Radar Detector Recomendation
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
"Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04...
>
> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits are
> bad limits, complain to you elected officials. Or become an elected
> official.
I have no complaints about the speed limits. I operate my vehicles
within the limitations happily watching the morons flying by, and down the
road ending up beside them at the next red light.
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
"Brian Smith" <Halifax@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote in message
news:ki5rj.18760$C61.16113@edtnps89...
>
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:ZZidnR78Yuut8zHanZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if you go
>> much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an accident. it's
>> 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower - about 35. 280 is
>> posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15 into las vegas from
>> l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and prevailing is about 95.
>> that's bumper to bumper too.
>
> I'm sorry Jim, but someone obeying the law is not the one responsible
> (take note of that word) for causing the collision(s). The ones
> responsible for the collision(s) are the people who aren't willing to obey
> the law.
When you're injured or worse, who care's who is responsible? Hurt is hurt.
I'd rather not be hurt. If the prevailing speed is 7 over on a particular
highway, I'll do 7 over. Righteous indignation won't cover my ***.
news:ki5rj.18760$C61.16113@edtnps89...
>
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:ZZidnR78Yuut8zHanZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if you go
>> much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an accident. it's
>> 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower - about 35. 280 is
>> posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15 into las vegas from
>> l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and prevailing is about 95.
>> that's bumper to bumper too.
>
> I'm sorry Jim, but someone obeying the law is not the one responsible
> (take note of that word) for causing the collision(s). The ones
> responsible for the collision(s) are the people who aren't willing to obey
> the law.
When you're injured or worse, who care's who is responsible? Hurt is hurt.
I'd rather not be hurt. If the prevailing speed is 7 over on a particular
highway, I'll do 7 over. Righteous indignation won't cover my ***.
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
"Seth" <seth_lerman@NOSPAMhotmail.com> wrote in
news:tw1rj.134605$rl3.76029@fe02.news.easynews.com :
> "Dan C" <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote in message
> newsan.2008.02.08.15.38.38.486343@moria.lan...
>> On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 06:58:54 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>>
>>>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit
>>>>> would cause a 50 vehicle pile-up
>>
>>>> Bullshit. Poor attempt at rationalization.
>>
>>> sorry dude, it's not bullshit. you're just so enraged in your
>>> argument with dave, you're not thinking straight.
>>
>> Wrong. I'm not "enraged" about anything. You apparently are, which
>> may explain your need to speed on the highways. It's called "road
>> rage".
>
> Speeding is not road rage. Some people are quite calm at 10+ over the
> limit. Speeding is speeding. Driving angry as a result of something
> another driver did or you perceive they did, is road rage.
"speeding" is usually just ignoring an arbitrary number painted on a road
sign. No actual relation to road safety.In many urban areas,sticking to the
speed limit actually makes things MORE unsafe.It causes traffic to bunch
up.That's more unsafe than the "speeding".
I suspect "Dan C." speeds too. ONE mph over the SL -IS- "speeding".
>
>>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if
>>> you go much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an
>>> accident. it's 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower -
>>> about 35. 280 is posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15
>>> into las vegas from l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and
>>> prevailing is about 95. that's bumper to bumper too.
>>
>> More bullshit. I lived in Alameda for 6 years, and frequently went
>> to S.F. I also go to Vegas at least 6-8 times a year, and that's
>> just not the truth. Keep trying to rationalize your speeding,
>> though.
Even police speed,both on-duty and off-duty,even when not needed for work
purposes.
>
> I can't speak to those roads, but I-80 in NJ, if you're not keeping up
> with traffic you are causing a problem.
>
>
Hairballs in the throat of traffic.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
news:tw1rj.134605$rl3.76029@fe02.news.easynews.com :
> "Dan C" <youmustbejoking@lan.invalid> wrote in message
> newsan.2008.02.08.15.38.38.486343@moria.lan...
>> On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 06:58:54 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>>
>>>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit
>>>>> would cause a 50 vehicle pile-up
>>
>>>> Bullshit. Poor attempt at rationalization.
>>
>>> sorry dude, it's not bullshit. you're just so enraged in your
>>> argument with dave, you're not thinking straight.
>>
>> Wrong. I'm not "enraged" about anything. You apparently are, which
>> may explain your need to speed on the highways. It's called "road
>> rage".
