🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Mar18.131757@thuja.gsfc.nasa.gov> karl@thuja.gsfc.nasa.gov (Karl A. Anderson) writes:
>|> Gov. Shaefer to veto the bill.  They're not going to spend any of
>|> _my_ money on that.

>They're welcome to spend _my_ money on that.  Keeping the limit at 55
>mph saves gas, keeps pollution (including greenhouse gases) lower, and
>saves my money by keeping accident rates lower, thereby keeping
>insurance claims and thus premiums lower.

SURE it does.  You should see my premiums-- and the only moving violation I've
ever been convicted of was for 45mph in a 40mph zone.  Next year, it
is either not driving, or driving uninsured, for me-- I won't be able
to afford the premium (payable in full in advance, thankyouverymuch)

As for gas, I've tried the experiment-- driving a whole tank at the
speed limit, rather than my usual speed.  Same mileage.  When I drive
much faster than my usual speed, or if we have a spell of windy days
(like this January), THEN my mileage drops off.  And how many
accidents occur due to high speed on rural interstates?  Most
accidents I've seen were the result of ice and snow, crossing the
centerline, or bad judgement at intersections.  The only accident I
know was due solely to speed happened at 55mph (in a 35MPH zone)---
on a very winding road.  The driver was unable to make the curve and
went off the road.  That isn't likely to happen at 65MPH (or even
75MPH) on an interstate highway.

>Oh, yeah - it save lives,
>too.
SURE it does.  

>Banning radar detectors would help to enforce the lower limit,
>obviously.

Naa.  Police will catch exactly the same number of violators.  They
can already catch as many as they want.
-- 
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)