 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / September 2005Tragic rail equivalent of 90 in a 25 zone
"I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." (Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving) ---------- ALERT! We interrupt the regularly scheduled r.a.d. liar-fest to bring you the latest news from the real word: http://www.suntimes.com/output/news/18train.html "A commuter train was going almost 60 miles per hour over the speed limit just before it derailed, killing two people and injuring dozens, the acting chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board said Sunday." [The speed limit was 10 MPH on that section of Chicago track.] ---------- Be it trains, planes or automobiles, it's all part of the same "whinery" denial. Already, someone in r.a.d. is preparing to convince me that speeding trains have no relation to speeding cars and 60/10 is nothing like 90/25. "You see, Carl, trains are on rails and the frictional coefficient of a specific steel used in Illinois creates conditions that...blah, blah, blah...which means there is NO comparison with a speeding car on asphalt, see? SEE?!" Oh yeah, I see how creatively stupid y'all can be. But once again, let's debunk those tall tales with another trip to the real world: http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news?p=driver+car+speeding+crash&fr=FP-tab-n ews-t&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8 This time I chose Yahoo! News, for those who think I've been paying Google to post fake speeding articles. Or isn't that part of your big conspiracy theory yet? Still getting adequate mileage from the old cops/revenue angle? C.T. (casting pearls to swine since the late 90s) http://www.geocities.com/aggressive_driving/ > "I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." > (Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving) [quoted text clipped - 20 lines] > conditions that...blah, blah, blah...which means there is NO comparison > with a speeding car on asphalt, see? SEE?!" <snip> Carl... Carl honey, you should put a bit more thought into your cute little posts. See sweetheart, mentioning anything about planes in your uneducated rants about speed shows your extreme ignorance. An average jet powered commuter plane travels at .8 Mach. You do know what Mach means don't you? Just in case you don't, .8 Mach is over 500mph. Wow! Traveling by plane is the safest and the fastest form of mass transport available in the modern world. Did I just say safest, *and* fastest?? I most certainly did! Double Wow! I like how you conveniently left out a lot of important bits in your post. Like, the train driver had only been on the job for 45 days, and he was traveling at 69mph through a 10mph *intersection*. Why don't we compare traveling at 69mph through a school car park, with traveling at 114mph in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the day, on a straight, flat, empty, motorway/interstate/autobahn. I do like the way you've tried to exploit this tragic accident in which two women died, to try and prove your silly point. Well done. Now back in your box. > http://www.geocities.com/aggressive_driving/ www.abd.org.uk www.roadsense.com.au www.safespeed.org.uk  SignatureSL "The essence of propaganda consists in winning people over to an idea so sincerely, so vitally, that in the end they succumb to it utterly and can never again escape from it" Joseph Goebbels - Nazi Minister of Propaganda, 1933 - 1945 > > "I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." > > (Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving) [quoted text clipped - 27 lines] > jet powered commuter plane travels at .8 Mach. You do know what Mach > means don't you? Just in case you don't, .8 Mach is over 500mph. Wow! Are you implying that cars and planes should have the same speed limit. Most (if not all) airplane pilots obey the restrictions on supersonic flight without bitching about government "revenue agents" or insurance company conspiracies. > Traveling by plane is the safest and the fastest form of mass transport > available in the modern world. Did I just say safest, *and* fastest?? > I most certainly did! Double Wow! So? > I like how you conveniently left out a lot of important bits in your > post. Like, the train driver had only been on the job for 45 days, and > he was traveling at 69mph through a 10mph *intersection*. What relevance does that have? > Why don't we compare traveling at 69mph through a school car park, with > traveling at 114mph in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the day, [quoted text clipped - 19 lines] > > Joseph Goebbels - Nazi Minister of Propaganda, 1933 - 1945 >>>"I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." >>>(Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving) [quoted text clipped - 33 lines] > flight without bitching about government "revenue agents" or insurance > company conspiracies. That would be because said restrictions are set by reasonable, educated government bodies, don't you think? Therefor the pilots don't need to complain as the great majority of rules and regulations are reasonable and make sense. Can you ever imagine an angry group of nimbys who have moved underneath a flightpath successfully campaigning for a 25mph speed limit on all planes flying overhead? No, that would be utterly stupid and routinely ignored, and no doubt the relevant aerospace authorities would say that to the campaigners in as many words. Now can you imagine the same group of nimbys who have moved near a busy road successfully campaigning to have the speed limit