At least once a year, I make a trip that takes me up and down a long stretch of 95. This is a very busy road populated by many tractor trailers who love to ride bumpers. It is terrifying because, if I make one mistake, that truck will kill me. If someone wants to produce evidence that I am actually safer allowing that truck to ride my ass than I am speeding up for the ten seconds it takes to move up and switch lanes, I'm all ears. Until then, I am getting the hell out of the way, even if it means going well above the speed limit, because I am fairly certain that truck-driver won't be open to any lessons from me and my relatively tiny car.
Oh, I've been there. But what I'd really love to see is more truckers ticketed. Truckers are usually very technically skilled drivers, but they also drive like total assholes.
I believe the case here involved presumption that the car owner was the driver, and several ticket holders refused to turn over the actual drivers. I'd have to go back and look for the details, but that's what I remember.
At any rate, I guess that's my issue on this if they were to bring it to the US. If people aren't getting pulled over and just getting ticketed, then how would we know that folks aren't getting targeted by other means? Nice car? Ticket! Shitty car? Ticket! It still has the ability to create a cash cow situation without any pesky confrontations.
Hard to say and it's not like I wasn't peeved and didn't want to plead my case. But generally I don't feel like the cops here are just out to get me and raise revenue for shady reasons. For better or for worse, I don't really worry too much about corruption over here, at least not in that way. They could be, but I just feel like there are so many rules and so much order and public figures get in trouble for the most minor discretions, I just don't worry about it. I don't know what it's like in Finland. But I absolutely do know it's shady back in the States.
Ultimately though, I do like the idea of people being fined based on income.
It's funny you mention this - I was in a meeting yesterday where a fellow/rival consultant was making an argument for a specific street treatment and their evidence for safety was the results when they used it in Germany. And I REALLY wanted to be like, "dude, no. Germans DO NOT KID AROUND when it comes to safety and driver training. Their results are really freakin' hard to correlate to US driving conditions." But I had no numbers to back that up, so I had to soften my initial reaction quite a bit. Reminds me I wanted to actually look up the stats.
There was something very similar here (Minnesota) with the red light camera tickets about 10 years ago. The judge ended up shutting them all down.
Red light cameras are very controversial. I believe ATL got rid of most of theirs, and I remember reading about tickets being thrown out in Chicago because the lights themselves didn't comply with the law in terms of how long they were yellow, or something along those lines.
They aren't red light cameras. The cops stand there with the gun, or have them hidden in a car. They just don't bother to pull you over.
it is totally a money grab. When they need more money, they lower the speed limits or tolerances. Everyone (even the media) refers to is as "Flash for cash" No reason the speed limit needs to be 40 km/hr on a main thoroughfare.
Red light cameras are very controversial. I believe ATL got rid of most of theirs, and I remember reading about tickets being thrown out in Chicago because the lights themselves didn't comply with the law in terms of how long they were yellow, or something along those lines.
I believe the case here involved presumption that the car owner was the driver, and several ticket holders refused to turn over the actual drivers. I'd have to go back and look for the details, but that's what I remember.
At any rate, I guess that's my issue on this if they were to bring it to the US. If people aren't getting pulled over and just getting ticketed, then how would we know that folks aren't getting targeted by other means? Nice car? Ticket! Shitty car? Ticket! It still has the ability to create a cash cow situation without any pesky confrontations. Andplusalso they wouldn't even have to prove the identity of the driver.
You've got it right.
There was also a marital privilege issue - challenging the ticket would've required a spouse to testify against his/her spouse.
At least once a year, I make a trip that takes me up and down a long stretch of 95. This is a very busy road populated by many tractor trailers who love to ride bumpers. It is terrifying because, if I make one mistake, that truck will kill me. If someone wants to produce evidence that I am actually safer allowing that truck to ride my ass than I am speeding up for the ten seconds it takes to move up and switch lanes, I'm all ears. Until then, I am getting the hell out of the way, even if it means going well above the speed limit, because I am fairly certain that truck-driver won't be open to any lessons from me and my relatively tiny car.
Oh, I've been there. But what I'd really love to see is more truckers ticketed. Truckers are usually very technically skilled drivers, but they also drive like total assholes.
The rage I have for these truckers is off the charts, and I am constantly complaining to H about the fact that they are not ticketed more often on 95. I had one trip a couple years ago that was particularly bad in terms of the number of crazy truck-drivers on the road. At one point I looked in my rear view mirror and all I could see was the grill of the truck behind me. I was sweating bullets for much of the drive and my arms were sore the next day from gripping the wheel so tightly.