>
> Speeding is not road rage. Some people are quite calm at 10+ over the
> limit. Speeding is speeding. Driving angry as a result of something
> another driver did or you perceive they did, is road rage.
"speeding" is usually just ignoring an arbitrary number painted on a road
sign. No actual relation to road safety.In many urban areas,sticking to the
speed limit actually makes things MORE unsafe.It causes traffic to bunch
up.That's more unsafe than the "speeding".
I suspect "Dan C." speeds too. ONE mph over the SL -IS- "speeding".
>
>>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if
>>> you go much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an
>>> accident. it's 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower -
>>> about 35. 280 is posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15
>>> into las vegas from l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and
>>> prevailing is about 95. that's bumper to bumper too.
>>
>> More bullshit. I lived in Alameda for 6 years, and frequently went
>> to S.F. I also go to Vegas at least 6-8 times a year, and that's
>> just not the truth. Keep trying to rationalize your speeding,
>> though.
Even police speed,both on-duty and off-duty,even when not needed for work
purposes.
>
> I can't speak to those roads, but I-80 in NJ, if you're not keeping up
> with traffic you are causing a problem.
>
>
Hairballs in the throat of traffic.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04:
> Brian Smith wrote:
>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9A3E50897EBB5tegger@207.14.116.130...
>>> Suppose the posted maximum was set for political reasons and is set
>>> too low?
>>
>> My living depends on my licence being perfectly clean. It has
>> been for
>> over twenty five years now, I'm not about to change the way I drive
>> because of any reasons, political or not.
>
> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials.
that's NAIVE at best.
55mph -used- to be the National Motor Speed Limit(NMSL);before that many
highways were posted 70-75 mph.
Were they "unsafe" before the 55 NMSL? No.
And much later,speed limits got changed back to 65-70 mph in most non-
Socialist states.
Traffic deaths continued to decrease.
BUT,the Unintended Consequence of the 55 NMSL was that LANE DISCIPLINE was
lost forever. 55 NMSL brought about the self-rightous LLB,Left Lane
Blocker,and passing on the right,necessary to get around LLBs.
Look at Germany's Autobahn;they have lane discipline,and higher traffic
speeds.
> Or become an
> elected official.
>
> Jeff
>
Who still doesn't have the authority to alter posted speed limits.
Most SLs come from traffic "engineering" manuals.
To deviate from them usually requires a legislative majority to vote to
change them.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
> Brian Smith wrote:
>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>> news:Xns9A3E50897EBB5tegger@207.14.116.130...
>>> Suppose the posted maximum was set for political reasons and is set
>>> too low?
>>
>> My living depends on my licence being perfectly clean. It has
>> been for
>> over twenty five years now, I'm not about to change the way I drive
>> because of any reasons, political or not.
>
> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials.
that's NAIVE at best.
55mph -used- to be the National Motor Speed Limit(NMSL);before that many
highways were posted 70-75 mph.
Were they "unsafe" before the 55 NMSL? No.
And much later,speed limits got changed back to 65-70 mph in most non-
Socialist states.
Traffic deaths continued to decrease.
BUT,the Unintended Consequence of the 55 NMSL was that LANE DISCIPLINE was
lost forever. 55 NMSL brought about the self-rightous LLB,Left Lane
Blocker,and passing on the right,necessary to get around LLBs.
Look at Germany's Autobahn;they have lane discipline,and higher traffic
speeds.
> Or become an
> elected official.
>
> Jeff
>
Who still doesn't have the authority to alter posted speed limits.
Most SLs come from traffic "engineering" manuals.
To deviate from them usually requires a legislative majority to vote to
change them.
--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
Brian Smith wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:ZZidnR78Yuut8zHanZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if you go
>> much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an accident. it's 4
>> lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower - about 35. 280 is posted
>> 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15 into las vegas from l.a. on a
>> friday night, that's posted 65 and prevailing is about 95. that's bumper
>> to bumper too.
>
> I'm sorry Jim, but someone obeying the law is not the one responsible
> (take note of that word) for causing the collision(s). The ones responsible
> for the collision(s) are the people who aren't willing to obey the law.
