[topvega]

Originally Posted by whya1?

I know this is going to enrage civil liberty fans but some cars in Japan are now being outfitted with GPS enabled speed limiters that make the top speed of a vehicle only 100mph. This restriction is lifted only at approved race tracks which will allow a higher top speed.

I personally think this is a fabulous idea since no one needs to go more than 100mph on any public road. I think it should be made mandatory on anyone convicted of reckless driving or speeding at more than 90mph. Hell, i would limit their cars to 65mph just to teach them a lesson. Like drunk drivers and their breathalyzer ignition locks, some people can't help driving like dangerous road raging jerks.

So how does limiting the speed to 100mph keep that person from doing 0 to 100 in 8 seconds in a residential area while drifting into school children waiting to catch the school bus??? It doesn't... Where does it end? Let's make cars that only go 10 mph top speed and put giant foam bumpers on them to make them extra safe... some people can't help driving like road raging jerks.. yes... but there a also quite a few of us who can drive above the speed limits responsibly...

[ARES45]

Since there are so many alcohol related traffic accidents, why dont we put breatholizers on all cars, or better yet, ban alcohol again.

[Yearofthe1]

Originally Posted by whya1?

The problem with speeding/drifting on an empty stretch of highway is that you can't be sure it is an empty stretch of highway. Someone hitchhiking on the side of the country road or simply crossing at the wrong time could easily be hit by your overly aggressive driving.

On a track or closed course you can go as fast as you like.

Laws are there to impose some sort of order. Is it any wonder that most countries think that Americans are arrogant pricks? BMW drivers have an even worse reputation. Picking and choosing which laws you agree to follow is idiotic, not mature. What if you really like smoking crack? Since you don't agree with that suggestion than you just go ahead and do it.

In your case of a raped wife what happens if you are wrong and kill an innocent man? Just because you believe a law is unjust doesn't mean your neighbor argees with you. Free will has nothing to do with it, it is called self control. Even if you do kill the correct rapist, if your wife was no longer in danger you would be charged with murder and rightly convicted.

If you think speeding and taking a laissez-faire attitude to traffic laws is ok what happens if your neighbor thinks the laws regarding sound violations are immoral? He can play his music loudly at 2am and while annoying it has no potential to end in a car crash that could potentially kill you. Who is more at fault?

The point of laws are to make that distinction.

Again, please read EXACTLY what I am writing. I said I would kill the man that I caught IN THE ACT of raping my fiance. I said speeding and/or drifting on an OBVIOUSLY empty stretch of highway. Maybe you just haven't driven the enormously expansive stretches of freeway in the West and Midwest, but holy bejesus, if you continue to argue that there's no way you could know these roads are deserted, you really need to get to an opthomologist. There are roads in this country that you can see clearly all the way to the horizon. So again, yes, I would be perfectly comfortable breaking 100 mph for a brief moment in the middle of Bumm-f Utah as long as I was putting no one else in danger. And no, I would never consider going more than 25 mph when driving on streets that a kid could dart in front of me at any moment.

And again, I have a free-will that I choose to exercise. I don't NEED a law to tell me what is right and wrong. I have my free-will and conscience to guide my actions, not someone telling me what my actions should be.

If an idoit wants to smoke crack, I don't care, as long as he's not violating my or anyone else's rights. The laws against drugs have proven much more damaging than the drug use itself, since pushing any product to the black market will immediately make it lucrative to criminals. Just look at the history of Prohibition and you'll have your answer.

Finally, a neighbor playing his music loudly at 2 a.m. would be violating his neighbor's rights, so this would be wrong, regardless of any law. Luckly, noise ordinances exist that support the fact that this behavior is wrong. But a man yelling at the top of his lungs that his house is on fire at 2 a.m. would not be charged with a violation. Yet another example of the situational relevance of the law.

[trashcan]

Originally Posted by whya1?

I know this is going to enrage civil liberty fans but some cars in Japan are now being outfitted with GPS enabled speed limiters that make the top speed of a vehicle only 100mph. This restriction is lifted only at approved race tracks which will allow a higher top speed.

