Speeding Crackdown.

[Lemur]

Escort 9500ix + Waze and you are set.

This is what I use, even in Virginia. Screw the no radar detector law. I've gone border to border late at night in times I don't want to admit.

[Viktimize]

In any debate, it is uncommon to have both parties ultimately agree. That being said, it seems we both have our lines drawn in the sand. In situations such as these, all I can do is raise the intellectual price tag as high as I can for you to maintain your position.

What I've gathered from this conversation, Viktimize, and I could be mistaken...not lying, is that you simultaneously hold conflicting views in that because speeding doesn't directly cause crashes (~C) and isn't enforced proportionately according to the percentages of traffic collision causes and due to possible unreasonable speed limits, it therefor shouldn't be enforced (~E) or maybe even be limited at all. You would however agree with me, ipso facto the enforcement (~~E) thereof, if only it was enforced in a manner consistent with your view (R), that is unmolested engineer suggestion which is still speed enforcement but this is despite your reasoning that speeding doesn't cause crashes, which is why, according to you, we shouldn't enforce it in the first place!...on the highway that is, leaving one to wonder why non highways are exempt from your reasoning. Also, what if the engineer still suggested a speed lower than what you are comfortable traveling at?

1. ~C>~E
2. ~C
3. ~E
4. ~C>R
5. ~C
6. R
7. R=E
8. E (simp, 7)
9. ~C>E^~E
10. E=/=~E

Reductio ad Absurdem

...I could be mistaken though.

It could be that we've been arguing past each other as I'm not arguing that speeding directly causes crashes and therefor should be enforced. Why does that need to be a factor anyways?

The reasons for enforcing the speed limits need not be because speeding cause crashes at all . Rather they are enforced based soley upon what the violation thereof contributes, exponentially I might add, to the problems of reduced reaction times and/ or increased braking distances and/ or the damages caused. Which is a public safety concern because it leads to crashes. That is all that is needed to justify the speed laws and their enforcement and nothing else.


As you've rightly pointed out, the relationship of the speed limit and any unsafe condition related speed traveled are purely incidental. Sometimes the safest speeds are lower than the actual speed limit and that law exists. Enforcing safe speeds is a judgement call which includes many factors. The capabilities of the driver which are unkown to the officer and sometimes even the overly confident driver, the vehicle's condition which is unknown to the officer (I don't know what it's like to drive a Porsche 911 or a Ducati) or perhaps even its driver, the weather which is ever changing, general traffic congestion and speed which is fluid by the minute, roadway surface and conditions which change and deteriorate and are then repaired, wildlife which is utterly unpredictable, the officer's personal judgement, the comfort level of the driver which can be effected by mood, roadway familiararity etc. I'd say that enforcing this type of speeding would indeed be more meaningful but the only sure fire empiracle evidence of an unsafe speed traveled is the crash which it lead to, but that is exactly what we're trying to prevent in the first place. I guess the speed limit really is for those who are too dumb.

I'll just go ahead and point out where we do agree that speed limits should be reasonable (to be reasonable though, it must first be allowed) and enforced responsibly, which means it must be enforceable.

...And just so you know, not a single officer that I've met in my 20 years, supervisors included, could care less about the revenue generated from a ticket he wrote.

Be safe out here!

This is hardly a debate. This has become you completely ignoring any valid made point of mine and not addressing it. And then simultaneously trying to twist my argument or read so deep into it that you've lost the point all together.

I don't know when you became a theoretical physicist? But if you have a complete unwillingness to understand the variables because it compromises your position, then creating a formula from those variables will be gibberish at best.

You're right about one thing. I don't agree with speed limit enforcement. The only way I would is if it was a secondary charge tacked on to drivers who were ticketed for dangerous behaviours directly related to collision statistics. Then it would stack demerits to remove these people from the roadway faster or force them to change their behaviours to be safer.

But that is where you being right ends. And you have taken what I said out of context again.

I wouldn't agree with speed enforcement if limits were correctly set either. However it would be a far stretch better than our current system. At least it would cut my speed fines down significantly since I would be travelling at say 10km/h over the limit instead of 40km/h.

I don't completely disagree that there is reason to enforce speed. But at best you are now enforcing possible damages that can occur in the event of accident. Which is better than nothing, but barely, that is a really shitty reason to enforce speed. You have the option to enforce accident causes which will address the problem of damages by decreasing accidents overall instead of just the speed they occur at. This form of enforcement has a snowball effect on everything accident related. When accidents decrease, fatalities decrease, injuries decrease, subsequently causing health care costs decrease, insurance payouts decrease, subsequently causing insurance rates to drop. Traffic flows smoother and congestion is eased. Your travel times are decreased. The only problem it does not address is the revenue problem of the government.


A safe speed can be lower than the posted limit which there is a law for as you mentioned. But a safe speed can also be higher than the limit as well, but there is no corresponding law to address that. Combined with the many immeasurable factors you brought up about what speed is safe for each individual driver, and we arrive once again at the absurdity of the speed limit. The most obvious best course of action is to ensure that drivers are operating their vehicle with safe behaviours. This addresses the huge percentage of drivers who are still unsafe below the limit. And allows drivers who are safe to not be punished based on a mundane posted sign that is not relevant to them. Can this system make things perfect? Of course not, nothing is perfect and we can't ever bring the accident rate to zero as long as humans operate vehicles. But my scenario is a massive improvement over the current system.

I don't doubt that any officer actually thinks he is collecting revenue. The problem lies in the fact the police are humans. And most humans lack the mental depth to see past what is being fed to them by government propaganda. Police are no better than your average human. So by in to the nonsense themselves, believe what they are told, and then go out under the assumption they are making a difference. But for some reason never put two and two together when they read the statistics readily available to them and see that what the do makes no difference at all.


Anyway, great talk. I don't think I will bother with this any longer though unless you want to start directly addressing my points. Otherwise I might as well be yelling into a vacuum.

[BrassMonkey ACR E]

OK lets do away with the police and set up "RED LIGHT AND SPEEDING CAMERAS" everywhere
Now we don't have to blame the police for doing "part of their job description"
EVERYONE will get tagged-NO EXCEPTIONS.
You think that SPRAY and OBSCURED plastic will save you?? Go ahead try it and see how many tickets you will rack up
How much over the legal speed limit is OK???????

[SandViper]

Escort 9500ix + Waze and you are set.

This is what I use, even in Virginia. Screw the no radar detector law. I've gone border to border late at night in times I don't want to admit.

Your close... But even better!!! Use Escort Live! its what I use you don't know how many times it has saved me! it updates itself and includes all the red-light cameras, Air patrols and everything you can think of... BEST THING OUT THERE BY FAR! totally worth it... It works with your current detector, you just buy the chord.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXzEduhbiYs

[Boba Fett]

Speeding has never been the cause of any accident in history. So no I don't believe speed traps nailing people for driving perfectly safe protects anybody.

But since speeding in itself is not a dangerous act.

What you are referring to is driving too fast for conditions. Many times this has very little to do with the speed limit. .

holy crap you're a moron!!

[Viktimize]

holy crap you're a moron!!

The moron who is 100% backed by statistics.

[Boba Fett]

The moron who is 100% backed by statistics.

yea, the statistics that constitute a moron

[City]

holy crap you're a moron!!

yea, the statistics that constitute a moron

Knock it off. Keep posts civil and directed at the discussion rather than the participants. But you know this already! Don't push it.