I’ll say it again: the problem isn’t speeding, it’s recklessness. Speeding, depending on circumstances, can be reckless, but recklessness is far more encompassing and speeding does not by default equal recklessness.
Agreed wholeheartedly. As long as people stick to their lanes and respect the lane priority, there’s no problems.
Autobahn has fewer fatalities per km than your average city highway.
Racing has been safer than commuting for years.
Absolute speed isn’t the problem - it’s relative speed. Always has been. The problem is, the politicians need a line that even their constituents can understand, to rile up a mob.
IMO “speeding” doesn’t mean “driving fast”. It means “driving too fast for the conditions present”. The Autobahn is designed for high speeds, city Streets aren’t.
And the fucking sadists in power (not everyone in power, just the sadists) are eager to take away driving freely and being in control of the car, which is a genuine feeling of pleasure that the lower classes get to experience.
There are those for whom the goal is misery. For them the misery isn’t a side effect of their own gain. It is the gain they seek.
Agree. This is why average speed over distance enforcement is so effective.
It gets people to concentrate on their speed and it gets people to drive at very similar speeds.
Right, going 5/10/15 even 20 over isn’t going to make much of a difference especially on a highway.
Most road speed limits are set too low anyways because old people constantly complain to the city about them.
That being said, the fucks that are going fucking 60 in a 25 are absolutely being reckless regardless of how much they’re paying attention
It does make a difference, especially around pedestrians.
“Speeding accounts for nearly one-third of all fatalities on our roads and puts everyone at risk, including people in other vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and people with disabilities,” Acting Administrator Carlson said.
https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/speed-campaign-speeding-fatalities-14-year-high
Removed by mod
Ah, so what you’re saying is because the lumber industry and government propagandized the dangers of marijuana in order to help subjugate people of color and to keep hemp from competing with the wood market, this study can’t be true.
Super interesting take.
Its super brave of you to point to a conspiracy where the safety administrations and healthcare experts collude to lie in a study. What for? To get people to drive slower, which puts them at odds with the oil industry (driving slower uses less gas)? To have less people inured, putting them at odds with big healthcare? To put them at odds with the very states and cities who thrive off of ticket revenue?
Help me connect the dots like you see it
You also antivax and believe the moon landing is fake? Maybe cut down on the pot, especially if you’re driving above 35.
No pedestrians on the freeway dude
Try reading before you reply.
“Speeding accounts for nearly one-third of all fatalities on our roads and puts everyone at risk, including people in other vehicles, pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists and people with disabilities,” Acting Administrator Carlson said. [Emphasis mine, dude]
Feel free to click on the link in my comment. In there, there’s even a link to the data they draw the conclusions from.
Pedestrians are especially but not exclusively susceptible to cars and speed differences, but all persons involved in accidents fare worse with increased speeds. https://news.ua.edu/2005/11/ua-traffic-safety-study-shows-relationship-between-speed-and-deaths/ it’s a bit older, but it says chances of fatality double every additional 10mph over 35.
The comment above specifically mentioned highways. You specifically mentioned pedestrians, and it was the main topic of your comment.
It’s two very different scenarios and I was only addressing one of them.
- its driving
Honestly the fact we drive tons of metal at high speeds to move a couple hundred pounds/kilos of people is so silly.
Perhaps I’m unusual but I am only speeding because everyone else disregards the speed limit in my area, and it would put myself and my family at increased risk if I didn’t go with traffic.
I’d much prefer to go slower for the fuel economy.
I rarely check the speed limit. I always go with the flow in order to avoid accidents. It’s downright dangerous to drive the speed limit in some highways.
I usually go slightly faster or slower than most everyone else. It ensures i dont do my entire drive stuck in one of the packs that everyone seems to get caught up in. I’d much rather have half a mile of space between me and the next car than go the same speed as everybody else.
This doesn’t work in cities, or other states, but i spend my longest drive times going between cities in texas anyways.
This right here is what defensive driving is supposed to look like. If you have the option to distance yourself from the other cars on the road, that’s always best.