Haven't cars in Japan been limited to 112 mph (180 km/hr) since at least the 80s?

[whya1?]

Originally Posted by trashcan

Haven't cars in Japan been limited to 112 mph (180 km/hr) since at least the 80s?

Not sure, this info came from the Civic RR (a special edition Type R in Japan)

112 is plenty fast and there is no place you can legally do that speed anyway on a public road. I like the idea of disabling it for track events.

[whya1?]

I know this is difficult for some to understand but by speeding you are endangering not only your own life but the lives of all the drivers around you. There is no such thing as "responsible" speeding.

I have been out West and have spent many hours driving between Denver and Billings. The speed limit is already 75 out there and not many people do much above that. 80 or so is the norm and there are large stretches where you don't see anything but antelope. I still wouldn't do 100+mph out there for long because there is no point. The road is completely straight but antelope, cattle (and buffalo) can still cross the road on many spots and you will just have to slow down anyway. But if you really really wanted to speed then Montana wouldn't be a bad place.

They did allow a daylight speed limit of "whatever is safe and prudent" for a while but people have different ideas of what that means (as evidenced by this thread). You might think you are perfectly safe in your 135 doing 150mph but I don't the police will agree. Again, the law is there to protect the weakest link (grandma in her Buick). There is no way she is going to be able to do 100+mph safetly and making her keep up with the pro drivers in the 1 series who insist on doing 100mph is dangerous. By limiting everyone to a safe velocity you can at least lessen ONE cause of accidents.

Free will is good but speeding is not a cause that you use to argue that we should have total freedom. The neighbor playing music is violating your rights but you speeding in traffic is endangering ALL of the drivers around you. How many times have you sat in a horrible traffic jam because someone speeding or weaving got into an accident? Loud music won't kill an innocent person but speeding can.

[whya1?]

Originally Posted by ARES45

Since there are so many alcohol related traffic accidents, why dont we put breatholizers on all cars, or better yet, ban alcohol again.

I only want to put limiters on people who have proven themselves unable to control their vehicle or who have shown a disregard for traffic laws. Just like breathalyzers installed on drunk drivers.

If you insist on speeding and collecting tickets then society should move to limit your ability to endanger the rest of us. How is this a bad thing? Are you an habitual speeder?

[ARES45]

Not as much as I used to be whya1, but the speed definitely creeps up on me in the 135. I believe in less laws, better education and more guns. But hey, that is just me.

[colonel1961]

Originally Posted by whya1?

I know this is difficult for some to understand but by speeding you are endangering not only your own life but the lives of all the drivers around you. There is no such thing as "responsible" speeding.

I'll be as nice as I can possibly be, but how on God's green Earth can you say there is no such thing as 'responsible' speeding? With the speed limit on a local highway at 70 mph, are you suggesting that I cannot be responsible whilst driving at 75 mph? After all, that is speeding...

You've created a false dichotomy in your simple little mind. Speed limits are often arbitrary, re: the 55 mph speed limits in the seventies. Jefferson and Adams didn't waste their extraordinary vision so that sheeple would march in lock step to something as capricious as speed limits.

C'mon, dude - free your mind and the rest will follow...

[esses]

Much misinformation. Speed does NOT kill, it has been proven time and time again.

The National Highway Patrol Association says speed kills, certainly. For example, if two drunk drivers fall asleep at the wheel each driving 1 mph over the limit, and one crosses the median and has a head on collision with the other driver - the highway patrol officer who writes up the accident report is REQUIRED to list speed as a contributing factor.

Ask yourself what caused that accident. Then remind yourself that in most states (not all) the revenue the local highway patrol receives from speeding tickets is GREATER than that they receive from taxes. Now ask yourself why it pays (literally) the officer to list speed as a contributing factor.

Independent studies correcting for outside factors (drink driving, sleeping, driving under the influence of drugs, etc) shows that speed has zero statistical contribution to accidents on America's freeways. Of course we all also know that the autobahn has no speed limit and has a fraction of the collisions American freeways have. Csaba Csere has published lengthy articles filled with citations in Car and Driver on the subject. There is a lot of literature out there.

