Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I’m not defending them but would love to see proof that they are creating accidents. Have you tried it as ca defense in court? “Your honor! The guy 10 cars up caused this not me!” Did it work?
When someone runs under/at speed limit on the left lane in parallel with another car to his right, that person will create a traffic jam behind them.
People will try to get in front of him passing to his right lane or anywhere they can. That person is responsible for creating unnecessary traffic and risk.
Wait, it gets worst when that person blocks the left lane.
What happens when many cars back there is an emergency ambulance or firetruck that needs to pass?
How many valuable minutes are lost when someone's life depends on fastest possible response?
Conclusion: when someone deliberately drives below or at speed limit while not moving out of the way of faster traffic - that person endangers other people lives!
Thanks. I do believe driving too slowly is dangerous. I’m only thinking that the person who gets in an accident usually has some share in the blame.
Almost all accidents today are divided into fault percentages by insurance company. For instance driver A will be determined to be 70% at fault and driver B 30%.
55 on the interstate? Don't think I have ever seen such a speed a limit on the interstate.
You saw it EVERYWHERE on EVERY interstate from 1973 to 1995. It was there to conserve oil and had the additional benefit of reducing the impacts of climate change significantly.
However, the most environmentally destructive Administration in history.....Clinton/Gore repealed the 55 MPH maximum speed on the interstates in 1995.
Hmm, and climate change accelerated right about that time.
You saw it EVERYWHERE on EVERY interstate from 1973 to 1995. It was there to conserve oil and had the additional benefit of reducing the impacts of climate change significantly.
However, the most environmentally destructive Administration in history.....Clinton/Gore repealed the 55 MPH maximum speed on the interstates in 1995.
Hmm, and climate change accelerated right about that time.
Take you political BS to you know where. None of that is true. The climate changes have been happening since the 1970s, shortly after the 55 mph speed limit was implemented. Temperatures have been consistently increasing since 1981. The 55 mph speed limit had no effect on climate change at all. Though you could argue that the 55 speed limit accelerated global warming. But I doubt there is any scientific evidence to back that up.
The one and only goal of the 55 speed limit was to conserve energy. Which initially it achieved that goal to a limited extent. With EVs and more fuel efficient cars, that is no longer as much of a concern.
No one can possibly do the speed limit at peak driving times in most cities.
We recently moved to PHX, one of the lesser-congested big cities but a person is lucky to do 25 on I-10 or the other interstates in the AM-PM rush. Add an accident and it's sit-still for who knows how long. Weekends are nearly as bad traffic-wise when large events take place.
Rural interstates can be more dangerous than driving in cities. A road trip is no longer a leisurely drive, it has become a cat-mouse game of who can outrace the next driver.
Don't ever be the fool in the middle lane doing 5 over, you'll be cut off and even threatened by the yahoos in their souped-up rides who think they own the road.
Take you political BS to you know where. None of that is true. The climate changes have been happening since the 1970s, shortly after the 55 mph speed limit was implemented. Temperatures have been consistently increasing since 1981. The 55 mph speed limit had no effect on climate change at all. Though you could argue that the 55 speed limit accelerated global warming. But I doubt there is any scientific evidence to back that up.
The one and only goal of the 55 speed limit was to conserve energy. Which initially it achieved that goal to a limited extent. With EVs and more fuel efficient cars, that is no longer as much of a concern.
Oh Please....laws of physics. Driving 55 MPH reduces CO2 emissions by 20%. A HUGE number.
Using 1940 as a baseline, is pretty funny from a science point of view. Out west, the last century has been abnornally wet and benign when it comes to weather. We are back to NORMAL. Hot and dry in the west.
Oh Please....laws of physics. Driving 55 MPH reduces CO2 emissions by 20%. A HUGE number.
Using 1940 as a baseline, is pretty funny from a science point of view. Out west, the last century has been abnornally wet and benign when it comes to weather. We are back to NORMAL. Hot and dry in the west.
You saw it EVERYWHERE on EVERY interstate from 1973 to 1995. It was there to conserve oil and had the additional benefit of reducing the impacts of climate change significantly.
However, the most environmentally destructive Administration in history.....Clinton/Gore repealed the 55 MPH maximum speed on the interstates in 1995.
Hmm, and climate change accelerated right about that time.
All they did was repeal the law that prevented states from having speed limits that exceed 55, but it was the states that decided to increase the speed limits. They didn't have to.
I don't find Ford pickups or Texans to be particularly intimidating. I do have some preconceived notions about pickup drivers, but it has nothing to do with intimidation.
Well, neither my pickup nor my person is particularly intimidating; I was just semi-humorously guessing why, when I drive at the speed limit, in the right hand lane (except when passing slow moving traffic) I do NOT see all these enraged sportscar drivers nor do I observe great multi-car pileups in my rear view mirror due to this horrible, horrible thing I'm doing.
Maybe it's because I'm driving in the overly rules-obeying states of Texas, Oklahoma, Arkansas, Tennessee; maybe it's because I'm driving in deep rural places like White Plains, NY, Allentown PA, Hartford Conn., Boston Mass.
Or maybe all the pearl-clutching is bogus from the people who think that driving faster is more manly or more exciting or somehow a proof of something or else. Well, however much manlihood I have, it's pretty well set by 60 and driving real fast all the time and collecting a bunch of tickets and paying more for my insurance doesn't really seem a cost-effective way to try to increase it - especially since it won't work.
Basically, no one on the Interstate seems to care, as long as you drive predictably and move to the right when you're the slower traffic.
No, driving a fast car does not make you more attractive to the opposite sex (or the same sex, these days); it does not elevate you from cubicle monkey to a member of the attractive slightly rakish upper classes; it doesn't put hair on your chest; nope.
At any rate, I find that people who want to go faster just go round me, and I go round people who don't want to go as fast. I pass Highway Patrol cars without that little frisson of "how fast am I going? did he nab me? will the blue lights come on in a minute?" Tire wear, gas consumption (and in this big truck everything I can do will help), reaction distance, fatigue and attentiveness, are all improved.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
