Over on Fark, they recently posted a story that claimed that `'91% of drivers routinely speed, eat or read while driving''. While I'll admit that reading while drving is probably an exceptionally bad idea, and eating somewhat so, it occurs to me (again) that the speed limits in the US are much too low.

As a case in point, I take an interstate-labeled beltline to work. The posted speed limit is 60MPH. I don't believe that I've ever seen anyone drive 60MPH on this road. In fact, this morning, I got onto the beltline behind a city cop, and, despite the fact that I was driving about 70MPH, he quickly left me behind, and he was not on his way to a crime scene. I usually drive between 75 and 80 MPH on that road and am probably on the high side of the average speed. It doesn't seem to have any more accidents than any other stretch of road.

I suppose that city roads (that is, not highways) are more sanely marked, even if they are usually about 5 MPH too slow, IMO. (Then again, have you ever actually driven 25MPH on a normally sized neighborhood road? It feels like you could get outside and push the car faster.) But highways are just insane. North Carolina is all about collecting revenue via traffic violations -- even moreso in recent months, it seems -- but I'd be much happier paying higher taxes than worrying about whether driving the same reasonable speed as everyone else on the road is going to garner me a ticket, especially when it's not inconceivable that I could lose my license for it, since it's often, if not usually, 15MPH over the limit.

I suppose I'd have more respect for it if cops ever drove the limit, but every time I see them, they're either going the same 10-15MPH over the limit, just like everyone else, or are driving 5MPH less than the limit just to freak everyone out (I assume -- I can't see any other reason they'd be doing that).

The posted speed limit is 60MPH

That IS a very slow posting for an intersate. All of the intersates in NM (well, there are only 3 of them) have a posted limit of 75mph. And all state highways are 65mph. These speeds are a 20mph increase from about 10 or so years back.

Weren't highway speeds generally higher a long time ago? I seem to remember my parents telling me that the general highway speed of 55 was a speed reduction set back during fuel crisis times. And that the speeds were actually much faster in the past even when cars were not as safe at high speeds as they are today. But I have no idea if that is true or if I just made that up somewhere along the line.

- trs

I suppose I'd have more respect for it if cops ever drove the limit, but every time I see them, they're either going the same 10-15MPH over the limit, just like everyone else, or are driving 5MPH less than the limit just to freak everyone out (I assume -- I can't see any other reason they'd be doing that).

This is what really gets me. I got a ticket a few weeks ago, and after driving away at 54mph (I95 around Boston still has a 55mph limit) the cop flew past me at about the speed that I had been doing before getting stopped.

The most dangerous driving that I've ever seen was a NY state trooper. He pulled a U-turn on an interstate, turning into the left lane about 100yds in front of us. My wife had to stamp on the brakes. Of course, he didn't have any lights on, or indicate any intention. My wife decided that she didn't want to be anywhere near this lunatic so changed lanes into the right lane and slowed down. Unfortunately this didn't work as the cop then changed lanes into the middle lane (again no signal) but didn't do the usual accelerate to 100mph thing. So he's about 30 yds ahead of us in the middle lane doing about the same speed as we are. A half mile down the road he suddenly, without warning or indication, swerves across our lane whilst braking hard, and then pulls a U-turn and drives the wrong way up a ramp.

Shit like that really pisses me off. If I had done either of hose manovoeurs then I'd have been given a costly ticket. Both of them would have probably lost my driving priviledges. But cops routinely get away with them.

But I'm ranting. Back on topic;

Most tickets in the US are written under civil law, not criminal. Anyone can bring a civil case in a court. I wonder whether it would be possible to motivate enough people online to start bringing speeding troopers to justice too? I wonder if this would translate to an opinion change amongst state troopers and lead to a raising of speed limits to sensible speeds?

I suppose I'd have more respect for it if cops ever drove the limit

In the UK, the motorway police always drive at the speed limit (except when they're answering a call, obviously).

This is really friggin' irritating, because nobody wants to speed past them; meaning that traffic that was flowing smoothly at 85-90mph suddenly slows down to 72mph to eek past the police car so that they can speed up again.