>
>
there's a website just for people like you brian: sanctimoniousclaptrap.com
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:ZZidnR78Yuut8zHanZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if you go
>> much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an accident. it's 4
>> lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower - about 35. 280 is posted
>> 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15 into las vegas from l.a. on a
>> friday night, that's posted 65 and prevailing is about 95. that's bumper
>> to bumper too.
>
> I'm sorry Jim, but someone obeying the law is not the one responsible
> (take note of that word) for causing the collision(s). The ones responsible
> for the collision(s) are the people who aren't willing to obey the law.
>
>
there's a website just for people like you brian: sanctimoniousclaptrap.com
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
Dan C wrote:
> On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 06:58:54 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>
>>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would
>>>> cause a 50 vehicle pile-up
>
>>> Bullshit. Poor attempt at rationalization.
>
>> sorry dude, it's not bullshit. you're just so enraged in your argument
>> with dave, you're not thinking straight.
>
> Wrong. I'm not "enraged" about anything. You apparently are, which may
> explain your need to speed on the highways. It's called "road rage".
you're projecting there dan because what you describe is not what i'm
experiencing. you might want to see a therapist about that.
>
>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if you
>> go much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an accident.
>> it's 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower - about 35. 280 is
>> posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15 into las vegas from
>> l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and prevailing is about 95.
>> that's bumper to bumper too.
>
> More bullshit. I lived in Alameda for 6 years, and frequently went to
> S.F.
dude, alameda is on the 880, not 580. you're lucky to ever reach 55 on
880, but if you do, you'd better be sure to keep up with the guys in front.
> I also go to Vegas at least 6-8 times a year, and that's just not
> the truth. Keep trying to rationalize your speeding, though.
how odd - i drove down three weekends ago, and was barely keeping up
with traffic at 95 on the 15 headed into town on the friday evening. do
you think my speedometer was showing 40 over? can you check it for me
please?
> On Fri, 08 Feb 2008 06:58:54 -0800, jim beam wrote:
>
>>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would
>>>> cause a 50 vehicle pile-up
>
>>> Bullshit. Poor attempt at rationalization.
>
>> sorry dude, it's not bullshit. you're just so enraged in your argument
>> with dave, you're not thinking straight.
>
> Wrong. I'm not "enraged" about anything. You apparently are, which may
> explain your need to speed on the highways. It's called "road rage".
you're projecting there dan because what you describe is not what i'm
experiencing. you might want to see a therapist about that.
>
>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if you
>> go much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an accident.
>> it's 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower - about 35. 280 is
>> posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15 into las vegas from
>> l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and prevailing is about 95.
>> that's bumper to bumper too.
>
> More bullshit. I lived in Alameda for 6 years, and frequently went to
> S.F.
dude, alameda is on the 880, not 580. you're lucky to ever reach 55 on
880, but if you do, you'd better be sure to keep up with the guys in front.
> I also go to Vegas at least 6-8 times a year, and that's just not
> the truth. Keep trying to rationalize your speeding, though.
how odd - i drove down three weekends ago, and was barely keeping up
with traffic at 95 on the 15 headed into town on the friday evening. do
you think my speedometer was showing 40 over? can you check it for me
please?
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
Brian Smith wrote:
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:RJGdndSbq6ME_THanZ2dnUVZ_q3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would cause
>> a 50 vehicle pile-up - and that's /really/ not intelligent.
>
> Not for the morons that won't obey the law, it isn't.
see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple tickets
for "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what speed she
drives...
> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
> news:RJGdndSbq6ME_THanZ2dnUVZ_q3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would cause
>> a 50 vehicle pile-up - and that's /really/ not intelligent.
>
> Not for the morons that won't obey the law, it isn't.
see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple tickets
for "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what speed she
drives...
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
Brian Smith wrote:
> "News" <News@Group.name> wrote in message
> news:UMKdnR2ioPSU1jHanZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> Not driving at the prevailing speed of surrounding traffic is dangerous.
>
> I agree, for the fools and idiots that can't or won't obey the law and
> use common sense.
>
>
how about the law that states you need to keep up with the prevailing
speed of traffic?
> "News" <News@Group.name> wrote in message
> news:UMKdnR2ioPSU1jHanZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>> Not driving at the prevailing speed of surrounding traffic is dangerous.
>
> I agree, for the fools and idiots that can't or won't obey the law and
> use common sense.
