You make perfect sense. Lets ticket everyone that leaves their home. Why? Because they might get into an accident, and if we ticket them, less people would leave their house, and therefor... less accidents! Remember... Leaving Your House Kills! Giving people tickets for leaving their houses, is a preventative measure!

 

Drawing a comparison between driving within a reasonable speed on public roads and never leaving your house is nowhere close to an accurate analogy.

 

Your comment shows the reason why the law is flawed. You say 'reasonable speed', however what's reasonable to one car's capabilities, is not for another. Same would go for driver skill. If we 'dumbed down' the law to make it so even the worst car with the worst driver, could drive safely, we'd be putt-putting around at 10mph so a 90 year old can drive his Model-T without fear of being flattened. Your comment doesn't define 'reasonable speed', so that just leaves it to the 'wheel' of the beholder. (ho ho! what a clever pun!) I don't think 80 year olds should drive as fast as a sharp 24 year old. I don't think you should push a Cutlass Supreme as far as a... Mitsubishi Evolution. Etc. Etc.

However the law is flawed because it disreguards these variables. Why is it the a cop can speed like the dickens, to catch... a speeder?! Is it because they have training? Well ok then, does that mean ex-cops, and driver's instructors get the right to go faster than others? The law says no. Oh, do the cops get to break the speed limits because they have lights on their car? Well then, why can't tow trucks speed too? Its hypocracy.

 

Your reasoning is still flawed.

I agree that controllable speed varies from car to car, driver to driver. However, this is not entirely how speed limits are created. The area of travel is also a consideration. Just because a car/driver can travel trough an residential or business area at 75mph safely doesn't mean it's safe for the area. Also, speed limits are a generalization of what has been determined to be a safe speed for the majority of drivers. How in the world would one enforce a law that in contingent on so many factors. Too subjective. It is not, and should not be 'dumbed down' for the worst driver. Instead it should be an accurate reflection of the average driver.

Furthermore, if the law is more permissive for the best driver, all that does is give poor drivers more opporunity to cause damage to themselves, and/or other people.

Police officers are 'allowed' to speed to catch a criminal. Whether that criminal be a murderer trying to outrun police, of just a speeder. Suppose that 'speeder' is flying through traffic to get away from a more serious crime he or she just committed. Granted, this is a hyothetical situation which is not usually the case, but if there is no reason to speed, then why speed.

 

By your own admission, the law is only as it is, simply because it would be too hard to enforce it in a more just way. I think this is grounds alone, for the law to be sticken down. By your logic, we should simply outlaw people as a whole, simply because its hard to 'keep them in line.' I would rather have 100 'jerks' on the loose, than to have 1 'nice' guy jailed, simply because he sped too fast on an open clear highway. Yes, if we added variables to the law, it would be harder to enforce... but at least we'd be more free. Its not like cops don't get paid, its their job to enforce the law, and just because it might make it a bit hard on them to enforce it, it doesn't mean we should let them bag everybody... 'cuz its easier'.

 

Something that hasn't been mentioned yet, but unfortunately is a major factor is speed limits is MONEY. Both the local governments and the insurance industry benefit from keeping limits below what is reasonable with todays cars. Most highways were originally engineered for much higher speeds that the current limit will allow.

By taking a road, putting a speed limit below what the road will easy handle (speedwise), allows drivers to easy drive over the limit and allows police to easily hand out high priced tickets. This makes BIG money for local governments.

Also, does having a couple 65 in a 55 tickets (on a road that was designed for 80+ travel)really justify the extra $500 a year your insurance charges? NO, but if the limits were set at 80 or 85, then there would be far less speeders and thus far less tickets and far less $$$.

 

I never said that was the only reason the law is as it is. My point was that with a concrete law, there is no room for interpretation. While this also makes it easier to enforce, it also makes it consistant.

Let's take a hypothetical situation. You and another person are both driving down the same road at the same time. You are driving your miata and the other person is driving a Porsche 911. Say you are traveling at 45mph and he is traveling at 65mph. Imagine a cop pull you over, reasoning that 65mph is acceptable for the driver to be driving the 911, but 45mph is too fast for you to be driving your miata. (Please do not take these numbers literally, they are merely for illustrative purposes)

Does that seem fair to you? It seems grossly unfair to me. Who is that cop to decide that your car or driving skill are inadequate for a certain speed at a given time/area? That is not the police officer's job. Their job is to enforce the law, not interpret it. That's why we have a judicial system.

A speed limit that is the same for everyone is clear, definable, and enforceable. If your suggestion were implemented, how exactly would you convince anyone that you were capable of the speed you were driving? Even taking driver's classes does not constitute profound driving skill on public roads. Those classes are administered in a closed environment, with careful supervision. On a public road, an infinite number of suprises could make their way into your path of travel: deer, debris, pedestrians etc.