Note: for reference -- the speed limit on a motorway is 70mph; average speeds on the M11 (London-Cambridge) seem to be about 85mph; average speeds on the M4 (London-Wales) seem to be about 95mph.

I agree that a lot of the interstates are marked at too low a speed. I live in Columbus, OH and I-70 is one of the straightest, flattest highways around. It's speed limit could be raised to 70 or 75 safely, but currently it is set at 65 for cars and 55 for trucks. The state decided that the money it got from fining truckers was worth losing fedral highway funding (the fed tried to push Ohio to raise the truck speed limit to 65). That's just evil.

On the other hand, have you ever driven I-79 through West Virginia? It's speed limit is 70, and I think that it is too fast for portions of the highway. It is very windy with some steep inclines, and I've seen some near accidents there.

Also, 25 for neighborhoods is very very reasonable. I know it seems slow, but that is pretty much the max speed you can be traveling and expect to stop if a child runs out from in front of a parked car. I live on a very wide street, and it seems like everybody does at least 35 down the road. They treat it like it's a drag strip, and there are many children that I fear one day will be hit by a car. I've had my share of balls roll out in front of my car, and I could stop, because usually I drive UNDER the speed limit of 25 on my street. I doubt some of the riceboy cars that race up and down the road could do the same.

I agree entirely. It is not a mistake, however. It is based upon the business case of the revenue that speed enforcement generates. Some police chiefs will actually admit this.

The newest fad is to install automatic semaphore (traffic light) monitoring equipment similar to photo radar. The idea is that vehicles running reds will be photographed and sent a ticket. One may argue that red light running is a bad idea, and I agree, but most of the tickets issued are in the first few tenths of a second after the yellow->red change. It's pure business case. As a matter of fact, the monitoring equipment is given to jurisdictions *free* from the manufacturer -- who gets a share of the ticket proceeds.

It's business. It has nothing to do with safety. Safety is just the cover story. Just a small scale version of the WMD/Iraq manipulation that you're fond of discussing.

If there was a sincere interest in red light saftey, they would just put a 1.5-2 sec delay from the red one way to the green the other. Some jurisdictions do exactly that.

Someone else in this thread mentioned that the speed limits used to be much higher. It seems to me that the speed limits are nowabout what they were in the 1960's (after a ridiculous 20 or so years at 55mph). However, car technology is vastly improved and an average consumer sedan can go 100mph safely all day long.

The one argument that supports lower speed limits is the horrendous congestion in most American cities. Too bad they haven't been spending that ticket money on improvements to the infrastructure...

If there was a sincere interest in red light saftey, they would just put a 1.5-2 sec delay from the red one way to the green the other. Some jurisdictions do exactly that.

Not really, because the 1.5-2 seconds would effectively become part of the "green light." Human nature dictates that people are going to run the light as long as they're assured there's nobody coming the other way. If you made it 20 seconds between changes, people would run the red light for 18 or 19 seconds.

For the record, when I drive in certain parts of Philadelphia, I slow down at every GREEN light.

The posted speed limit is 60MPH
That IS a very slow posting for an intersate

That depends on where you live. In the DC Metro area, all the interstates are 55mph. It isn't until you get about 30 miles south of the beltway that it becomes 65, which is more acceptable.

I agree completely with your statements, Bitt. I also have one question for you, since you're in the NC area: have you ever been to Williamsburg? Driving in that area for the last 3 years has very nearly killed my love of driving. I have yet to find an area that has worse speed limits, traffic patterns, and traffic lights than Williamsburg, VA.

The main road in town is Richmond Rd. At one point it is a road with 2 lanes each way and a turning lane in the middle. There are about 3-4 lights in this mile of road, and about 7 entrances to store parking lots on each side of the road. This road is 25mph. AHH! I just can't stand it! This is only made worse by the fact that there is so little for cops to do in this town full of tourists and old people, that they WILL pull you over for doing 34 in a 25 (I have). In fact, they always have two cars present when this happens.