>
>
how about the law that states you need to keep up with the prevailing
speed of traffic?
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
Jim Yanik wrote:
> Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04:
>
>> Brian Smith wrote:
>>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9A3E50897EBB5tegger@207.14.116.130...
>>>> Suppose the posted maximum was set for political reasons and is set
>>>> too low?
>>> My living depends on my licence being perfectly clean. It has
>>> been for
>>> over twenty five years now, I'm not about to change the way I drive
>>> because of any reasons, political or not.
>> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
>> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials.
>
> that's NAIVE at best.
> 55mph -used- to be the National Motor Speed Limit(NMSL);before that many
> highways were posted 70-75 mph.
> Were they "unsafe" before the 55 NMSL? No.
> And much later,speed limits got changed back to 65-70 mph in most non-
> Socialist states.
> Traffic deaths continued to decrease.
>
> BUT,the Unintended Consequence of the 55 NMSL was that LANE DISCIPLINE was
> lost forever. 55 NMSL brought about the self-rightous LLB,Left Lane
> Blocker,and passing on the right,necessary to get around LLBs.
>
> Look at Germany's Autobahn;they have lane discipline,and higher traffic
> speeds.
>
>> Or become an
>> elected official.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
> Who still doesn't have the authority to alter posted speed limits.
as i understand it, you can post lower limits, not higher.
> Most SLs come from traffic "engineering" manuals.
> To deviate from them usually requires a legislative majority to vote to
> change them.
>
>
> Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04:
>
>> Brian Smith wrote:
>>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>>> news:Xns9A3E50897EBB5tegger@207.14.116.130...
>>>> Suppose the posted maximum was set for political reasons and is set
>>>> too low?
>>> My living depends on my licence being perfectly clean. It has
>>> been for
>>> over twenty five years now, I'm not about to change the way I drive
>>> because of any reasons, political or not.
>> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
>> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials.
>
> that's NAIVE at best.
> 55mph -used- to be the National Motor Speed Limit(NMSL);before that many
> highways were posted 70-75 mph.
> Were they "unsafe" before the 55 NMSL? No.
> And much later,speed limits got changed back to 65-70 mph in most non-
> Socialist states.
> Traffic deaths continued to decrease.
>
> BUT,the Unintended Consequence of the 55 NMSL was that LANE DISCIPLINE was
> lost forever. 55 NMSL brought about the self-rightous LLB,Left Lane
> Blocker,and passing on the right,necessary to get around LLBs.
>
> Look at Germany's Autobahn;they have lane discipline,and higher traffic
> speeds.
>
>> Or become an
>> elected official.
>>
>> Jeff
>>
>
> Who still doesn't have the authority to alter posted speed limits.
as i understand it, you can post lower limits, not higher.
> Most SLs come from traffic "engineering" manuals.
> To deviate from them usually requires a legislative majority to vote to
> change them.
>
>
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
jim beam wrote:
> Brian Smith wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:ZZidnR78Yuut8zHanZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if
>>> you go much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an
>>> accident. it's 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower -
>>> about 35. 280 is posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15
>>> into las vegas from l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and
>>> prevailing is about 95. that's bumper to bumper too.
>>
>> I'm sorry Jim, but someone obeying the law is not the one
>> responsible (take note of that word) for causing the collision(s). The
>> ones responsible for the collision(s) are the people who aren't
>> willing to obey the law.
>>
>
> there's a website just for people like you brian: sanctimoniousclaptrap.com
I looked for the site. It doesn't exist. However, you're able to make it
your own site, if you want.
Jeff
> Brian Smith wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:ZZidnR78Yuut8zHanZ2dnUVZ_jidnZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> come to the san francisco bay area. 580 oakland is posted 55. if
>>> you go much slower than 80 outside of rush hour, you'll cause an
>>> accident. it's 4 lanes, bumper to bumper. rush hour is slower -
>>> about 35. 280 is posted 65 and 80 is the rule. if you drive the 15
>>> into las vegas from l.a. on a friday night, that's posted 65 and
>>> prevailing is about 95. that's bumper to bumper too.
>>
>> I'm sorry Jim, but someone obeying the law is not the one
>> responsible (take note of that word) for causing the collision(s). The
>> ones responsible for the collision(s) are the people who aren't
>> willing to obey the law.
