- Feb 17, 2005
- 4,682
- 1
- 0
How did this ever come about? And why aren't more place rakeing in the cash from the rampant speeding?
Originally posted by: Tick
How did this ever come about? And why aren't more place rakeing in the cash from the rampant speeding?
Originally posted by: Mill
Speed limit should be 100 on non-crowded interstates anyway.
Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
Originally posted by: Mill
Speed limit should be 100 on non-crowded interstates anyway.
Drivers in the U.S. have enough trouble at 65-75 mph as it stands
Originally posted by: jordanz
On side streets I usually maintain 30-35 because it's not that much faster than 25 and if your kid is running around in the street and I hit him. I'm sorry, I'm lieing. I was going 25. Your bad parenting hurt someone, and oh yeah, my speeding.
Originally posted by: Blackjack2000
Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
Originally posted by: Mill
Speed limit should be 100 on non-crowded interstates anyway.
Drivers in the U.S. have enough trouble at 65-75 mph as it stands
I drive at close to 80 MPH almost all the time on the interstates. I am no more likely to get into an accident than if I drove at 65.
The problem is that if I do get into an accident at such speeds my odds of survival are far lower as such speeds.
Ideally there would be no speed limits at all, but if you were driving in a dangerous manner, the punishment would be harsher.
Originally posted by: DLeRium
Originally posted by: Blackjack2000
Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
Originally posted by: Mill
Speed limit should be 100 on non-crowded interstates anyway.
Drivers in the U.S. have enough trouble at 65-75 mph as it stands
I drive at close to 80 MPH almost all the time on the interstates. I am no more likely to get into an accident than if I drove at 65.
The problem is that if I do get into an accident at such speeds my odds of survival are far lower as such speeds.
Ideally there would be no speed limits at all, but if you were driving in a dangerous manner, the punishment would be harsher.
You don't know that its the same risk to drive at 80 as it is to drive at 65. Statistics don't lie. Driving fast and driving dangerously come hand in hand.
Originally posted by: SampSon
They ARE raking in the cash, are you on drugs?
Speed limits were intentionally kept low for quite a long time in order to generate income.
Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
Originally posted by: jordanz
On side streets I usually maintain 30-35 because it's not that much faster than 25 and if your kid is running around in the street and I hit him. I'm sorry, I'm lieing. I was going 25. Your bad parenting hurt someone, and oh yeah, my speeding.
Need any further evidence that drugs are bad for you?
Originally posted by: Tick
Originally posted by: SampSon
They ARE raking in the cash, are you on drugs?
Speed limits were intentionally kept low for quite a long time in order to generate income.
If they really were raking in the cash, their would be 100x as many cops as thier are. Their makeing money, but they clearly be makeing a lot more. People still speed all the time. If they were raking it in, people would stop.
Originally posted by: Tick
How did this ever come about? And why aren't more place rakeing in the cash from the rampant speeding?
Originally posted by: Tick
How did this ever come about? And why aren't more place rakeing in the cash from the rampant speeding?
Originally posted by: Tick
How did this ever come about? And why aren't more place rakeing in the cash from the rampant speeding?