[GLHS837]

Since it was rightly pointed out that we were hijacking the other thread with our debate (which I will refer to as, "Us:angel: vs The Wrong Ones:devil: "

(And please nobody get offended, I'm playing around in the name of good clean debate :beat: )

:happy:

Anyway, on to the question.

Basic point. Does speed alone kill?

No, it does not. No more than running kills. Run into traffic, die. Run off a cliff, die. Run into the wrong neighborhood, get crippled, maybe die.

Just like sensible running, sensible speeding has no harmful effects.
By this same token, sensible speeding is NOT aggressive driving.

"What does sensiblemean?" I hear the audience say.

Like obscenity, it cannot be cleanly defined. But, just like obscenity, it CAN be spotted. "I know it when I see it". It's the reasonable man theory. While my sensible is not yours, I'm willing to temper mine to allow for yours, are you?

While I would feel perfectly safe on I-10 across Texas to just set 130, depending on conditions, I realize that's far enough out from the norm to realize it's just not feasible. While you might think anything over 70 is just plain crazy.

I'm willing to come down to 90, wil you meet me there?

and of course, this discussion changes nothing, but is just for entertainment. while gentle fun poking is allowed, please refrain from getting excited and calling names. Belitttling anothers point of view hardly ever leads to rational discussion.

 

[ninerjoe]

I thought it was CRACK that kills...

 

[maneval69]

The Does speed kill is a question best left to the pharmaceutical industry.

The real question should be ?Does increased speed decrease safety?
________
California Dispensary

 

[GLHS837]

Hell, getting in the shower decreases safety!!!! Everything after putting legs over the side of the bed decreases safety Except for the risk of bedsores

Of course it does, but how much is a number driven by so many variables even Stephen Hawking would blow you off. Vehicle speed, mechanical condition, traffic density, phsyc profiles of every other driver around, the mechanical condition of their cars, road conditions.

Trying to quantify how much "safety", which by the way, can never be acheived, you can only mitigate risk, you can never be "safe", you trade per each mph increased is impossible.

I'm not a thrill junkie, not by any means. I've been involved with aviation and ordnance for over 20 years. I know a little about risk and safety.

 

[maneval69]

Thank you.
That's my point exactly.
Speed doesn't kill it just increases your chances of dieing.
________
SexualExtacy

 

[blitzkrieg_55]

Letting certain people speed is like wellfare. Well it is a great idea and if everyone respected and used it the right way it would work. It is the nature of people to use things and letting a certain amount of people speed would be just as bad.

 

[CO-Charger]

Agree with you on that one point.

My original point in the other thread was that as cars get better and capable of handling higher speeds, it seems there has to be a way to allow drivers who want to use this capability can do so without LEO's getting their shorts wound up in a wedgie. I think we can also all agree that when you have multiple cars on the road its not really the speed itself, but the differential of speed between the cars that makes things more unsafe that the actual speed.

 

[maneval69]

I think we can also all agree that when you have multiple cars on the road its not really the speed itself, but the differential of speed between the cars that makes things more unsafe that the actual speed.

My first issue in the other post was the idea of graduated licenses. This would only make the speed differential worse.
Also
The speed limit is how engineers decide how to long to make entry and exit ramps. It determines how big the lanes are and how far apart they are.

The rules they allow the autobahn to have high speeds are:
# Vehicles with a maximum speed rating of less than 60 km/h (36 mph) are prohibited as are bicycles, mopeds, and pedestrians.
# Passing on the right is prohibited! Slower vehicles must move to the right to allow faster traffic to pass, and drivers should stay in the right lane except to pass. When passing, you must do so as quickly as possible.

Those rules are followed or people die. And parents can?t sue the state if there 18 year old wraps him self around a tree at 120 MPH.
http://home.att.net/~texhwyman/autobahn.htm#regs


I would love to have add a lane dedicated to faster traffic. But you see how well it works now. "Slower traffic keep Right" I see those sign all over the Highway. How many time are you stuck in the left lane behind someone going the exact speed limit or the exact speed of the car it is driving beside. But I guess that gets back to driver education. I do know people that drive in the left lane at the speed limit, on purpose. I call them "A-holes"

The Big question is who does it benefit, why does it benefit them, and how does it benefit society?
________
Live Sex

 

[chargershed]

My first issue in the other post was the idea of graduated licenses. This would only make the speed differential worse.
Also
The speed limit is how engineers decide how to long to make entry and exit ramps. It determines how big the lanes are and how far apart they are.