It baffles me seeing a group of cars on the road all bunched up with less than a second between them going 75. If there’s a hazard on the road that the cars behind don’t see, they’re all going to crash into each other when the guy in front slams his brakes.
Driving is all about awareness and predicting what others might do. I just assume at any point, anyone could need to suddenly brake hard. Plan accordingly and position yourself defensively.
Removed by mod
This works when people respect the “slower cars move right” convention. In California, it’s a free for all because slow people camp in the left lanes.
Removed by mod
I want that extra mpg, but I’m not going to die trying.
I live in a city though, so I really only need to speed if I’m out in the burbs or on the loop.
The ideal speed for best fuel economy really depends on the type of car you drive. Many sports cars get better fuel economy at 75MPH rather than 55MPH.edit: no quality sources to back up claim
Can you provide an example? In all data I can find, even for sports cars, they still have the best mpg at speeds significantly lower than 75mph.
Apologies for spreading potential misinformation, I too am having trouble finding a definitive source for what I thought was common knowledge.
I did some light research and was left with these notes:
- Air resistance increases at higher speeds by the inverse square law, more aerodynamic cars help offset the wind load but physics always wins.
- Peak engine efficiency is at the highest gear and approximately 1500 RPM, a more powerful engine may hit this at higher speeds.
- The EPA now tests various speeds up to 80 MPH when calculating highway fuel economy, so it wouldn’t be surprising to see manufacturers optimizing across the range.
- Cars that are optimized for the above points may get the best gas mileage at 60 MPH, but will have less MPG loss at slightly higher speeds.
- 90 MPH will never be more efficient.
- Personal anecdotal evidence has too many variables and I don’t have access to a variety of sports cars and straight level sections of highway with controllable wind settings to confirm.
Source?
I just posted an update under another comment asking for source information. TLDR: none.
I’m not sure what roads you’re talking about, but if you’re on a highway, the answer is just to stick to the right.
I say this, because countless people ignore this part of the rules of the road. The left lane is always for passing.
The rightmost lane on my local highway runs at 10 over the posted speed limit on most days.
Sounds good, but we should also consider how the design of the street can encourage drivers to go faster or slower.
work a job that requires the work vehicle to not go five over the speed limit and it feels like we are crawling going down any road, highway, or interstate
speed limits should be thrown out the window at this point and are only benefiting police
Yo, I’m alive because of speed limits.
and am about dead because of them
not being allowed to go more than five over and everyone else is going ten or more likely over ten miles an hour
coming down hills especially in Tennessee it feels like the people behind me are going to cream me
if there were no speed limits could at least not have that worry
places like South Carolina refuse speed limit cameras stating privacy concerns
without everyone adhering to said speed limits then only the cops are benefiting from them and they become useless
Your argument for not having speed limits is that a portion of other drivers speed and this isn’t enforced? Not that it should be stricter, or the limit lowered?
not a portion it is the majority of the drivers we are on the road with do not follow road rules including speeding
when speed limits are lowered very small group of drivers that adhere to the speeds set suffer due to bumper humpers and road ragers
not safer
That definitely sounds like an enforcement issue because it definitely isn’t the case everywhere!
The argument is that safety is already naturally incentivized. People don’t want to be in crashes, so they naturally avoid.
And an awake human brain, on site and paying attention and in control of the speed, is a better safety mechanism than a car that won’t go over a specific speed.
People also overestimate their reflexes and abilities, and lower speeds result in fewer injuries and deaths. Sure, being awake is good, but so is going slower; why not both?
If speed limits were taken away, every crash would be fatal
nobody on the road follows them as it is
constantly getting bumper humped
hot
Lolol just making shit up at this point 🤣🤣
I wasn’t planning on getting rid of my low tech beater anytime soon but now I’m really not going to.
You could make sane speeding laws and enforce them where it matters.
But we’ll get a fat ass sitting on the highway getting someone doing 15 over in low traffic.
But this type of garbage, this is the shit that puts Trump’s in office. Nanny state bullshit that serves to piss people off.