I also hope everyone is aware what the basic speed law in their state is. In California, it is NOT and has NEVER BEEN the posted speed limit. Don't believe me? Familiarize yourself with California Vehicle Code 22350.

C'mon, this is America people (at least where I am sitting): we have a patriotic obligation to question unsubstantiated propaganda.

[adc]

Originally Posted by whya1?

112 is plenty fast and there is no place you can legally do that speed anyway on a public road.

Yes there is - Montana.

Edit: Must be my drunken drug-induced stupor that I usually speed at through school zones to work that made me put the incorrect state initially.

[adc]

Originally Posted by whya1?

The speed limit is already 75 out there and not many people do much above that. 80 or so is the norm and there are large stretches where you don't see anything but antelope. I still wouldn't do 100+mph out there for long because there is no point.

There may be no point to going over 100, but you've just admitted it could be done safely.

[colonel1961]

Here’s some anecdotal evidence that speed has no relevance to stoopid driving or to the wrecks resulting wherefrom. I just followed a person in a taped-up Cadillac driving down the street at five miles per hour under the speed limit watching as she had a hell of a time keeping it between the lines. Now, it was about noon our time when this occurred, so I’ll give her the benefit of the doubt that she wasn’t in the bag just yet. Nonetheless, she was far more a danger to life and limb (and property) than me driving five miles per hour over the posted speed…

[Citizen Z]

To those that say its impossible to speed safely, I have one response: the German Autobahn. The only reason its unsafe in the US is because other drivers arn't expecting it. On a stretch of traffic free, limited access highway such as the interstate, it is perfectly safe to travel in excess of 100mph in a high performance sports coupe such as the 135i. Drive for the traffic, road, and weather conditions and you're fine. German cars are made for it.

[whya1?]

Originally Posted by adc

Yes there is - Montana.

Edit: Must be my drunken drug-induced stupor that I usually speed at through school zones to work that made me put the incorrect state initially.

Not anymore. They revised that law and there is now a speed limit. 75mph

[whya1?]

Originally Posted by Citizen Z

To those that say its impossible to speed safely, I have one response: the German Autobahn. The only reason its unsafe in the US is because other drivers arn't expecting it. On a stretch of traffic free, limited access highway such as the interstate, it is perfectly safe to travel in excess of 100mph in a high performance sports coupe such as the 135i. Drive for the traffic, road, and weather conditions and you're fine. German cars are made for it.

The is a huge difference between the quality of roads and drivers in the US and Germany. I love going to germany and driving on the autobahn not because of the speed but because there are fewer cars, better roads and NO ONE passes on the inside. Basic rule and they follow it.

The catch is to maintain those excellent roads and to limit the numbers of cars gas costs the equivalent of $8.50/gallon (more with the weaker dollar). I would gladly pay 8-9/gallon for equivalent roads and equivalent traffic. And then all of the speed demons could have their unlimited areas.

The best thing is that the majority of people who speed excessively and drive aggressive are young and relatively poor. They can't afford the gas so they can't drive. That is why Germany is so great. The poor and young drive tiny little diesels that can barely get over 90mph while the mature and rich drive large BMWs/Mercedes that can cruise at 150mph all day.

Of course there are statistical anomalolies and outliers but the majority hold to this stereotype. This would never work in the US because people expect cheap gas and would never allow our government to collect even more tax money thru higher gas taxes. But then again, we aren't as socialist as Germany.

[whya1?]

Originally Posted by esses

Independent studies correcting for outside factors (drink driving, sleeping, driving under the influence of drugs, etc) shows that speed has zero statistical contribution to accidents on America's freeways. Of course we all also know that the autobahn has no speed limit and has a fraction of the collisions American freeways have. Csaba Csere has published lengthy articles filled with citations in Car and Driver on the subject. There is a lot of literature out there.

I would love to see these studies. Speed is most definitely a contributing factor. If you remove all accidents with drugs, alcohol, sleeping, etc then you STILL hundreds if not thousands of fatal accidents every year were speeding was a factor. Every street race that kills someone, every teenager speeding with his friends, every BMW owner trying to hit his limiter; all have speed as the major factor. Are you telling me they are ALL drunk/stoned/sleepy?

