 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / August 2005Make penalties for speeding proportional to the vehicle weight
The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as the vehicle weight does. This measure would also induce people to drive small cars and thereby reduce our need to send soldiers in for foreign countries to die for our oil humbubba@smart.net >The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. >Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as >the vehicle weight does. This measure would also induce people to >drive small cars and thereby reduce our need to send soldiers in for >foreign countries to die for our oil Another one I'd like to see is emissions requirements linked to passenger-miles-per-emmision, not per amount of fuel burned. That also currently favors gas-guzzlers.  SignatureRick (Richard Allen) Hohensee Party of one candidate, President of the United States of America humbubba@smart.net Maryland, USA Ground troops out of Iraq Put the CIA under INS Semi-legalize drugs Prosecute Bush Tighten the borders Isolate Israel Tax churches halve military aquisitions platform ftp://smart.net/pub/humbubba/platform2 >The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. >Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as >the vehicle weight does. This measure would also induce people to >drive small cars and thereby reduce our need to send soldiers in for >foreign countries to die for our oil You should also fine the guys posting the speed limit 100 for every mph under the 85%ile that they set the limit. The fine should occur everday the limit is underposted. Under posting causes more accidents than people safely travelling above and underposted limit. ---------------- Alex > >The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. > >Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > ---------------- > Alex And how do we determine what the 85%ile is? > > >The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. > > >Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > And how do we determine what the 85%ile is? Measure the speed of 200 cars. Then do the math. > > > >The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. > > > >Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Measure the speed of 200 cars. Then do the math. Are you really that stupid? Is anyone that stupid? > > > And how do we determine what the 85%ile is? > > > > Measure the speed of 200 cars. Then do the math. > > Are you really that stupid? Is anyone that stupid? No, I can do the math. Apparently you don't understand what "percentile" means. > And how do we determine what the 85%ile is? Simple: it's 20mph above whatever's posted. Around 8/25/2005 11:46 AM, Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) <http://tinyurl.com/65nqz> wrote: >>You should also fine the guys posting the speed limit 100 for every mph under >>the 85%ile that they set the limit. The fine should occur everday the limit [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > And how do we determine what the 85%ile is? Easy: A competent traffic engineer measures it. Seeing as how the procedure has been described to you numerous times previously, and how the specifics involve some complex mathematical principals that you couldn't hope to comprehend (like addition and division), I won't bother you with details yet again. Signature~/Garth "I am patient with stupidity but not with those who are proud of it." - Edith Sitwell (Mail pgp@v6stang.com for secure contact information) > Around 8/25/2005 11:46 AM, Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) > <http://tinyurl.com/65nqz> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > Easy: A competent traffic engineer measures it. HAHAHA. And how does he measure it, you idiot?. Oh hell - the whole notion is just crazy. Who ever heard of passing a law where the PLAN is for 15% of the citizens to violate it?????????????????????????? Around 8/26/2005 8:21 AM, Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) <http://tinyurl.com/65nqz> wrote: >>Around 8/25/2005 11:46 AM, Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) >><http://tinyurl.com/65nqz> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > HAHAHA. And how does he measure it, As I said and you snipped: Seeing as how the procedure has been described to you _numerous_ times previously, and how the specifics involve some complex mathematical principals that you couldn't hope to comprehend (like addition and division), I won't bother you with details yet again. Signature~/Garth "I am patient with stupidity but not with those who are proud of it." - Edith Sitwell (Mail pgp@v6stang.com for secure contact information) > Around 8/26/2005 8:21 AM, Aunt Judy (Pride of Diarrhea) > <http://tinyurl.com/65nqz> wrote: [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > comprehend (like addition and division), I won't bother you with details > yet again. Well, actually, if you have a speed measuring device and some graph paper, you can just make a crude speed distribution curve by just marking the speeds down as cars pass. Then you can eyeball the 85th on the curve. Alternately you could just measure the speed of, say, 1000 cars, arrange the data as above, and count backwards 149 vehicles from the fastest. No math required! it really is THAT easy. Too difficult for Judy perhaps, but still pretty trivial as far as manipulating numbers goes. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel > > >The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. > > >Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > And how do we determine what the 85%ile is? It's been explained over and over, and yet you're still too f.cking retarded to comprehend it? No wonder you can't get anything right except for your visits to the bath house. is? >It's been explained over and over, and yet you're still too f.cking >retarded to comprehend it? No wonder you can't get anything right >except for your visits to the bath house. Talking to yourself again? Just because you repeat it to yourself does not make it true. There are many smart people who have studied traffic for many years and come to the conclusion that the 85%ile speed is the safest speed to set speed limits. Figuring out that speed it very simple, but requires some work. You find a section of the road where there is nothing that would interfere with the smooth flow of traffic. It also means you don't do it rush hour or when the volume of traffic would slow down traffic. You also do it on a day when the weather conditions won't influence traffic. What you are looking for are the most ideal conditions. You then use a device to measure the speed of cars on the road. The other thing to keep in mind is that if you use radar, it should not be on one of the regular police frequencies because you don't want cars with radar detectors slowing down. Once you have the data, you figure out what speed 85% of the cars are traveling at, or below. A simple math problem. -------------- Alex How about making the penalty for trolling proportional to the number of newsgroups spammed? > > >The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. > > >Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > > And how do we determine what the 85%ile is? Determining percentiles is really not all that difficult - Excel, SAS, database programs all have one or more canned utility to crank out the values from a database of numbers, or you can do it the old fashioned way too. The process shouldn't be the issue. The agenda of those who push this inane concept should be the focus of all our attention. Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe that speed no matter whether it is posted or not. Some will go faster and some will go slower, providing the basis for a nice average as well as establishing percentiles. They feel that the observed speed at the 85th percentile (85% of the drivers are going slower) should be the posted maximum, no matter what traffic safety engineers and the police think is prudent for the average (not highly experienced) driver. They conveniently ignore the tendency of percentile values to vary and the tendency of drivers to push the posted maximum no matter what it is posted at. They also ignore the fact that many drivers do not possess the skills to handle many roads at such posted speeds. Essentially you have a small group of people looking for a way to validate their desire to exceed the agreed upon speed limit. > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > 85th percentile (85% of the drivers are going slower) should be the > posted maximum, no matter what traffic safety engineers I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. > and the police > think is prudent for the average (not highly experienced) driver. Cops will specify a maximum that will yield the most revenue while causing them the least trouble. What makes anybody think that they have the faintest clue about prudence and the abilities of average drivers? > They > conveniently ignore the tendency of percentile values to vary and the [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > have a small group of people looking for a way to validate their desire > to exceed the agreed upon speed limit. Wait. Some people want to drive faster and some want to drive slower, but I NEVER agreed to any speed limit anywhere on earth. I wonder what an election to determine the maximum freeway speed would show... SignatureCheers, Bev ==================================================================== "My parents just came back from a planet where the dominant lifeform had no bilateral symmetry, and all I got was this stupid F-Shirt." >>Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there >>is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 25 lines] > NEVER agreed to any speed limit anywhere on earth. I wonder what an election > to determine the maximum freeway speed would show... I think 3x10^8 m/s is a speed limit we can all agree on :) nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel >I think 3x10^8 m/s is a speed limit we can all agree on :) I'm holding out for the OTHER c, the one that's at least as big as Aleph-1. Perhaps we could compromise on aleph-null? SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. >I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO >practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. I'm sure I could think of a Professional Engineer or two who will tell you with a straight face that it's 55mph. SignatureThere's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can result in a fully-depreciated one. > >I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO > >practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. > > I'm sure I could think of a Professional Engineer or two who will tell > you with a straight face that it's 55mph. Many become engineers because they can't meet the requirements to become scientists. SignatureCheers, Bev ============================================= You need only two tools: WD-40 and duct tape. If it doesn't move and it should, use WD-40. If it moves and shouldn't, use duct tape. >>>I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO >>>practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Many become engineers because they can't meet the requirements to become > scientists. HEY!!!!! seriously, it's generally the ones that append "P.E." to their signature in non-professional correspondence that you need to worry about. nate (then some engineers become project managers because they consider ramen a snack, not a lifestyle...) Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel > >>>I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO > >>>practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > HEY!!!!! Well, that's what the scientists tell me! > seriously, it's generally the ones that append "P.E." to their signature > in non-professional correspondence that you need to worry about. I used to occasionally secretary for a CE like that. He got his shorts in a wad because some unqualified serf referred to himself as an engineer and wrote a 3-page single-spaced letter to The Authorities demanding some sort of punishment for the guy. He was a jerk in other ways too. > (then some engineers become project managers because they consider ramen > a snack, not a lifestyle...) Campbell's fat-free when you can find it. The real stuff can kill you! SignatureCheers, Bev ************************************************* Never argue with a woman holding a torque wrench. >>I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO >>practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. > >I'm sure I could think of a Professional Engineer or two who will tell >you with a straight face that it's 55mph. Care to name some names, because I cannot think of any. John Lansford, PE -- The unofficial I-26 Construction Webpage: http://users.vnet.net/lansford/a10/ >>I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO >>practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. > >I'm sure I could think of a Professional Engineer or two who will tell >you with a straight face that it's 55mph. Only if they have political ambitions. -------------- Alex > > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > I would suspect that traffic safety engineers would say that there is NO > practical maximum safe speed for a straight empty freeway. Since most of us have yet to find such a freeway, please tell me what your point is. > > and the police > > think is prudent for the average (not highly experienced) driver. > > Cops will specify a maximum that will yield the most revenue while causing > them the least trouble. Not the sergeants and captains I'm acquainted with. > What makes anybody think that they have the faintest > clue about prudence and the abilities of average drivers? If the cops who observe and ticket the idiotic and sometimes dangerous behaviour of drivers on a daily basis don't know about the abilities and limitations of the driving public I don't know who would. Surely not the proponents of this idiotic 85th percentile idea. > > They > > conveniently ignore the tendency of percentile values to vary and the [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > NEVER agreed to any speed limit anywhere on earth. I wonder what an election > to determine the maximum freeway speed would show... If you want to drive as fast as you want under any conditions then go buy yourself an island somewhere, construct a ring road and have at it. If on the other hand you want to live among other human beings in some sort of society then be prepared to accept some commonly supported restrictions. > -- > Cheers, > Bev > ==================================================================== > "My parents just came back from a planet where the dominant lifeform > had no bilateral symmetry, and all I got was this stupid F-Shirt." > > > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > > > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > Since most of us have yet to find such a freeway, please tell me what > your point is. I take it you've never been to Arizona, New Mexico, Texas, etc. etc. etc. oh, yeah, almost forgot: http://www.silverstateclassic.com/ > > > and the police > > > think is prudent for the average (not highly experienced) driver. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Not the sergeants and captains I'm acquainted with. Cops shouldn't be specifying speed limits to begin with. > > What makes anybody think that they have the faintest > > clue about prudence and the abilities of average drivers? [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > and limitations of the driving public I don't know who would. Surely > not the proponents of this idiotic 85th percentile idea. You mean like traffic safety experts? The above comment makes it clear that you've nothing intelligent to contribute to the discussion, no need to bother reading the rest of your post. nate > > > > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > > > > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > > Cops shouldn't be specifying speed limits to begin with. Yes, they do enforce them. However the statement was made that the police would (if given the chance) specify the maximum that would yield the most revenue. That is clearly wrong. > > > What makes anybody think that they have the faintest > > > clue about prudence and the abilities of average drivers? