djct_watt

If the government really cared about our safety and our right to live life, we'd have stricter license restrictions and tests. IMO, if you are obviously unable to control your car during normal and emergency situations, you should not be allowed to on the road to risk other people's lives.

It's a proven system that works in much of Europe and especially Germany. If you look at studies comparing the death rate on German highways, many of which do not have speed limits, it is significantly lower than our highly inefficient interstate system.

Traffic offenses taken seriously in Germany? Failing to allow vehicles moving at a faster rate to pass (when in the fast lane).

Shaka_Z

actually even the autobahn is getting speed limits imposed in some areas, although you are right that in general their system is far superior to ours in term of driver training - they treat drivers liscences there almost the same way we treat pilots liscenses.

in addition, in germany at least, there are separate speed limits for different classes of vehicles. for instance, passenger cars have one limit (usually about 120mph) whereas light trucks (including pickups and vans) are legally restricted to 70mph or thereabouts. big rigs are even slower. this is a far more sensible approach - and much more in line with the laws of physics

djct_watt

Actually, there is no actually. It's exactly as I said it. I said that "[the] death rate on the German highway system, many of which do not have speed limits, [it] is much lower." I actually didn't say "all" and am well aware that many parts have speed limits imposed. But the fact of the matter is that the unregulated parts are not chaotic bloodbaths of death. Therefore it IS possible to speed without recklessly endangering human life.

Shaka_Z

whoa there... I think you might have taken my post in a manner in which it was not intended. I was after all agreeing with you ^^

djct_watt

Sorry, long day. And I apologize for sounding like a total A hole.

But yeah, the word "actually," when used as a transition, usually denotes that the previous statements were incorrect. I think I just take words and tone too seriously, as this IS an online forum. But when you used the word "actually," you basically implied that you disagreed.

IE:
Statement: "water is blue"
Response: "Actually, it's clear"

And again I know that you basically agree for the most part, but I guess I misread? Whatever, it's totally not a big deal, and I have no idea why I made a big deal out of it.

Well... ACTUALLY, I am drunk right now as I just got back from celebrating my buddy's birthday. I have a habit of picking on people's catch words.... Like when people say "actually" or "basically" or "like." Again sorry! Why am I still typing? Alcohol! woopop!

InfiniteVisi0n

Well they cant banned all vehicles that have the ability to surpass the speed limit even if they wanted too. If they did then almost all of America will be without transportation and the economy will fall back to recession because a big percent of the US population will not be able to buy stuff like gas, food, clothes, and etc. Of course people can walk or ride a bike but that can go only so far. What about the people who live in the country side where everything is 10 miles away. Its not logical to travel that far for something so small as a bar of soap. However I do see where you are coming from and if our government did banned a majority of cars because they are capable of surpassing 20 mph then America will lose weight and we will have cleaner air

Vincenzo

I think the whole discussion from people urging others to "slow down" or "don't speed" is a moot one. People will always drive at the speed their most comfortable with. For me, that's generally spirited or aggressive. I've been driving cars fast ever since my grandfather who's a retired police officer gave me the lesson they receive as police officers. I feel comfortable and confident behind the wheel in any condition. It's condescending to tell someone to slow down without knowing their comfort level or disregard their awareness of the laws governing automobile transportation.

There are many ways the authorities can gauge your speed. My favourite is road markers and counting distance between them and the time it takes you to reach each marker. People generally don't think about that. Also, how many times have you estimated the speed of a car that's passing you or driving in the opposite direction. You'd be surprised to know how accurate you are more times than not. A lot of police work is estimation with probability combined with luck.

Being safe on the road is like a formula: common sense (don't draw attention to yourself) + learn how to follow the flow of traffic (don't be erratic and dodge in and out lanes (slow is smooth, smooth is fast)) + KEEP YOUR EYES OPEN if you see a cop, lay off the accelerator = A conscientious, smart driver who's at the head of the pack.

Oh yeah, and get a radar detector only if you're driving in an area where you're not familiar with speed trap locations. For me a radar detector would be a waste of money. For one, I let other cars/trucks play defense for me when I'm approaching speed traps. Use traffic to your advantage, save money but know you're the only one responsible for anything that happens to you behind the wheel. Drive defensively, always.