I would love to have add a lane dedicated to faster traffic. But you see how well it works now. "Slower traffic keep Right" I see those sign all over the Highway. How many time are you stuck in the left lane behind someone going the exact speed limit or the exact speed of the car it is driving beside. But I guess that gets back to driver education. I do know people that drive in the left lane at the speed limit, on purpose. I call them "A-holes"

The Big question is who does it benefit, why does it benefit them, and how does it benefit society?

Where speed differential causes problems is when an agressive driver "runs into" drivers who are not paying attention...My definition of an aggressive driver would be some one who makes more than 4 lane changes in a single mile, passes on the right to move back over two lanes to the left because traffic isn't going quite fast enough or pulls to within 20 feet of the car ahead of them and sits there at 70 mph. etc.. imagine this car weaving in and out of a crowded hiway while some other genius is talking on the cell, sipping latte, applying makeup etc.. you can visualize the mayhem...

A graduated license sytem would work, you just have to tie in the drivers license with the vehicle license. For example; I pass a three tier driving test that includes accident avoidance, foul weather driving skils along with a "standard" driving skills test. My car must also pass these tests plus a mandatory yearly vehicle safety inspection. After which, based on my skill as a driver and the condition and limits of my vehicle I'm given a decal ( similar to emmissions stickers required here in CO) which enables me to use certain lanes of the highway and depending on vehicle, skills etc.. may not allow me to use certain others. this decal would go on the left front and rear part of the windshield/backglass, so as to be visable for Johnny Law. Vehicles caught in the wrong lanes would be remanded stiff fines and multiple offenders would loose driving privlages entirerly. Speed differences would not exceed 15 mph in the city from the far right lane to the far left and only 5 mph for adjacent lanes.

The net effect of a program like this would be; those who want to travel faster would have to "prove" they belong by improving their driving skills as well as their vehicle's capabilities. Making for safer Highways and better traffic flow. Depending on your ranking, out on the open interstate, you would also be allowed to drive at a faster speed as long as conditions permit.
Is this a fool proof plan? not hardly... lower income folks would have a fit as their pos' would ultimately keep them from getting anywhere quickly, regardless of their driving ability. Law enforcement agencies would decry the loss of revenue the current system provides. Insurance companies could have a field day and it still wouldn't keep people from drinking and driving ( the real problem)

Just my .02

 

[CO-Charger]

The graduated license is my "pie-in-the-sky". I've always equated drive a car to flying a plane (at least to the point of being consistant and precise in how I manage the tasks when behind the wheel). Maybe someday with technology, I'll be able to program into the car my (ficticious) license grade and LEO's would be able to "read" the car's signal letting them know my grade. As for other driver's knowing my grade and me knowing theirs, again, someday technology might solve that too. For now, I would settle for (almost) any other practical implementation that would allow a little more leeway on the highways.

I hear you on the "Slower Traffic Keep Right" signs. I do find when going interstate, that when you leave a large city or town and get out into the rural areas that folks ususally do stick to the right and only get in the left when passing. You learn quick to do so when you have a multi-ton 18 wheeler riding on your bumper. Its when in higher populated areas that you get the folks who are clueless to the "keep right" concept and just plant themselves into the left lane and are oblivious to the rest of traffic that irritates me as well.

 

[CO-Charger]

Damn! Wish I could be as eloquent in how I state thing. Right on the money shed.

 

[SOLD!]

Saying speed kills is like saying guns kill. Oops, did I open another can of worms here? Both are instruments of death but neither are the sole causes of death.

Bad drivers kill, drunk drivers kill, road conditions may kill but all these and others kill irregardless of speed.