Add to all this the fact that there are exactly 1.5 intersections in the entire town where you can turn left on green (legal in VA if no left-hand turn red arrow is present), and you can understand how I regularly scream at some non-existant traffic regulator in the sky.

I have been to Williamsburg, but, honestly, I don't think I've ever driven there.

However, many touristy and just plain small towns do the same thing. One of their big forms of revenue seems to be ticketing the out-of-towners, probably because they know that it's easier for the tourist to just send the fine back than to drive back in a month to contest it.

My basic point is not so much that 60MPH is too slow everywhere. Obviously, there are many factors that go into what the correct speed limit in a given area should be. Nor is it really an issue of revenue-based ticketing, although that's certainly an important concern. The issue, in my mind, is that everyone goes way faster than the speed limit in certain sections. In my experience, except for some places that are obviously speed traps, everyone, including the cops, realize that the speed limit is too slow, so few tickets occur. But if that's the case, why are the limits still so slow? I know for a fact that state legislators drive these roads regularly. The DOT administrators do, too, as that's the building I'm driving to. All those signs do is serve to make drivers nervous.

Sure, some of the issue with raising the limit, some people will say, is that people will continue to drive faster than that. I've not faound that that's really the case. I've found that people find the speed they think should be driven on the road and drive that, with little regard to the posted sign, even to the point that, on rare occasion, the traffic on the road will be going slower than the limit, and not due to overcrowding, but just because that's the innate speed of the road.

And, to defend myself about the 25MPH thing, in Raleigh, there are some roads that were probably historically residential, but they're now thoroughfares, even though they may still be two-lane roads, and they're still 25MPH. I'm not talking about backroads; I'm taking about non-shortcut roads people use to get places every day.

I agree somewhat, but I think a lot depends on the area.

Again, in Williamsburg, area drivers are unbelievably slow. I can honestly say that I drive in the fastest 5% of all citizens in the area. I also don't feel that I drive unsafely. I'm not entirely certain why people drive so slowly here. One reason is that they are mostly retired people in their 80's (my entire neighborhood is filled with retired people). The other is that the rest of the people here are tourists who have no clue where they are, so they drive extra slow.

Both of these are possible, but I think it's mostly a different mindset. I've observed that about 75% of all the people in Williamsburg go exactly the speed limit, about 15% go 5pmh over, another 5% go 10mph over, and I'm in that last 5%

OTOH, in northern VA, where I love to drive, about 90% of the people fall into that top 25%, edging towards the faster end. I love driving here.


I don't mind the speed limit as long as people observe MY speed limit. This goes back to that whole discussion on slower traffic keeping to the left, which I don't want to get back into again. All I can say is, I generally "urge" people to get over, and I continue to go my own speed, while looking out for cops much in the same way Tony does

I have no problem with red light cameras except for the fact that in the UK (at least) they seemed to be a precursor to the dreaded speed camera.

Too many people run red lights around Boston. It happens all the time. The fact is that there is a yellow light that tells you that the light is about to turn red, and (assuming that it is timed correctly) if you miss that light then either you were speeding excessively or you were deliberately trying to squeeze through when you shouldn't have.

Note: for reference -- the speed limit on a motorway is 70mph

Roger, I just wanted to take a moment and thank you for Americanizing your units for us. Appropriate, considering the thread's subject was US speed limits.

Too many people run red lights around Boston. It happens all the time. The fact is that there is a yellow light that tells you that the light is about to turn red, and (assuming that it is timed correctly) if you miss that light then either you were speeding excessively or you were deliberately trying to squeeze through when you shouldn't have.

My problem with the "red light cameras" isn't the whole running-reds thing.

I read something in a car magazine about a year ago which gave some interesting and scary information. Now, I don' t have any support for this information other than the article I read, so take it with a grain of salt. But what I heard was that large cities have been deliberately lengthening the signal cycles (longer time intervals that a given light stays green while all the opposing lights stay red) in the interest of better overall traffic flow. This is, I believe, what's been causing people to try to "push" the reds at either end and why some cities are complaining about the running-reds epidemic and needing to install red-runner cameras. Sounds like they need a refresher course in TQM and should be trying to look for the root cause of the problem.