The ticket comes from the state, not the police. The police don't have to be there. It could be a camera or something. I've gotten one speeding ticket my whole life that was a total fluke and it was here in Deutschland. I pushed too hard on the gas in our new car in a 30 km zone and went 38 for about 10 seconds, but it just so happened to be in front of a parked police car. They didn't pull me over, ask for an explanation or say boo. I didn't even see them. I just got a 350€ ticket in the mail about 2 weeks later.
How do you defend yourself against something that allegedly happened two weeks ago and you didn't even know was coming? Or is it just assumed you are guilty?
I dunno how this works in other countries. I'm thinking in terms of how this would work in the US. This isn't the same thing as a parking ticket.
I'm not arguing. Just discussing.
Here, tickets are done by camera/video. You can contest it by going to your local police station and making your case there. But good luck with that since whatever you did was recorded in some way. My DH got a ticket mailed to him even though I was the one driving and the car is "mine". His name is the only name on the title, so the ticket was sent to him. I have no idea what would have happened if he contested the fact that he wasn't in the car. It's his car so I doubt they would have cared, but I don't know.
i red light cameras are still pretty controversial & many cities have removed them. I think if you get a ticket, it doesn't actually count the same on your DL points or insurance b/c they can't prove who the driver was, but the owner of the car still gets the tickets.
I don't think there are any speed cameras around in the US though....I don't know of any??
We have them in Chicago. They are on city streets near parks (30mph) and schools (20mph).
Red light cameras are very controversial. I believe ATL got rid of most of theirs, and I remember reading about tickets being thrown out in Chicago because the lights themselves didn't comply with the law in terms of how long they were yellow, or something along those lines.
They aren't red light cameras. The cops stand there with the gun, or have them hidden in a car. They just don't bother to pull you over.
it is totally a money grab. When they need more money, they lower the speed limits or tolerances. Everyone (even the media) refers to is as "Flash for cash" No reason the speed limit needs to be 40 km/hr on a main thoroughfare.
In Chicago or ATL?
We have a flash for cash road that just opened a year or two ago. It's a major road with no development of any kind on either side of it and very few lights and the speed limit is 40. Cops are all over that road; meanwhile, in a far busier and more dangerous section of town, granny just made an illegal left turn into the grocery store, forcing people behind her to slam on their brakes, and she damn near ran over a pedestrian. It's all good, though, because she gave the asshole wave.
I could rant for days about the drivers in my area and the lack of police presence to deal with them, except for on the 29th and 30th of every month.
This is such a pet peeve of mine. The right and left lane are equivalent. There is one speed limit for all the lanes. Passing is done to the left.
The reality of the situation is that in CA, there is no such thing as a passing lane.
Rationalizing as it may be, I don't think causing people to make possibly unsafe lane changes because I'm going 65 in the middle lanes is safer than going with the flow of traffic.
Lanes changes account for about four percent of all car accidents in the US, and perhaps as much as ten percent of accidents on highways. Meanwhile, research has generally shown that the strongest predictor of an accident isn't speeding, but variance from the average speed of traffic — and a car going five miles per hour slower than the surrounding traffic has a greater chance of causing an accident than one going five miles per hour faster than it.
They aren't red light cameras. The cops stand there with the gun, or have them hidden in a car. They just don't bother to pull you over.
it is totally a money grab. When they need more money, they lower the speed limits or tolerances. Everyone (even the media) refers to is as "Flash for cash" No reason the speed limit needs to be 40 km/hr on a main thoroughfare.
In Chicago or ATL?
In Australia.
More accidents are happening because everyone is watching the speedo instead of the road.
My biggest highway driving pet peeve is people who tailgate or don't leave enough distance between cars. It's so dangerous. I'm really paranoid about not having enouogh room to stop. And I don't leave as much distance as I should, but I leave more than most of the crazies on the Baltimore beltway.
I hate this too. And then when you leave enough distance, somebody has to jump into it. Like yes, I left that space just for you to come over.
Most police officers I know have said that you won't get pulled over for speeding for doing 80 if that is flow of traffic but if you are weaving in an out to get up to that speed you will because that is what causes most accidents.
Oh, I've been there. But what I'd really love to see is more truckers ticketed. Truckers are usually very technically skilled drivers, but they also drive like total assholes.
The rage I have for these truckers is off the charts, and I am constantly complaining to H about the fact that they are not ticketed more often on 95. I had one trip a couple years ago that was particularly bad in terms of the number of crazy truck-drivers on the road. At one point I looked in my rear view mirror and all I could see was the grill of the truck behind me. I was sweating bullets for much of the drive and my arms were sore the next day from gripping the wheel so tightly.