>>
>
> there's a website just for people like you brian: sanctimoniousclaptrap.com
I looked for the site. It doesn't exist. However, you're able to make it
your own site, if you want.
Jeff
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
jim beam wrote:
> Brian Smith wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:RJGdndSbq6ME_THanZ2dnUVZ_q3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would
>>> cause a 50 vehicle pile-up - and that's /really/ not intelligent.
>>
>> Not for the morons that won't obey the law, it isn't.
>
> see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple tickets
> for "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what speed she
> drives...
Let's see the tickets where it says that.
> Brian Smith wrote:
>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>> news:RJGdndSbq6ME_THanZ2dnUVZ_q3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would
>>> cause a 50 vehicle pile-up - and that's /really/ not intelligent.
>>
>> Not for the morons that won't obey the law, it isn't.
>
> see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple tickets
> for "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what speed she
> drives...
Let's see the tickets where it says that.
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
jim beam wrote:
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>> Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04:
>>
>>> Brian Smith wrote:
>>>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9A3E50897EBB5tegger@207.14.116.130...
>>>>> Suppose the posted maximum was set for political reasons and is set
>>>>> too low?
>>>> My living depends on my licence being perfectly clean. It has
>>>> been for over twenty five years now, I'm not about to change the
>>>> way I drive
>>>> because of any reasons, political or not.
>>> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
>>> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials.
>>
>> that's NAIVE at best. 55mph -used- to be the National Motor Speed
>> Limit(NMSL);before that many highways were posted 70-75 mph. Were they
>> "unsafe" before the 55 NMSL? No. And much later,speed limits got
>> changed back to 65-70 mph in most non-
>> Socialist states.
What are the Socialist states?
>> Traffic deaths continued to decrease.
Traffic deaths decreased in large part because of cars that were able to
protect their occupants better, as well as using safety equipment and
decreasing drunk driving.
>> BUT,the Unintended Consequence of the 55 NMSL was that LANE DISCIPLINE
>> was lost forever. 55 NMSL brought about the self-rightous LLB,Left
>> Lane Blocker,and passing on the right,necessary to get around LLBs.
ROTFL. You should write to Dave Letterman. He can use it for his show.
>> Look at Germany's Autobahn;they have lane discipline,and higher
>> traffic speeds.
>>
>>> Or become an
>>> elected official.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>
>> Who still doesn't have the authority to alter posted speed limits.
>
> as i understand it, you can post lower limits, not higher.
That's because of laws, which are made legislators, who are elected
officials.
>> Most SLs come from traffic "engineering" manuals.
>> To deviate from them usually requires a legislative majority to vote
>> to change them.
And who votes for the legislature?
Jeff
> Jim Yanik wrote:
>> Jeff <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04:
>>
>>> Brian Smith wrote:
>>>> "Tegger" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
>>>> news:Xns9A3E50897EBB5tegger@207.14.116.130...
>>>>> Suppose the posted maximum was set for political reasons and is set
>>>>> too low?
>>>> My living depends on my licence being perfectly clean. It has
>>>> been for over twenty five years now, I'm not about to change the
>>>> way I drive
>>>> because of any reasons, political or not.
>>> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
>>> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials.
>>
>> that's NAIVE at best. 55mph -used- to be the National Motor Speed
>> Limit(NMSL);before that many highways were posted 70-75 mph. Were they
>> "unsafe" before the 55 NMSL? No. And much later,speed limits got
>> changed back to 65-70 mph in most non-
>> Socialist states.
What are the Socialist states?
>> Traffic deaths continued to decrease.
Traffic deaths decreased in large part because of cars that were able to
protect their occupants better, as well as using safety equipment and
decreasing drunk driving.
>> BUT,the Unintended Consequence of the 55 NMSL was that LANE DISCIPLINE
>> was lost forever. 55 NMSL brought about the self-rightous LLB,Left
>> Lane Blocker,and passing on the right,necessary to get around LLBs.
ROTFL. You should write to Dave Letterman. He can use it for his show.
>> Look at Germany's Autobahn;they have lane discipline,and higher
>> traffic speeds.
>>
>>> Or become an
>>> elected official.
>>>
>>> Jeff
>>>
>>
>> Who still doesn't have the authority to alter posted speed limits.
>
> as i understand it, you can post lower limits, not higher.