I also read that some cities were deliberately shortening the length of the yellows, even though statistics have shown you'll get fewer red-runners if you lengthen the yellows. That's just downright mean if you ask me.

Roger, I just wanted to take a moment and thank you for Americanizing your units for us. Appropriate, considering the thread's subject was US speed limits.

He wasn't, we use MPH for speeds in the UK as well.

He wasn't, we use MPH for speeds in the UK as well.

As well as in the US or as well as km/h?

In fact, this morning, I got onto the beltline behind a city cop, and, despite the fact that I was driving about 70MPH, he quickly left me behind, and he was not on his way to a crime scene.

I am noticing that 90% of all Austin PD I get behind don't use their turn signals, yet this is one of the main violations they will cite to pull people over to further investigate DUI, etc. Now I'm not against DUI patrols, but it irks me that they (or 90% of the rest of Austin) don't use their damn turn signals. I'm thinking of starting to take car numbers and times and reporting them. Hey my tax dollars right?
I did use one of those "How's My Driving" numbers on a delivery truck the other week. He thought he need not sit at the red light to turn right so skipped it by going through the dry cleaners lot on the corner. I was 5 cars ahead before he skipped the light. right behind him after with the 1-800 number begging me to call... I did. I felt good, if you're gonna feel like you're more important than any other car on the road, you better not have the "How's My Driving" sticker in view...

Okay, I'm going to take a moment to reply to the main subject/premise of this thread, which I'll paraphrase as "current US speed limits are, in general, unrealistically low".

What I'm about to say isn't a well-thought-out logical argument, I haven't put much energy into thinking about it yet, but I'll put it here in the interest of sparking discussion. And my opinion here will probably surprise some people here on the BBS.

My opinion, in summary, is: "I think the current US speed limits are, in general, right where they should be".

And this is coming from someone who routinely exceeds the speed limit and has to spend an inordinate amount of time and energy trying to avoid getting a speeding ticket.

Supporting arguments:

- Each time we increase the speed limits, people begin driving X mph faster than what's posted. If speed limits were 125, we'd all exceed those limits eventually.

- Most drivers on the road are mouth breathing knuckle-draggers, and honestly, I don't trust them to drive over 65-75 mph safely. I have very little faith in the intelligence and attentiveness of my fellow man.

- Recently, we did increase the speed limits. From a national limit of 55, it was increased to 65, and now it is even higher (75 or more) on some particularly wide/flat/straight interstates. I think that's enough for now. I think those are realistic limits for the general public.

- The current speed limits are a compromise, taking into account the fact that we know people exceed them.

- The faster we drive, the more alert we need to be. However the current consumer trend seems to be toward adding driver distractions rather than removing them. Cell phones, in-car DVD players, cars so big they need their own zip code, MP3 players with visuals ( ), etc...

- To avoid a speeding ticket, one needs to be an alert driver, constantly monitoring the surrounding traffic, the road ahead, the traffic behind, and the sides of the road ahead. When you are speeding, you should be driving with just enough fear to keep you on your toes. Modern cars are quiet and smooth enough so that you could easily do 100mph as comfortably as you can do 60. So fear of the state police is all that some people have got left to keep them from getting complacent at high speeds.

I'm perfectly happy with the current paradigm, which is: I can speed if I'm being alert enough to avoid being seen by cops, and not so overt about it that I'm causing other problems (such as weaving in and out of traffic, blowing by other cars, etc.).

This basically means most of the general public doesn't speed too much, which would make the roads unsafe. And, it gives the state police a pretty good place to collect the revenue they need to collect. I think they have an important function, and I like knowing that they're patrolling our highways, and I'm happy to let the non-alert drivers support that by getting nailed for speeding tickets with regularity. I think what we've got now is a pretty good compromise, and it rides the "edge" between too-draconian and unsafe-anarchy reasonably well.

