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.
Should be no speed zones, no one guaranteed you safety in the constitution. If you can drive it safely, why be punished for doing so? Now, if you wreck, you should have the book thrown at you.
That maxes out the speedometers on most of my vehicles. My pickup runs 2,900 rpms at 70 mph and sucks down fuel like crazy at that speed so 85 seems a bit much.
Back when Carter imposed a national speed limit of 55, one newspaper waited a couple of years, then asked people, "Do you prefer a speed limit of 55, or a speed limit of 65?"
My favorite answer:
"I prefer a speed limit of 65. Because it's a lot easier to slow down from 80 to 65, than from 80 to 55."
If you can find a way to enforce German-level driver education, to name but one standard that could probably stand to be raised, I'll applaud you.
In Germany and other European countries, you don't get people camped out in the passing lane oblivious to who is behind them.
And European drivers don't find it offensive when someone flashes them to pull into the right lane and they don't slow down or refuse to move in retaliation.
And passing on the right is a big no-no in Europe as well as being illegal.
US highways can support higher speeds but I am unsure that US drivers are ready for them.
Interstates are seventy so folks drive 80. Kick it up to 85 they will drive 95. Some can't handle that speed. If they built cars that could only go the max speed limit I'd have no problem with this.
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.