidly or be different then they appear.  The school zone is especially
>problematical, take for example the school located on a major street.
>The street looks like it should be 55mph, but little kids may dart out
>at any time....

California law tries to make it fair, by creating a "rebuttable
prsumption" that the posted speed limit is the right one.  The motorist
may of course try to persuade the court otherwise.  I don't think they
could have done this any better, other than perhaps by adding a clause
that a police officer's testimony is to be considered no more credible
than that of a cited motorist.  Most other states treat speed limits as
absolutes, which is unwise and unrealistic.

California law messes up the situation with "absolute" speed limits on
highways.  These speed limits are set by legislative fiat and are not
based on traffic engineering, which is why they are almost always
unrealistically low and widely ignored by both motorists and law
enforcement officers.  It's these absolute speed limits that ought to be
set much higher.

I find no fault with most of the lower speed limits -- I have seldom
found any to be set too low.  One exception is Palo Alto, where many
major roads are set at 25 mph -- probably because residents applied
political pressure.
-- 
Rahul Dhesi <dhesi@spams.r.us.com>
a2i communications, a quality ISP
    "Any idiot can avoid automobile accidents that are his own fault.  It
     takes skill to avoid accidents that are the *other* person's fault."