This is why, even if the car-only lanes have more traffic, I will still use those lanes when the Turnpike divides because I just hate being surrounded by trucks.
Most police officers I know have said that you won't get pulled over for speeding for doing 80 if that is flow of traffic but if you are weaving in an out to get up to that speed you will because that is what causes most accidents.
On the contrary, speeders are much easier to pull over because you just have to sit on the side of the road and pick them off. Pulling over people for reckless driving (like weaving in and out of lanes) requires a lot more effort and frankly, an awful lot of cops are lazy (at least when it comes to this) and their bosses are more interested in revenue than in keeping the roads safe.
Now, if localities and states would increase the fines for reckless driving, then they would have more incentive to get out there and actually make the roads safer.
My biggest highway driving pet peeve is people who tailgate or don't leave enough distance between cars. It's so dangerous. I'm really paranoid about not having enouogh room to stop. And I don't leave as much distance as I should, but I leave more than most of the crazies on the Baltimore beltway.
The rage I have for these truckers is off the charts, and I am constantly complaining to H about the fact that they are not ticketed more often on 95. I had one trip a couple years ago that was particularly bad in terms of the number of crazy truck-drivers on the road. At one point I looked in my rear view mirror and all I could see was the grill of the truck behind me. I was sweating bullets for much of the drive and my arms were sore the next day from gripping the wheel so tightly.
This is why, even if the car-only lanes have more traffic, I will still use those lanes when the Turnpike divides because I just hate being surrounded by trucks.
Most police officers I know have said that you won't get pulled over for speeding for doing 80 if that is flow of traffic but if you are weaving in an out to get up to that speed you will because that is what causes most accidents.
On the contrary, speeders are much easier to pull over because you just have to sit on the side of the road and pick them off. Pulling over people for reckless driving (like weaving in and out of lanes) requires a lot more effort and frankly, an awful lot of cops are lazy (at least when it comes to this) and their bosses are more interested in revenue than in keeping the roads safe.
Now, if localities and states would increase the fines for reckless driving, then they would have more incentive to get out there and actually make the roads safer.
My stepfather was pulled over for speeding once, and he asked the cop why he got tagged but the faster driver weaving in and out of traffic and posing the bigger threat wasn't. The cop flat out told him it was because my step-dad was easier to catch.
On the contrary, speeders are much easier to pull over because you just have to sit on the side of the road and pick them off. Pulling over people for reckless driving (like weaving in and out of lanes) requires a lot more effort and frankly, an awful lot of cops are lazy (at least when it comes to this) and their bosses are more interested in revenue than in keeping the roads safe.
Now, if localities and states would increase the fines for reckless driving, then they would have more incentive to get out there and actually make the roads safer.
My stepfather was pulled over for speeding once, and he asked the cop why he got tagged but the faster driver weaving in and out of traffic and posing the bigger threat wasn't. The cop flat out told him it was because my step-dad was easier to catch.
I believe it. This is also why motorcycle drivers basically never get pulled over, no matter what kind of reckless and dangerous things they are doing.
This is why, even if the car-only lanes have more traffic, I will still use those lanes when the Turnpike divides because I just hate being surrounded by trucks.
ANd since we're complaining....wrecker drivers are the worst! The drive bigger/heavier cars than average, SUPER speed and drive very aggressive to be the first to get to a wreck. I had one come about a foot from rear ending me at 30+ mph difference on Friday...luckily I swerved left in my lane and he swerved right into the shoulder.
I've never driven in L.A. How does it work? There are 3-4 lanes of traffic? Speed limit is 65-ish and far left lane goes 80-ish on average?
I literally have no idea. I'm an NYCer so naturally, I hate L.A. :-)
LA traffic is actually not that scary, and I say that as a woman who is terrified of freeways. If it's congested, it's not moving. And it's almost always congested. (The motorcyclists are still scary, though, as they're legally allowed to drive between cars during congestion).
As for the rest of Southern CA, I'd say 4 lanes is the norm, going up to 8 at junctions. The truck speed limit is 55 mph, and everyone else is 65 mph. I think trucks have to stay in the right lane unless they're passing, allowing cars to merge, or preparing to exit from a specific lane (in LA, there are several places where this lane is designated with a sign that says "Trucks OK"). This allows the cars to drive in the left lanes. I personally prefer to drive no faster than 9 over the speed limit, so I'm typically in one of the middle lanes. CA drivers, in my experience, tend to give each other room to drive, but most people are going 10-15 mph over the limit. The most terrifying riding experience I've had in CA was with a coworker who drop far too slowly.
The most terrifying ever was in Detroit because they go fast and drive bumper to bumper there.