Your argument continues to be that speeding should be ok on an 'open highway', but how are you to know for sure that the highway is clear. There have been numerous times myself, that I thought I was alone on the highway only to see a car pulled onto the should with someone calling for help, or an animal skimper across the road. These are all factors to be considered when driving.

The simple fact of the matter is that there are way too many variables to consider to make laws that subjective.

Now one thing I will agree with is that highway speed limits can be raised a bit. There are areas around me where the highway and it's surrounding do not change, but the speed limit will drop from 65 to 55. This is, however, annoying at worst.

I must say, I am rather enjoying this argument, you have been very respectful with your comments which is more that I can say for most on this forum.

 

I'm in agreeance.

 

You guys need help.

 

Actually, I would say that I was being treated justly. My car isn't built to drive like a Porche 911, so obviously it would be more dangerous to push it to that point. As for your mention that taking in driver's skill is too hard, again I disagree. Show a certificate of completion (from a good driving school), to the local DMV, and get some sort of special note put on your liscense. There, no skin off anyone's back, no one is doing 'extra' work except a DMV clerk. Obviously, we would have to create the data, legal, and social infrastructure to have such a reality, but I'd say its certainly worth it due to the fact it would be making a law more just. You're argument is still dependent on the line of thought that "in order to catch some of them, lets bag 'em all and make them all pay." That doesn't settle right with me, and the "let god sort it out" mentality shouldn't have place in a country we call 'free.' (those quotes denote sarcasim. )

 

**** all of you that wish bad luck on me (like getting arrested or car being taken). i would never hope that another evo owner would lose their evo. i told my story cuz it was rare, not to get flamed by people for dring to fast or what not. if your talking **** bout going fast in the evo i dont know what to say to you. also i drive fast but im very safe and never risk life for speed and fun, ie i dont serve in and out of traffic; i dont speed around other traffic. ive never hit anyone either fast or slow. i live in a town that is not that big and the freeway is not packed like the freeways in most big cities. also i have gotten my share of tickets and such...so dont be mad at me if you got a ticket for doing 75 in a 65 (u probably looked like a hoodlum or were not nice to the cop or something)

ps i'm not trying to get attention, just trying to share an experience

pss also going alot slower now, since i got my chance

psss you guys fight and flame alot, i thought we all buddies

 

I threw no flames. Just pointed out how ironic getting nabbed for something minor can be when we all know we've been well past the legal limit and gotten away with it.

 

cool
if you didnt flame then its all jesus(good). i was only saying that to the people who did flame.

 

wtf. I have never gotten a warning nothing. Must be the "special" treatment for me.

got pulled over 5 times, got 5 tickets.

 

Honestly, I think you guys are all arguing something that has no answer and that will not please anyone. The real point is we all have Public driver’s licenses. When we got those lic's... we agreed to certain laws on the road. It seems that we have forgotten about that?

Also, what does it mean to have a ticket? Does it mean that you are in-fact doing something wrong... or does it mean that the citing officer was a witness to something he thinks was wrong and you have the right to contest that claim?

Laws are inherently vague because you need some flexibility to capture items no one would have thought about.

If you are intentionally doing something wrong (knowing the speed in an area and exceeding it) then you are intentionally subjecting yourself to the risk of being caught. When you get caught, regardless of it is several times on the same day or once ever couple decades, you have to realize that you were caught PROBABLY because you were doing something wrong. NOW, if you are incorrectly caught for something... there is a system in place for you to deal with that as well. Learn how to properly deal with those things in that venue.

As for myself, I have had various citations in my driving tenure. I average about 1 moving violation every 1.5 years. Was I doing something that could possibly be considered wrong for each one of those, YES. Along the way... I learned I had a voice in the court system... I fight all my tickets. I am proud to say that today... I have read and understand most of the C.V.C laws in the full C.V.C manual and when I break the law, I know what I am being cited for. I also know what process needs to be followed on the part of the police officer. Coupling all that knowledge, I am able to put together a case which I can take to court and maintain my clean driving record. I have received tickets, but I maintain a clean record. That is key folks.

One item to note: I don't drive recklessly, I have Zero accidents and in the past 15 years of logging on average of about 100 miles a day, I have only had 1 in motion accident where a lady made a right turn from a center lane into my door (her fault) and I tried my best to save from that accident as well... I made the call to let her hit me rather then veer and hit a parked car.

Caution: If you feel compelled to drive in an extreme manor, because you feel you have the skills to do so, then please take it to the track. The public road is for PUBLIC use, the rules in place are for the average driver... not for the special case of YOU. If you have a McLaren that can do 200 MPH and you want to drive that fast... do it on the track because our public roads are not designed with that criteria/usage in mind. Why are people *****ing and moaning on this issue to be responsible? Because, believe it or not, we don't want to see a diminishing number of Evo enthusiasts (owners, drivers, passengers, or everyday people who watch the evo's go by). <Stepping off of soap box>