lowered from 55mph to 35mph? That would be just as stupid, and just routinely ignored, however it's quite possible that the limit would still be lowered, isn't it? Road rules and road safety practices stopped being set by educated specialist bodies a long time ago. I don't know quite how you got the impression that I was suggesting speed limits on planes, I was making fun of Carl's reference to planes in his post, as it's like comparing apples and oranges. >>Traveling by plane is the safest and the fastest form of mass transport >>available in the modern world. Did I just say safest, *and* fastest?? [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > What relevance does that have? If you can't see how the train driver being so inexperienced is relevant, then why are you taking part in this discussion? >>Why don't we compare traveling at 69mph through a school car park, with >>traveling at 114mph in the middle of nowhere, in the middle of the day, [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] >>www.roadsense.com.au >>www.safespeed.org.uk SignatureSL "The essence of propaganda consists in winning people over to an idea so sincerely, so vitally, that in the end they succumb to it utterly and can never again escape from it" Joseph Goebbels - Nazi Minister of Propaganda, 1933 - 1945 > "I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." > (Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving)\ The fact that you have to go back 4 years to quote someone who supports going 90 in a 25 just shows how far fetched your claim of r.a.d. participants is. >> "I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." >> (Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving)\ > > The fact that you have to go back 4 years to quote someone who supports > going 90 in a 25 just shows how far fetched your claim of r.a.d. > participants is. Furthermore, he trims to make it look like something different. The full quote: "I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no. It was the middle of nowhere with great visibility. It just happened that it was a county road, so it was marked at the default speed for residential areas. No one lives on that road. It is empty fields on both sides. I was safer on that road at 90mph in a 25mph than I was yesterday at 15mph in a 30 mph zone (construction and pedestrians)." http://groups.google.com/group/alt.law-enforcement.traffic/msg/118b1f8a49c41f93? dmode=source&hl=en > ALERT! We interrupt the regularly scheduled r.a.d. liar-fest to bring > you the latest news from the real word: [quoted text clipped - 15 lines] > conditions that...blah, blah, blah...which means there is NO comparison > with a speeding car on asphalt, see? SEE?!" At the same time, a train in Italy ran from Rome to Naples at 348 km/h - that's over 216 mph. http://www.ansa.it/infrastrutturetrasporti/notizie/rubriche/ferrovie/2005 0915200333627094.html > > ALERT! We interrupt the regularly scheduled r.a.d. liar-fest to bring > > you the latest news from the real word: [quoted text clipped - 18 lines] > At the same time, a train in Italy ran from Rome to Naples at 348 km/h - > that's over 216 mph. What's the speed limit on the Rome to Naples railroad? > http://www.ansa.it/infrastrutturetrasporti/notizie/rubriche/ferrovie/2005 > 0915200333627094.html > "I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." > (Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving) [quoted text clipped - 23 lines] > Oh yeah, I see how creatively stupid y'all can be. But once again, > let's debunk those tall tales with another trip to the real world: This is pure railroad cop propoganda. They love writing big tickets to trains. Them and the insurance industry hate John Q TrainConductor. Everyone knows it was the fault of LRB (Left Railway Blockers) and female Asian conductors who don't know what the hell they are doing. Anyway the railroad should have upgraded that section of track a long time ago. It was their fault too. It had nothing to do with speed. If anything the train was going to slow. The accident would not have happened had it been going faster. To say otherwise implies that you have a small penis. > http://news.search.yahoo.com/search/news?p=driver+car+speeding+crash&fr=FP-tab-n ews-t&toggle=1&cop=&ei=UTF-8 > [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > http://www.geocities.com/aggressive_driving/ Just goes to prove that the railroads are more accurately posted than the roadways. Their limits are real limits. Not revenue generating limits. The same guys who set the RR limits should be settin interstate limits. Then we might properly set limits. -------------- Alex > "A commuter train was going almost 60 miles per hour over the speed > limit just before it derailed, killing two people and injuring dozens, > the acting chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board said > Sunday." [The speed limit was 10 MPH on that section of Chicago track.] I knew one of the trolls would bring this up. There's one thing different about rail speed limits, they actually have a damn good chance of reflecting REALITY instead of POLITICS and REVENUE collection. Think about it next time you are driving an interstate at 70mph carl. You know, the interstate, where in some states they are still posted with 55 mph speed limit signs from the 70s. > "I've gone 90 in a 25mph zone. Was it irresponsible? Heck no." > (Marc Whinery, 2001, rec.autos.driving) <article snipped> Q: Who gives a f.ck? A: Nobody *PLONK* |
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
|
©2008 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.