DH has his CDL and frequently drives trucks in the region to different job sites. He says truck drivers are either really good drivers or absolutely horrible. We always laugh because there's a low clearance underpass near my work and despite all the signs, so many trucks get wedged underneath it. At least one every week. That's how stupid some truck drivers are...
But on the flipside, some of the stories he tells me about passenger vehicles and the crazy shit they do around trucks is kind of insane, too. You can't cut off a tractor trailer and then get pissed because they almost wipe you out.
I've never driven in L.A. How does it work? There are 3-4 lanes of traffic? Speed limit is 65-ish and far left lane goes 80-ish on average?
I literally have no idea. I'm an NYCer so naturally, I hate L.A. :-)
LA traffic is actually not that scary, and I say that as a woman who is terrified of freeways. If it's congested, it's not moving. And it's almost always congested. (The motorcyclists are still scary, though, as they're legally allowed to drive between cars during congestion).
As for the rest of Southern CA, I'd say 4 lanes is the norm, going up to 8 at junctions. The truck speed limit is 55 mph, and everyone else is 65 mph. I think trucks have to stay in the right lane unless they're passing, allowing cars to merge, or preparing to exit from a specific lane (in LA, there are several places where this lane is designated with a sign that says "Trucks OK"). This allows the cars to drive in the left lanes. I personally prefer to drive no faster than 9 over the speed limit, so I'm typically in one of the middle lanes. CA drivers, in my experience, tend to give each other room to drive, but most people are going 10-15 mph over the limit. The most terrifying riding experience I've had in CA was with a coworker who drop far too slowly.
The most terrifying ever was in Detroit because they go fast and drive bumper to bumper there.
this must be why I immediately thought you'd get killed driving too slow (aka the speed limit) on a detroit freeway. I actually think we are awesome drivers, but maaaaaaybe I'm biased.
I'm on my phone...isnt this an old post? I just got the tag notification son I'm answeeing anyway.
I could write a lot about speed limits and safety. as much as I'd like to have pixy0stix's back, its not nearly as clear cut as she's saying. But! Typically its just physically unsafe for the average passenger vehicle to go more than 15 maaaaaybe 20 mph over on a divided, controlled access highway if there is literally zero traffic. (I.e. a freeway. Interstate. Whatever)
the gray area between the speed limit and the actual design speed with a factor of safety has a lot more factors with regards to traffic conditions and road conditions and such. I'll babble on when I'm on a computer if people are actually curious.
I don't think it's old, but knowing the fabulous Houston chronicle, it could be...they totally suck. It was on their front page today, so this is a new thread.
I agree....i work in the auto crash industry & roads are typically designed with a several fold factor of safety. There are 2 things to consider- you crashing into something on your own or your crashing into other cars. Every time your speed goes up a bit, your injury risk from a crash goes up b/c kinetic energy (KE=1/2 * m * V^2) goes up drastically & it has to be dissipated by your body in a crash.
Now, in an ideal world, we'd all be going the SAME speed & this would reduce the number of interactions/crashes between cars. People would feel less need to pass/change lanes to go around a slow person. We start driving too close (following too close) b/c other assholes cut us off & jump in front of you if you leave a proper gap.
There's a balance between the speed limit & trying to get everybody going the same speed. Start thinking about heavy trucks- tractor trailers, those types of vehicles going faster are wildly dangerous because their mass is so big. So if you DO get into a crash with them, you are screwed. So we have to consider the variety of vehicles that use the road & their stopping distances & general vehicle performance.
But back to the fine thing, I also think the "state" controlling the fines instead of local municipalities would help alleviate lots of things like we see in towns like Ferguson, where the whole town is financed on the backs of the poorer citizens & getting a ticket that you can't afford to pay will endlessly multiply the actual cost and land you in jail (a la John oliver www.youtube.com/watch?v=0UjpmT5noto)
Ah, I think there was an article from elsewhere a few weeks ago that got posted here. That makes sense.
To add to what zoe's saying here...and to totally nerd out. I'll do a TL;DR at the end.
So. Speed limits. In an ideal world run by engineers - all speed limits would be set based on the design speed of the roadway. The primary influence there sight distance in most cases rather than actual physically limitations. (except like...in the desert. Nothing to block your view for miles and miles and miles=way less sight distance issue) Like...we could design a curve such that you can stay on the road and make the turn without skidding. But 1. it *feels* scary well before it's actually totally unsafe 2. taller vehicles have issues and 3. often that would result in a situation where you can't see far enough ahead to have sufficient braking time if there is an obstacle in the road. #3 there being the biggest safety issue most of the time. (I'm not going to get into advisory speeds. But those yellow signs are all based on this same stuff too....)