The only thing I'd like to see changed, is better enforcement and compliance to the "slower traffic keep right" rule, but that's a completely different discussion.

He wasn't, we use MPH for speeds in the UK as well.

/me displays his complete ignorance of UK driving.

Why did I think the UK was KM/h?

You LOVE driving in NoVA? Good Lord, man. NoVA is one massive construction zone with a) insane people swerving all over the place and/or b) dead stop for hours. I'll stay down in Richmond, thank you

Rebuttal:

Each time we increase the speed limits, people begin driving X mph faster than what's posted. If speed limits were 125, we'd all exceed those limits eventually.

While I think the first half of your statement is demonstrably true right now, I think it has more to do with the fact that speed limits are unrealistically low than because people will always exceed the speed limit. I believe that Interstate highways can realistically be driven at 90MPH. Assume that's the case for a second. Now assume that people want to find the natural speed of a road. If the speed limit is 55MPH and they feel that they can safely go 15MPH over, then they're going to drive at 70MPH. If the spped limit's 65, then they're going to drive at 80. But if the speed limit's 90, then they're going to drive at 90, because that's the right speed. This is assumption, to some extent, but it's based on a small personal sampling of traffic patterns in my experience.

Most drivers on the road are mouth breathing knuckle-draggers, and honestly, I don't trust them to drive over 65-75 mph safely.

Good point. Perhaps we should have driver ratings, so that some can go only 55, some 65, some 75, etc. There could be other restrictions as well, like lane restrictions. Of course, the rating would have to be obvious to other drivers, especially cops, and that's a problem because I might be driving my grandmother's car, and while I have a 1-A rating, she may have a 4-F. SO this might not really be feasible, but it would be ideal, I think. Regardless, good point.

Recently, we did increase the speed limits.

That's not much of an argument.

The current speed limits are a compromise, taking into account the fact that we know people exceed them.

Repeat; already rebutted.

The faster we drive, the more alert we need to be.

Making one thing illegal because it might possibly lead to something else is one of my biggest pet peeves. Make the wrong thing illegal, not the thing with which it combines. Of course, you could conceivably argue that the speed is more wrong than the distraction, but I wouldn't agree.

To avoid a speeding ticket, one needs to be an alert driver

Basically, drivers suck, and making them hyper-aware due to fear makes them suck less. Okay. There's something to be said for that. But there are horrible drivers that can cause just as many accidents who drive exactly the speed limit. My mom is one of them. Speed is only one of the potential problems bad drivers exhibit, and it's probably not the worst. Wild lane changing is likely to be much more dangerous.

I can speed if I'm being alert enough

So an ad-hoc ratings system.

Basically, we mostly don't disagree on the issues, but we come to different conclusions from them. You seem to be interested in going faster than other people. It kind of comes across as elitist, although I'm sure that's not what you mean. On the other hand, I'll readily admit to being elitist.

I don't think speed kills. I think bad driving does, and that's what needs to be outlawed, not speed. It's too bad that Darwinism doesn't work here, as one screwup can take out more than just one bad driver.

I thought 70 on pretty much all of 79 in WV was fine, personally, but that was never really under "adverse" conditions.

I thought we were the only ones still using non-metric until I visited London in September. I noticed the cabbie doing 90 on I forget which motorway, and didn't remember 90 km/h seeming that fast. Then I realized...

Why did I think the UK was KM/h?

You probably confused us with Europe.

Rob

You LOVE driving in NoVA? Good Lord, man. NoVA is one massive construction zone with a) insane people swerving all over the place and/or b) dead stop for hours

Well, northern Virginia is a large place In my home town I have absolutely no problems getting anywhere. I can get to Washington DC, Tysons Corner, Dulles Airport, or southern Maryland, all in 15 to 20 minutes (about 10 minutes for Tysons).

What's more, there are multiple ways of getting to most of these places. I have over 4 equal ways to get to Tysons Corner, each with cut-throughs to the other. The problem with Williamsburg is that I know all the roads, and there are no cut-throughs to get anywhere.