The only way you can say that speeding has no effect is if you correct for stupidity. But then you wouldn't see speeding and aggressive driving at all.

[colonel1961]

Originally Posted by whya1?

The only way you can say that speeding has no effect is if you correct for stupidity. But then you wouldn't see speeding and aggressive driving at all.

Ergo, anyone who speeds is stupid? Is that your assertion?

[topvega]

Originally Posted by whya1?

T

The catch is to maintain those excellent roads and to limit the numbers of cars gas costs the equivalent of $8.50/gallon (more with the weaker dollar). I would gladly pay 8-9/gallon for equivalent roads and equivalent traffic. And then all of the speed demons could have their unlimited areas.

The best thing is that the majority of people who speed excessively and drive aggressive are young and relatively poor. They can't afford the gas so they can't drive. That is why Germany is so great. The poor and young drive tiny little diesels that can barely get over 90mph while the mature and rich drive large BMWs/Mercedes that can cruise at 150mph all day.

Of course there are statistical anomalolies and outliers but the majority hold to this stereotype. This would never work in the US because people expect cheap gas and would never allow our government to collect even more tax money thru higher gas taxes. But then again, we aren't as socialist as Germany.

So with all the money we have wasted in Iraq we cld have built a US version of the Autobahn? Damn... now I am pissed

[esses]

Originally Posted by whya1?

I would love to see these studies. Speed is most definitely a contributing factor. If you remove all accidents with drugs, alcohol, sleeping, etc then you STILL hundreds if not thousands of fatal accidents every year were speeding was a factor.

I would love to see studies that support YOUR position.

As I noted, if you merely say speed is a "factor" then the drunk drivers crossing the median scenario I described would have speed as a "factor."

Forget about that nonsense, the question is when does speed CAUSE an accident, and the answer is statistically irrelevant or, as you will see below, about two (2) percent of the time.

According to the American National Traffic Institute:
1. Most accidents happen at intersections at speeds under 30 MPH
2. If everyone never exceeded the speed limit we would require 18% more roads to keep the traffic load per mile the same as it is now.

You said you would love to see some studies. I mentioned Csaba Csere already. Alan Buckingham a British Sociologist has published many articles on speeding and accidents in the UK. The Government of British Columbia decided to do away with speed cameras when they found they had had "no discernible impact on speed or the fatal accident rate."

http://sense.bc.ca/research.htm contains a number of useful studies.

Here is a link to the study I referenced above which was conducted by the UK Department for Transport which concluded that only two (2) percent of accidents among drivers over 25 are caused by exceeding the speed limit: http://www.thenewspaper.com/rlc/docs/2007/0709-commonspeed.asp#adata

A trip to the local library would open up your eyes even more.

Bottom line is, bad drivers cause accidents, not fast drivers. In fact, familiarity with a vehicle at high speeds makes for better drivers, just ask any German motorist.

Isn't that one reason we shop for BMWs? The knowledge that if something flies out of the back of a truck on the freeway your BMW can safely and successfully evade debris at freeway speeds? Sure did help Year1of1 on these forums: http://www.1addicts.com/forums/showt...ght=335i+truck

[Yearofthe1]

Originally Posted by colonel1961

You've created a false dichotomy in your simple little mind. Speed limits are often arbitrary, re: the 55 mph speed limits in the seventies. Jefferson and Adams didn't waste their extraordinary vision so that sheeple would march in lock step to something as capricious as speed limits.

C'mon, dude - free your mind and the rest will follow...

Yeah, I've been trying to show him this the whole time - it isn't working, he's too thick! He can't quite grasp the situational relevance of laws, but dull people have always had a hard time thinking for themselves, and it discombobulates them when another person tries to explain and/or embodies what free-will really means.

[larryn]

I see people being called "stupid".. that's "infraction worthy". It's been remarkably civil in a debating sort of way, please make this get a bit more civil, or it will be locked.