Sight distance calculations take into account the amount of time it takes for you to see something in front of you and move your foot to the brake (perception-reaction time) plus the amount of time it actually takes for your car to stop once you hit the brake. The speed you're currently going is a variable in both components there, so you can imagine how quickly the amount of distance ahead you need to see increases with higher speeds. (think stopping short at 5 mph vs. 25. extrapolate out to 80) Random tidbit - even in perfect conditions. A dead straight, dead level roadway with NOBODY on it - you still probably shouldn't drive 80 mph at night unless you have those crazy obnoxious headlights. You end up outrunning your lights basically - driving so fast that as far out as your headlights reach is within your stopping sight distance so if there was a giant sinkhole or something (anything without it's own lights) you'd never be able to stop in time.
And then there's other stuff - like lane widths, horizontal clearance (distance from the edge of your lane to things like walls and trees, sides of mountains, etc) that also have to do with speed because there's less room for error if you leave your lane for any reason at higher speed vs. lower speed. You can recover or stop in way less distance the slower you're going. And then there's interchange spacing, driveways, pedestrians, etc that also have their own influence because each interaction introduces turbulence into the traffic stream. So all of these assumptions about design speed go into roadways. But the speed limit is not set at the design speed. It's typically 10 to 15 mph higher depending on the type of facility (local vs. highway, etc). The rule of thumb is that if you've designed the road and set the speed limit correctly, the 85th percentile speed (i.e. the speed where 85% of people are driving that or lower) is 10 mph over the speed limit.
this is the height of humor in my field. Be amused dammit.
This OFTEN goes completely out the damn window though because engineers don't run the world, and people do things like write letters to their local county council asking that the speed limit be lowered on a specific road because people drive too fast (which doesn't work FYI. the sign does nothing to prevailing speeds. You have to fix the road itself), or it's the 70's and we're trying to conserve gas, or just...because. Which you'd think, "oh, no big - so the speed limit is lower than people could safely drive." and that's trueish (and makes sense in places like school zones where we can do targeted enforcement to actually force compliance) but doesn't take into account the fact that generally, if the road is designed for a higher speed - people will drive that speed. Very very few drivers actually watch speed limits that closely - they drive what feels right, and 9 times out of 10 on a highway, that aligns with the speed limit. But where it doesn't, most people will chronically speed and some people won't - which increases the speed differential and actually causes more safety problems.
Which brings me to the other thing about speed, which touches on some of the objections raised to the "NO SPEEDING" POV: speed spread. It's kind of a long standing thing in the traffic world that what causes crashes is a speed differential. So, somebody driving 45 mph on a roadway where the 85th percentile speed is 75 is going to cause some PROBLEMS. Ditto somebody driving 60 on a road where people generally drive 30.
"Solomon Curve" by David Solomon - Accidents on main rural highways related to speed, driver, and vehicle.. Licensed under Public Domain via Wikimedia Commons.
This finding isn't totally sacrosanct (read the wiki to see), but it's pretty well accepted because it also just makes sense.
So....I feel like I had more to say here. I've had to stop and start this like 20 times to do my actual job so it's probably really disjointed. I dunno.
TL;DR - if you aren't driving a tall heavy vehicle and you're actually paying attention it's probably safe to drive ~10 mph faster than the speed limit in that you aren't going to lose control and drive off the road, IF that puts you right in line with the prevailing speeds. Not if it means that you're in the left hand lane steadily passing people.
I would like to clear up that I never said you shouldn't speed up to pass. That's just silly. What you shouldn't do is camp out in the left lane and go 20 mph over the speed limit because everyone else in that lane is going that speed. You do have options.
I would like to clear up that I never said you shouldn't speed up to pass. That's just silly. What you shouldn't do is camp out in the left lane and go 20 mph over the speed limit because everyone else in that lane is going that speed. You do have options.
And also if when you say the "flow of traffic" is going that speed you actually mean the flow of traffic in the leftmost lane - then no. You're still passing people who are going t totally reasonable speed. The prevailing speed takes into account all the lanes - so think more like the middle lane of a 3 lane section. Which might still be 65 in a 55 without congestion, but that doesn't mean you get to be all, "it's safer to drive with traffic!!" while going 75 in the left lane. Nope. You are not being safer doing that. Try again.
Most police officers I know have said that you won't get pulled over for speeding for doing 80 if that is flow of traffic but if you are weaving in an out to get up to that speed you will because that is what causes most accidents.
Someone once told me that on wide open stretches of freeway, in 70mph zones, local CHP officers set their doppler radar at 82mph. I think that's just below the point where a speeding ticket turns automatically into a reckless driving ticket.