I think it has more to do with the fact that speed limits are unrealistically low than because people will always exceed the speed limit.

I think we have to agree to disagree on this. It's my opinion that people will always try to exceed whatever limits are set. It's human nature.

Of course, you could conceivably argue that the speed is more wrong than the distraction, but I wouldn't agree.

I wouldn't argue that, I agree that distractions are worse than speed. But I believe that it's speed combined with distraction that is the biggest problem. Being a little distracted at 25mph isn't much of a problem unless you're in a neighborhood with children playing. It's just that speed happens to be something we can regulate easily because there's an infrastructure in place to do that right now. Regulating distractions is more difficult at the moment.

You seem to be interested in going faster than other people. It kind of comes across as elitist, although I'm sure that's not what you mean. On the other hand, I'll readily admit to being elitist.

I'll readily admit it to being an elitist as well. At least, I'm an elitist in this sense: I believe that anyone who's willing to be extra-alert and to maintain a constant scan of his environment, so much so that he can see the cops before they see him, has earned the right to exceed the speed limit because he's a safer driver than most. This was the central premise of that book I read on the subject of avoiding speeding tickets, and I agree with it.

I don't think speed kills. I think bad driving does, and that's what needs to be outlawed, not speed.

Agreed. But again, bad driving combined with speed is the worst of all. And one of the two happens to be easier to monitor and regulate. If I understand correctly, you can also be ticketed for many bad driving habits (tailgating, weaving among traffic, etc.), so in a sense, bad driving is illegal. It's just a question of enforcement.

I'm perfectly happy with the current paradigm, which is: I can speed if I'm being alert enough to avoid being seen by cops,

Of course you are. The fact that you've got a radar detector in your car (at least I remember you've installed one once) doesn't come into play here I'm sure!

No all countries are so tolerant when it comes to radar detectors. If I'm caught using one over here, the detector gets immediately confiscated + an fine that would make anybody's head spin is thown my way.

You probably confused us with Europe.

Of course you are. The fact that you've got a radar detector in your car (at least I remember you've installed one once) doesn't come into play here I'm sure!

The radar detector is only one tool, and it does not usually come into play when referring to the kind of speeding we're talking about here.

The radar detector is usually only useful against standing traps, and those are usually on city roads, not interstates. On the interstates (at least in my experience), the cops almost always pace you, or do the onramp-drop and then pace you.

Sometimes the CHPs will run continuous moving radar on an interstate, but any time I pick up one of those, I've seen the cop long before I'm in any danger of being clocked by his radar. Often, when I see CHPs on an interstate, the radar detector doesn't even blip. They're just pacing other cars to nail them. As always, a radar detector is no substitute for being an alert driver.

I believe that Interstate highways can realistically be driven at 90MPH

If that is the case, we need to re-educate drivers on the basics of highway driving again.

1. The left lane is the PASSING lane, not a travelling lane.
2. When merging from an on-ramp, match the speed of the traffic on the motorway
3. Do not pass on the left (related to 1)

I heard a comedy bit a while ago that went something like this: We should have a national system of driver rating. Everyone gets a high-powered suction dart gun, with darts that have little signs on them that say "Stupid Driver". If you see a stupid driver, shoot his/her trunk with the dart sign. If a cop notices 10 or so signs on the person's trunk, he'll pull them over, shoot them, and roll their body into the ditch.

I'm not so sure about the shooting part, but at least they could pull their license.

When merging from an on-ramp, match the speed of the traffic on the motorway

Actually, this is a potential reason not to increase the speed limits. Not because people are too stupid to accelerate on them (which they are), but because some of them are so short as to make it difficult to accelerate to traffic speed before being forced to merge now.

The other day, I encountered one of those people who refuse to accelerate on an entrace ramp. Not too uncommon, unfortunately, but he was driving a late model Porsche 911 Turbo. Certainly not the fastest car in production, but at the same time, definitely the fastest car on the road.