That's because of laws, which are made legislators, who are elected
officials.
>> Most SLs come from traffic "engineering" manuals.
>> To deviate from them usually requires a legislative majority to vote
>> to change them.
And who votes for the legislature?
Jeff
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
"Brian Smith" <Halifax@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote in
news:nf5rj.18756$C61.13644@edtnps89:
>
> "News" <News@Group.name> wrote in message
> news:UMKdnR2ioPSU1jHanZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>> Not driving at the prevailing speed of surrounding traffic is
>> dangerous.
Reworded:
Driving at the prevailing speed of traffic is safe.
This premise is abundantly supported by readily available evidence.
>
> I agree, for the fools and idiots that can't or won't obey the law
> and use common sense.
>
Do you know Latin?
Lex mala, lex nulla.
Just because a bunch of guys got together and wrote some stuff down on a
piece of paper does not mean they knew what they were doing.
Are you a Weberian? Or a Prussian? You must be either, or both.
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
news:nf5rj.18756$C61.13644@edtnps89:
>
> "News" <News@Group.name> wrote in message
> news:UMKdnR2ioPSU1jHanZ2dnUVZ_vvinZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>
>> Not driving at the prevailing speed of surrounding traffic is
>> dangerous.
Reworded:
Driving at the prevailing speed of traffic is safe.
This premise is abundantly supported by readily available evidence.
>
> I agree, for the fools and idiots that can't or won't obey the law
> and use common sense.
>
Do you know Latin?
Lex mala, lex nulla.
Just because a bunch of guys got together and wrote some stuff down on a
piece of paper does not mean they knew what they were doing.
Are you a Weberian? Or a Prussian? You must be either, or both.
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
"Brian Smith" <Halifax@NovaScotia.Canada> wrote in
news:r26rj.18782$C61.7449@edtnps89:
>
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04...
>>
>> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
>> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials. Or become an
>> elected official.
>
> I have no complaints about the speed limits. I operate my vehicles
> within the limitations happily watching the morons flying by, and down
> the road ending up beside them at the next red light.
>
>
You are aware that exessively low speed limits are associated with
increased collisions due to inattention?
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
news:r26rj.18782$C61.7449@edtnps89:
>
> "Jeff" <kidsdoc2000@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> newsv5rj.202$qV2.158@trnddc04...
>>
>> What difference does it make why the limits were set? If the limits
>> are bad limits, complain to you elected officials. Or become an
>> elected official.
>
> I have no complaints about the speed limits. I operate my vehicles
> within the limitations happily watching the morons flying by, and down
> the road ending up beside them at the next red light.
>
>
You are aware that exessively low speed limits are associated with
increased collisions due to inattention?
--
Tegger
The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: Radar Detector Recomendation
Jeff wrote:
> jim beam wrote:
>> Brian Smith wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:RJGdndSbq6ME_THanZ2dnUVZ_q3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would
>>>> cause a 50 vehicle pile-up - and that's /really/ not intelligent.
>>>
>>> Not for the morons that won't obey the law, it isn't.
>>
>> see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple tickets
>> for "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what speed she
>> drives...
>
> Let's see the tickets where it says that.
she's 600 miles away and i don't get tickets like that, so forgive my
laziness if i don't head on down there just because you can't be
bothered to look up something simple like ca vehicle code 21654(a).
now, you go ahead and tell me your state doesn't have an equivalent.
> jim beam wrote:
>> Brian Smith wrote:
>>> "jim beam" <spamvortex@bad.example.net> wrote in message
>>> news:RJGdndSbq6ME_THanZ2dnUVZ_q3inZ2d@speakeasy.ne t...
>>>> around my neck of the woods, slowing down to the posted limit would
>>>> cause a 50 vehicle pile-up - and that's /really/ not intelligent.
>>>
>>> Not for the morons that won't obey the law, it isn't.
>>
>> see previous post. oh, and my grandmother has gotten multiple tickets
>> for "not keeping up with prevailing traffic". guess what speed she
>> drives...
>
> Let's see the tickets where it says that.
she's 600 miles away and i don't get tickets like that, so forgive my
laziness if i don't head on down there just because you can't be
bothered to look up something simple like ca vehicle code 21654(a).
now, you go ahead and tell me your state doesn't have an equivalent.