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > that you've nothing intelligent to contribute to the discussion, no > need to bother reading the rest of your post. Given the level of your comments so far I'm gonna guess that you think that 85th percentile idea makes sense.... > nate > > > > > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > > > > > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 30 lines] > police would (if given the chance) specify the maximum that would yield > the most revenue. That is clearly wrong. Why is it "clearly?" Their enforcement priorities show that they value revenue over safety, so why wouldn't they recommend speed limits to be set for same? Oh, wait, they do, with a few notable exceptions (I do remember a couple threads where it was posted that police had semi-officially given motorists license to speed in grossly underposted areas, but those seem to be the exception that proves the rule.) > > > > What makes anybody think that they have the faintest > > > > clue about prudence and the abilities of average drivers? [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Given the level of your comments so far I'm gonna guess that you think > that 85th percentile idea makes sense.... The level of my comments? You mean based on solid theory and research rather than a feel-good, pulled-out-of-your-a.s number? Hell yeah the 85th percentile theory makes sense, and I double dog dare you to come up with a better one. nate > > > > > > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > > > > > > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 34 lines] > revenue over safety, so why wouldn't they recommend speed limits to be > set for same? Really now. I would hope by now it would be clear that speed enforcement is related to safety. You know, radar guns in 25mph zones by schools, cruisers with radar on clearly marked highways. Etc., etc. the examples are almost endless. Of course as we all know, speed enforcement is not the only law enforcement duty that police offcers perform. What is it about obeying marked speed limits that you find so difficult. > Oh, wait, they do, with a few notable exceptions (I do > remember a couple threads where it was posted that police had > semi-officially given motorists license to speed in grossly underposted > areas, but those seem to be the exception that proves the rule.) Semi-officially giving motorists the license to speed...c'mon gimme a break!!!! > > > > > What makes anybody think that they have the faintest > > > > > clue about prudence and the abilities of average drivers? [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > The level of my comments? You mean based on solid theory and research > rather than a feel-good, pulled-out-of-your-a.s number? Naw, more like the 85th percentile number is pulled from the a-hole of some clown that wants to justify speeding. That's the oldest trick in the book. Ofuscate the real issue by thorwing around a meaningless percentile to create a false sense of scientific precision. Gawd!! > Hell yeah the > 85th percentile theory makes sense, and I double dog dare you to come > up with a better one. Here is a better one. The present maximums are just fine because they balance safety with energy conservation. Actually, with the price of gas approcaching $3.00 per gallon I'm in the mood for more energy conservation, so lets consider dropping the nationwide maximum to 55mph. Makes perfect sense because we will all be safer and save some money too. Whaddya think Nate...good idea right.... > nate > > > > > > > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > > > > > > > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 41 lines] > enforcement is not the only law enforcement duty that police offcers > perform. Then why do I always see cops sitting in the median of a 55 or 65 MPH highway that's flowing at 75 MPH + pulling over speeders and not patrolling school zones or pulling people over for actual dangerous driving? > What is it about obeying marked speed limits that you find so > difficult. See above. I don't like being run off the road. > > Oh, wait, they do, with a few notable exceptions (I do > > remember a couple threads where it was posted that police had [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > Semi-officially giving motorists the license to speed...c'mon gimme a > break!!!! Brent, feel free to step in here. don't have time to google for the news articles at the moment. > > > > > > What makes anybody think that they have the faintest > > > > > > clue about prudence and the abilities of average drivers? [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > the book. Ofuscate the real issue by thorwing around a meaningless > percentile to create a false sense of scientific precision. Gawd!! You mean a-holes like Solomon, Cirillo, and the highway authorities in several states including my own state of Maryland? > > Hell yeah the > > 85th percentile theory makes sense, and I double dog dare you to come [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > > Whaddya think Nate...good idea right.... I agree that conservation is a good idea, but low speed limits won't achieve that end unless people actually obey them, which they won't. They don't now, why would they if you lowered them? nate > > > Why is it "clearly?" Their enforcement priorities show that they value > > > revenue over safety, so why wouldn't they recommend speed limits to be [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > patrolling school zones or pulling people over for actual dangerous > driving? You live in an unusual area if the only police officers you see enforcing speed limits are on the highway. I saw one this morning about a block down from the high school. And I've seen them regularly on the 40mph parkway that cuts through the subdivision. Maybe you spend most of your driving hours on a