🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Mar27.160239.8237@seas.gwu.edu> declan@seas.gwu.edu (Declan McCullagh) writes:

>The legislation has already been passed by the House and is scheduled
>for a Senate committee vote today.  If you've driven on an interstate
>highway in Maryland recently, you might wonder what the point of it
>is.  There seems to be no inhibition on large numbers of people going
>65 mph and over despite the existing limit of 55.
Right.

>The legislation
>would, nevertheless, authorize the higher speed on certain stretches
>of the interstates designated rural, some of which are not all that
>rural (270 north of Gaithersburg, for example).  The chief effect is
>likely to be a de facto speed of 70 or higher in a number of areas
>that carry a lot of traffic.

Also right.  But, anyone who has driven 270 north of Gaithersburg
knows that when the traffic lightens up, there IS a de-facto speed of
70MPH.  On some sections of 70 west of Columbia, 70MPH will get you
passed on both sides.  The law will have no effect with the exception
of legalizing the status quo on some roads, and making it less illegal
on others.

A law violated by most of those affected by it is probably a bad law.


-- 
Matthew T. Russotto	russotto@eng.umd.edu	russotto@wam.umd.edu
Some news readers expect "Disclaimer:" here.
Just say NO to police searches and seizures.  Make them use force.
(not responsible for bodily harm resulting from following above advice)