I think that if you're gonna head butt someone while driving, its safer to do it at a slower speed. :grin:

That said, I believe that I read somewhere once upon a time that in countries without speed limits i.e. Europe, the number of traffic fatalities are lower than countries that do impose speed limits i.e. North America.

I also think that speed limits are not based solely on public safety but also on political correctness and revenue. If we really want to get rid of speeders, just confiscate their cars. All charger owners will be going 55. LOL

 

[RPMSRT8]

Well said, "SOLD!".

 

[lammy]

OK before I get ripped for picking speed kills, let me explaine. I was in the Army in Germany fas an MP for 2 years. They have an extensive proccess to get your license. There is almost a year of work. It is a privalage not a right. I went to many accidents on the Autobahn where someone thought that thier tricked out Ford Festiva would be fun to run to 130+ because it could. Worked great until the flips started. I picked yes because speed does kill in the hands of people without the proper training or equipment. There is nothing in life that I want to do more than go to one of the NASCAR Track schools and run a track in a race car at 150+. I would take the class and use the proper equipment. So if I picked speed kills it is only because there wasn't a speed can kill in the wrong hands choice.

 

[SOLD!]

Yes Lammy, I agree with you in that we need much tougher tests to determine competence. Where I'm from, one would have to take at least 15 hours of driving lessons with an instructor one on one before even being able to take the test. The test is done using a manual tranny and one would have to paralel park, vertical park, S curve etc etc. The hardest part is to park the car on a steep incline and then go up without rolling back. If you fail any stage, you fail the whole test. I've known guys who have taken the test 6 or 7 times and still failed. If this system is used in North America, I'd say half the presently licensed will fail. They'll have to take public transit which will then start paying for itself without gas subsidy from drivers. Roads will be less crowded and we might even end gridlock.

But that will only get bad drivers off the road. What about good drivers with bad judgement. I say confiscate their cars and sell them. Tickets of a couple of hundred dollars will not stop the rich young kids from street racing. Take away their ride and it might make a dent. The police department can auction these vehicles off and maybe we can have our taxes reduced too :happy:

 

[DAYTONA_R/T]

lived in White Rock for 3 years... I dont think that vancouver drivers are any better then anywhere else....

Now, per this topic, speed kills even in the hands of professional drivers.... how many race car drivers can you name that have died in the last decade? And how often do they run 200MPH?

So if speed can take the life of a trained professional.... it will take the life of an average joe who went through drivers ed, passed his written and driving tests and got his license

 

[SOLD!]

Oh, I meant where I was from originally - Singapore.

 

[manofsteelCHARGER]

speed doesnt kill i agree with everyone else. its the people that dont respect their car and all the power in the hood once you loose that respect for the car thatsthe time that you cant control it and loose it no matter how fast your going. just ask copcharger he should know.

 

[plugray]

With a vehicle having a mass of a ton or more even doing 35MPH can be deadly.

Speed itself isn't the problem. Not taking into consideration your skill and the conditions is.

 

[maneval69]

Speed itself isn't the problem.

Speed isn't THE problem but it is A problem.
I don't understand what is being debated. Is someone trying to correlate speed doesn't kill with increased speed doesn?t cause safety issues?


For the license discussion.
Basically you want to offer a license to allow people to drive at a higher speed limit.
To get this license they would have to demonstrate the capability to handle an automobile at those speed, demonstrate the understanding of what that extra speed means when it comes to safety and interaction with traffic.
Just because someone can demonstrate the knowledge is no guaranty that they?ll apply that knowledge.
It seems like it would be an ego trip for most, a way to feel some level of superiority over others on the road.
Just what we need on our highways, people would feel that are more deserving of the road than the people around them. Then give them a license to encourage that behavior.

I?m sure that everyone here is a responsible driver who would never drive in an unsafe manor. But there?s not test for intent, people will lie to get what they want. Especially if they feel they deserve it.
The only way this would work is a tracking device that would record illegal driving. If the tracking device (data logger) is not on, your graduated license means nothing.
I believe these cars already have something along those lines.
I know I sound like a prude but I believe in speeding the old fashioned way. Illegally.
________
Mywetdreamss live