🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <NIGEL.92Jul14115849@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov>, nigel@rs733.GSFC.NASA.Gov writes:

|> 
|> As far as the 55 limit goes...it's a stupid law that cost fuel, lives
|> and is simply a way for the state to generate revenue.  It costs fuel
|> as quite a few of the modern cars have optimal fuel efficiency above
|> 55.  It costs lives because the majority of the people go 65 anyway
|> and since it is speed differential that causes accidents so some idiot
|> going 50-55 really hoses traffic patterns.  The states love the law
|> because they can simply increase enforcement when they need more money
|> and of course insurance companies with their huge lobbies love it
|> because they can raise our rates for no real safety reason.
|> 
|> BTW: For the person who suggested complaining to the road engineers
|> most of the interstates were built with the idea that cars would go
|> 70.  Most engineers probably would tell you that higher speed limits
|> are safer.  Instead complain to your reps and get the idiotic 55 law
|> repealed.  More important join one of the groups (that Dave Hsu
|> pointed out) to help lobby for that change.
|> 

The last time this issue came up in this group, I asked the proponents 
of higher speed limits for references to support their claims that, 
for example, cars are more fuel efficient at 65 mph than at 55 mph, or 
that highway accident rates are not a function of speed.  By references,
I mean results of well-designed, controlled studies reported in reputable
publications (I'd even accept _Time_ magazine).  So far, no one's come 
forward.  How about you, Nigel?
-- 
Karl A. Anderson		| Internet: karl@thuja.gsfc.nasa.gov
NASA/GSFC code 920.2 (HSTX)	| voice: (301) 286-3815
Greenbelt, MD 20771		| #include "std_disclaimer"