freeway. Still, if I was a cop and wanted to increase driving safety the quickest I would sit on the Maryland side of the beltway and start nabbing those insane motorcyclists. > > What is it about obeying marked speed limits that you find so > > difficult. [quoted text clipped - 37 lines] > You mean a-holes like Solomon, Cirillo, and the highway authorities in > several states including my own state of Maryland? So far the clowns who perpetuate that myth on this net group. > > > Hell yeah the > > > 85th percentile theory makes sense, and I double dog dare you to come [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > achieve that end unless people actually obey them, which they won't. > They don't now, why would they if you lowered them? People will obey the speed limit and as a side benefit conserve gas IF the limit is enforced fairly and rigorously. It quickly becomes common knowlege that the state or municipality is serious. Case in point is the scrapple capital of Delaware, Bridgeville. Bridgeville PD vigorously (and rightfully) enforce a well marked 25mph limit. Veterans of the route 404 trip to the shore know what the real limit is. Newbies get a quick lesson that 25mph doesn't mean 33mph. > nate >>>>Why is it "clearly?" Their enforcement priorities show that they value >>>>revenue over safety, so why wouldn't they recommend speed limits to be [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > on the 40mph parkway that cuts through the subdivision. Maybe you > spend most of your driving hours on a freeway. yes, I do... > Still, if I was a cop > and wanted to increase driving safety the quickest I would sit on the > Maryland side of the beltway and start nabbing those insane > motorcyclists. IMHO the bikers are FAR, FAR less of a hazard than the "Mr. Magoos" that merge into 75 MPH traffic at 40 and dive for the fast lane with no blinker at all. See that every day, see a truly nutty biker maybe once a week. Just today I saw someone doing about 30 MPH in the center lane of the Dulles toll road, with a mattress on the roof apparently held on by twine. Both driver and passenger had an arm out the window and were trying to hold the mattress from flying away. Just a normal, everyday occurrance... >>>What is it about obeying marked speed limits that you find so >>>difficult. [quoted text clipped - 39 lines] > > So far the clowns who perpetuate that myth on this net group. And everyone who's ever done a serious study on the subject. Even the authorities who actually do have power to set the speed limits at least pay lip service to the 85th percentile method, even if they are hamstrung by legislatively-mandated state maxima and/or don't always practice what they preach. There IS NO QUESTION that the 85th %ile method is the single most legitimate method ever devised for setting fair, enforceable speed limits that balance efficient travel with maximum safety for road users. I mean, seriously, have you ever done any research at all to attempt to back up your position? >>>>Hell yeah the >>>>85th percentile theory makes sense, and I double dog dare you to come [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > People will obey the speed limit and as a side benefit conserve gas IF > the limit is enforced fairly and rigorously. Exactly. Non-85th %ile speed limits are not fair. > It quickly becomes common > knowlege that the state or municipality is serious. Case in point is > the scrapple capital of Delaware, Bridgeville. Bridgeville PD > vigorously (and rightfully) enforce a well marked 25mph limit. > Veterans of the route 404 trip to the shore know what the real limit > is. Newbies get a quick lesson that 25mph doesn't mean 33mph. I'm not familiar with the area, but the way you describe it, it sounds like a classic speed trap, not a safety measure. nate Signaturereplace "fly" with "com" to reply. http://home.comcast.net/~njnagel > There IS NO QUESTION that the 85th %ile > method is the single most legitimate method ever devised for setting > fair, enforceable speed limits that balance efficient travel with > maximum safety for road users. (I think this deserves extra emphasis...) Signature~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie. Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave. ******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant." (pgp@v6stang.com for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) > Actually, with the price of > gas approcaching $3.00 per gallon I'm in the mood for more energy > conservation, so lets consider dropping the nationwide maximum to > 55mph. If you're in the mood to conserve, please feel free to do so...YOURSELF! {STP} > (I do remember a couple threads where it was posted that police had > semi-officially given motorists license to speed in grossly underposted > areas, but those seem to be the exception that proves the rule.) That was John Carr, back in July: http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/aa5fe9a31ca97a79 and http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.driving/msg/22d1f193c86cb9ad Signature~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie. Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave. ******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant." (pgp@v6stang.com for secure mail info) --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956) > If you want to drive as fast as you want under any conditions then go > buy yourself an island somewhere, construct a ring road and have at it. > If on the other hand you want to live among other human beings in some > sort of society then be prepared to accept some commonly supported > restrictions. Of course. That doesn't mean, however, that we have to enjoy it. SignatureCheers, Bev ************************************************* Never argue with a woman holding a torque wrench. > Basically you have a small group that would have us believe that there > is a natural speed for every road and drivers on average will observe [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > have a small group of people looking for a way to validate their desire > to exceed the agreed upon speed limit. A small group? like the WADOT? that sort of "small group"? Here is a position paper from my state's dept of trans, the people who actually deal with the issue, from the controlling side. http://www.ci.kirkland.wa.us/depart/pw/transcom/archive/speedlimit/speedlimitoth eragencies.pdf care to try again? Bernard > The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. > Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as > the vehicle weight does. This measure would also induce people to > drive small cars and thereby reduce our need to send soldiers in for > foreign countries to die for our oil Naw, lets do like a couple of scandinavian countries do...means test the tickets. The more you own the more you get to pay. 45mph in a 25 zone...well, just cough up $500.00 per mile and we'll call it square. I like it!! > > The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to other drivers. > > Only right that the punishment for this deadly crime should go up as [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > zone...well, just cough up $500.00 per mile and we'll call it square. > I like it!! I've heard about that and it's a good idea but it's entirely different from what i'm talking about. Your idea doesn't force the drivers of heavy vehicles to drive more carefully than drivers of small cars and it doesn't encourage people to buy small cars. I say make the fine proportional to the number of X chromosomes the driver has. SignatureJohn Carr (jfc@mit.edu) > I say make the fine proportional to the number of X chromosomes > the driver has. I guess you mean, the number of X chromosomes per cell... unless you are proposing that fat people get fined more? Not that I'd object.. NB. The original proposal looks like a thinly-veiled anti-SUV idea. >> I say make the fine proportional to the number of X chromosomes >> the driver has. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > NB. The original proposal looks like a thinly-veiled anti-SUV > idea. Thinly? > > I say make the fine proportional to the number of X chromosomes > > the driver has. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > NB. The original proposal looks like a thinly-veiled anti-SUV > idea. Thinly-veiled?? All decent people are opposed to these deadlySUVs that psychos like you drive. No need to be coy about that. On 25 Aug 2005 20:37:42 GMT, John F. Carr , said the following in rec.autos.driving... > I say make the fine proportional to the number of X chromosomes > the driver has. Or to how well maintained the vehicle is. In judy's case, the fine would be so high that it would never be able to pay... Signature"If you speed loons would just slow down we wouldn't have a problem. drive them until the holes get too big for that tire-in-a-can stuff to work.Then do what I do and go to pep boys and get a set of used retreads for $50 and repeat." --Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 11/20/04 ref: http://tinyurl.com/bg9n9 :) (: :) (: :) (: :) (: :) (: "Hey stupid - I've tried to fix it and i can't. The cable adjusting nuts are rusted solid." --Laura Bush - Vehicular Homicide (a.k.a. Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, Pride of America, aunt millie and Judy Dairya, among others. See: http://tinyurl.com/ahphj), 6 Apr 2005 11:05:54 -0700 Ref: or9851dpb7a4s8fduf7bf83gab02t9u5rn@4ax.com Ref: http://tinyurl.com/8exv3 They love Spam: boilingpitsofsewage@yahoo.com > The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to > other drivers. Only right that the punishment for this deadly > crime should go up as the vehicle weight does. This > measure would also induce people to drive small cars and > thereby reduce our need to send soldiers in for foreign > countries to die for our oil That's a great idea. I like that idea. Here's another idea that come to mind: Restrict use of freeway, fast lanes to "commuter cars". The designation of any automobile model as a commuter car would be based on an objective set of criteria that includes stability, cornering and handling ability and stopping distance, etc. This designation wouldn't be based on gas mileage or weight, but the criteria would probably eliminate pickups and vans and SUVs anyway. >> The more massive the vehicle, the more risk it poses to >> other drivers. Only right that the punishment for this deadly [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > be based on gas mileage or weight, but the criteria would probably > eliminate pickups and vans and SUVs anyway. Motorcycles! > Motorcycles! Actually, at high speed, the lack of aerodynamics per person is not as good as a small car with two passengers. Furthermore, in heavy traffic, the need for faster reflexes on bikes or the milliseconds it takes to loose control on the bike would lead to really massively bloody pileups. no airbags on a bike. |
Reply to this Message |
 Sign In
 Join
 My Latest Posts My Monitored Threads My Blog My Photo Gallery My Profile My Homepage Start New Thread Enable EMail Alerts Rate this Thread
|
©2009 Advenet LLC Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.