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.
No. The one thing that both sides in the "the speed limit is the upper/lower limit one can drive" wars seem to agree on is that a primary cause of accidents is cars going at very different speeds on the same road. That is, in fact, one of the very good reasons for speed limits - to minimize that - though while it used to work, in these entitlement days (BOY, does my generation have a lot to pay for!), it's not working so well. But it's the best thing we have right now, and no speed limits at all would create a free for all on the highways just because of the nature of the kind of people we have driving in this country right now.
The autobahn is irrelevant. The culture is entirely different. Now, if there was a way to get both the slow pokes AND the speed addicts off the roadways, then no speed limit might work.
Standard younger generation is reason why all things are worse now cliche.
Standard younger generation is reason why all things are worse now cliche.
Not really. A lot of my generation raised our kids (who would be in their 40's now, by the way) to think they can do no wrong and the world revolves around them, and they passed that on to the next generation, increased. Things are worse because of what us oldsters did, in other words.
IN Florida the speed limit is 70, which means most of us are already going 80.
What ticks me off is someone coming up behind me going 90-100, swerving in and out like they own the road.
Invariably, that causes a panic reaction where a line of cars are screeching brakes.
These manics are the prime cause of accidents.
Alternatively, you could have no speed limit in which case most people would still do <90, a few nuts would do 100+. If combined with people knowing how to drive (no left lane hogging, no swerving in and out of traffic partially because it's necessary due to left lane hogging), it'd be much safer for everyone. It's the latter part of people learning how to drive that's really the impediment. It's way too easy to get a license in this country and way too difficult to lose one.
I'd be up for it if the infrastructure (roads) were drastically improved to support that kind of speed and if license testing in this country was made significantly more difficult (this bit needs to be done regardless of speed limits).
Even with speed limits, maniacs will still drive 100mph+. I've seen Lambos and Ferraris doing 120mph+ weaving in and out of traffic before.
Heck, didn't Paul Walker just die due to speeding?
Walker wasn't even driving the car in that crash, he was the passenger. And of course that happened on local streets IIRC.
I personally would not be in favor in no speed limits....too many stupid people on the roads that drive crazy. As a professional semi driver I still see such folk when they pass me using their cell phone or trying to text something while driving at high speed! I see all kinds of things some people do on the roads. The other night someone flew by me at around 90 mph IN THE RAIN!! Nope, we don't need unlimited speed limits.
Add to the fact that most commercial semis are electronically governed at either 65 or 70 so that would create a extreme hazard with cars flying that fast around trucks that can't go that fast (and shouldn't considering the amount of weight they carry). Its bad enough when car drivers cut off semis.
Only if they instituted Graded Drivers Licenses. You would have to have additional training for a higher speed license and corresponding license plates...and then only allow certain cars in certain lanes on the Freeway. All in all it would be a bad idea but I would still be in favor of "level of ability" drivers licenses...even if it was just to incent people to get more drivers training.
Alternatively, you could have no speed limit in which case most people would still do <90, a few nuts would do 100+. If combined with people knowing how to drive (no left lane hogging, no swerving in and out of traffic partially because it's necessary due to left lane hogging), it'd be much safer for everyone. It's the latter part of people learning how to drive that's really the impediment. It's way too easy to get a license in this country and way too difficult to lose one.
And therein lies the problem, people who blame anyone who isn't driving like a bat out of hell in the left lane for their own choice to swerve in and out of traffic rather than slow down to the speed limit. THOSE people are the problem, just as much as people who drive below the limit in the left lane, but it is all but impossible to get them to see it and to accept responsibility for their own actions,
No one, no one, makes you swerve in and out of traffic (or engage in other reckless behavior on the public roads), nor is it "necessary". It's a choice that you yourelf make, no one else, and until you can accept that and the responsibility that goes along with it for the consequences of those choices, you're a bad driver, period.
And therein lies the problem, people who blame anyone who isn't driving like a bat out of hell in the left lane for their own choice to swerve in and out of traffic rather than slow down to the speed limit. THOSE people are the problem, just as much as people who drive below the limit in the left lane, but it is all but impossible to get them to see it and to accept responsibility for their own actions,
No one, no one, makes you swerve in and out of traffic (or engage in other reckless behavior on the public roads), nor is it "necessary". It's a choice that you yourelf make, no one else, and until you can accept that and the responsibility that goes along with it for the consequences of those choices, you're a bad driver, period.
Quite frankly, the biggest problem isn't people swerving, its the moron who is holding up traffic in the left lane and forcing other vehicles to go around them because they don't have the decency to move over and admit that they are not capable of moving with other traffic in the left lane. There is no shame in moving at a slower pace, just find the correct lane to do it in rather than acting self righteous and enforcing your own speed limits on other individuals. Certainly there are idiots who swerve around regardless of how fast traffic is moving and they are just as bad but its the lane hogs who are the bigger issue. Let the police take care of traffic enforcement as that is what they are paid to do.
Absolutely not! Fatalities as well as our insurance rates would skyrocket. Engineers design our highways for the speeds currently in use. So when the yellow diamond shaped sign on a twisty mountain road says 45mph, it means the super elevation, curve radius and tack coat were designed for 45mph (even though they do use a factor of safety).
The other issue that people have moments of poor judgment. Teenager X driving up to Flagstaff on twisty mountain roads to go snowboarding will think he's Michael Schumacher and that his Ford F-150 is a Ferrari factory F1 car. Next thing you know he and his friends are tumbling pel mel down a 500' embankment and they all end up dead. The interstate is now closed for 8 hours and I-17 becomes a parking lot all the way back to Phoenix. No thanks!!!!!!
Quite frankly, the biggest problem isn't people swerving, its the moron who is holding up traffic in the left lane and forcing other vehicles to go around them because they don't have the decency to move over and admit that they are not capable of moving with other traffic in the left lane. There is no shame in moving at a slower pace, just find the correct lane to do it in rather than acting self righteous and enforcing your own speed limits on other individuals. Certainly there are idiots who swerve around regardless of how fast traffic is moving and they are just as bad but its the lane hogs who are the bigger issue. Let the police take care of traffic enforcement as that is what they are paid to do.
Again, wrong, and another sign of blaming others rather than accepting responsibility for your own actions.
Should people driving lower than the speed limit drive in the right lane, and those driving in the left lane driving the speed limit and no less? Absolutely.
However, nothing anyone else does justifies you making dangerous choices when driving. This is not rocket science; unless someone is in your car with you, holding your hands and feet somehow so that you are physically forced to weave in and out of traffic at a high rate of speed, you and you alone are responsible for that behavior. There is shame in saying, "That other person was driving too slow and he made me drive recklessly!" That is shameful because it is a child's justification, and we don't give children driver's licenses for a reason.
If everyone driving took responsibility for their own actions, and if everyone driving obeyed the traffic laws that they are taught before getting their license, then it might be feasible to have no speed limit on the highways. As it is, almost no one does, especially those who want to justify breaking the law, and so it isn't.
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.
Nope, we don't need unlimited speed limits.
