By Avery on Sep 1, 2008

Trying to get back on topic…
I have not found comments on this site about the recent events in Arizona with photo radar speed enforcement. After one state legislator uttered the hypocritical oxymoron that raising speeding fines would simultaneously reduce speeding AND increase revenues, the rest of the legislature and the Governor acted to at least reduce the hypocrisy by effectively decriminalizing the photo radar. Automated citations neither assess points, nor are reported to insurance. Plus, locations and times of photo radar are published in advance! In effect if not in name, speeding is a tax, not a crime, in Arizona, when assessed automatically (e.g., photo radar). I would like to see analysis by the principles in NWA on how and why this may be a good thing or not.

By Freddy on Aug 17, 2008

On 20 July a Montgomery County speed camera recorded me at 41 in a 30mph on Connecticut Ave northbound and E.Kirke St 6:30PM. Cost me $40 (so far) and probably points to a clean driving license to rush to a 6:30 commitment in the neighborhood. Speed differential influences accident frequency more than vehicle speed.

By Point Special on Aug 7, 2008

And what’s the speed limit on 355/290/53? Isn’t it 55 MPH? Nobody drives 55… It’s either 0 (near Schaumburg), 15 (accident) or 80 (everywhere else).

By George on Aug 7, 2008

80-80 is NOT egregious.

That is the traffic flow on the new I-355 extension.
Flat, straight, and three lanes, with nearly virgin pavement.

Blago has got to go! (so does Daley)

By PointSpecial on Aug 7, 2008

Illinois wants to get in on the action of using traffic tickets to fund other programs…

http://www.suntimes.com/news/metro/blagojevich/1095739,CST-NWS-blago07.article

By Randy on Aug 7, 2008

James says:
“Far more than what or where? If you’re comparing with the US Interstate system, you’re a little short. The US has 47,000 miles or over 75,000 kilometers of Interstates, not counting the Interstate-grade but excluded mileage such as the Hollywood Freeway (US 101). Germany has 12,000 kilometers of Bundesautobahnen. You’re only off by a factor of 6.”

James my point exactly. Us has only 75,000 compared to Geramans 12,000. How much larger is the Us than Germany in size?

James writes:
“While secondary and tertiary roads (and urban streets) endure higher crash-, injury- and fatality rates, it is not at all clear that “speeding” or even “speed too fast for conditions” *caused* those crashes in the first place. NHTSA does not assign causation although they do want the reader to infer it when they use “speed-related” in their verbiage. That currently includes any vehicle in excess of a posted limit, too fast for conditions, too slow for conditions, and “unsafe lane changes” (their words). So, if you have evidence that is unavailable to NHTSA, you need to present it here. The insurance companies will send buckets of cash your way.”

James it does not matter in a crash if speeding was the cause or not. If it is even involved in an accident it makes the accident worse unless you think that getting hit at 60 mph is better than getting hit at 30 mph. It is a fact that speeding is a primary factor im a certain percentage of accidents. When you pull out onto a road that is at the bottom of a hill you have no control how fast someone is flying over the hill. You just hope there is no one driving 60 mph because they will hit you because their stopping distance is a lot lot farther.

James says:
” {It has been proven that many drivers start driving more and more aggressively. The longer they do it the more aggressive they drive with faster speeds because their confidence level then increases until they have an accident or a near accident or get caught by the police a few times.}

Who proved this? When? Where?”

I do not have the reports in front of me but it was a phsycology report. Did you start driving the first time you started drving at 120 mph? I know there are some that have. I had a classmate at high school that did. He was not at our first reunion for a major reason.

Your reports that you are always referring to are often flawed. Things like miles of road or speed at a location are true and verifiable. Things like cause of accidents and miles driven in the US are far more complex. An example : There may be a hundred different factors that make up the results what a report should be showing. How many of these factors are used in a report? 10? 20? To get a report of miles driven to be accurate you would need hundreds of thousands of sample points on our roadways to be close to accurate. The same is true for miles driven on interstates. Our roads heve hundreds of variables in them from visibility road conditons turns onramps and it goes on and on. There are very few reports that show the exact reasons and percentages why things happen on our roads.

By James Young on Aug 6, 2008

Randy writes: {First it is a proven fact that expressways/interstate roads are the safest roads in a country.}

Yep, so far so good. Why, then, do highway patrols focus on the safest roads?

{ If a country has more of these it is going to be safer. Germany has far more multilane roadways also making it even safer.}

Far more than what or where? If you’re comparing with the US Interstate system, you’re a little short. The US has 47,000 miles or over 75,000 kilometers of Interstates, not counting the Interstate-grade but excluded mileage such as the Hollywood Freeway (US 101). Germany has 12,000 kilometers of Bundesautobahnen. You’re only off by a factor of 6.

{ In the US the standard interstate has only two lanes going one direction except near major cities making large differences in speed between the two lanes at times. Interstate roads have cars all driving the same direction and limited merging traffic from other roads compared to roads in towns or even rural roads in the country.}

Just like the autobahnen. Note, however, that US standard lanes are slightly wider than their German counterpart but the autobahnen uses a thicker, stronger base.

{ Speeding on these other roads causes a lot more deaths and injuries and accidents.}

While secondary and tertiary roads (and urban streets) endure higher crash-, injury- and fatality rates, it is not at all clear that “speeding” or even “speed too fast for conditions” *caused* those crashes in the first place. NHTSA does not assign causation although they do want the reader to infer it when they use “speed-related” in their verbiage. That currently includes any vehicle in excess of a posted limit, too fast for conditions, too slow for conditions, and “unsafe lane changes” (their words). So, if you have evidence that is unavailable to NHTSA, you need to present it here. The insurance companies will send buckets of cash your way.

{The other roads often follow the contour of the land having far more small hills and turns and cross streets than interstate roadways making it far more likely to have accidents.}

The autobahnen follow the contours of the land, utilizing wide sweeping curves that help keep drivers awake and alert.

{That being said it is still more dangerous to travel an interstate road at a faster speed than to have everyone drive slower speed.}

Source, please.

{It has been proven that many drivers start driving more and more aggressively. The longer they do it the more aggressive they drive with faster speeds because their confidence level then increases until they have an accident or a near accident or get caught by the police a few times.}

Who proved this? When? Where?

{James you are all about proof. All I can say is how did you get to be as old as you are without killing yourself reading some book while you are driving trying to figure out what you are to do next. Too bad you can not think for yourself.}

You are talking about establishing public policy and that requires a solid, quantifiable basis of knowledge rather than the guesswork that has generated so much of our legal framework, e.g., Nixon’s establishment of the NMSL in the hopes that it would do something about the embargo, not to mention make him look assertive in the face of the looming impeachment. I have this old-fashioned belief that laws (public policy) must actually work, hence the demand for proof.

By Randy on Aug 6, 2008

James you are all about proof. All I can say is how did you get to be as old as you are without killing yourself reading some book while you are driving trying to figure out what you are to do next. Too bad you can not think for yourself.

By James Young on Aug 6, 2008

Randy: Virtually none of that is true, ceertainly not provable. I’ll deall with this when I get some time later tonight. :(

By Randy on Aug 6, 2008

Doug I have to comment on your Germany statistics. First it is a proven fact that expressways/interstate roads are the safest roads in a country. If a country has more of these it is going to be safer. Germany has far more multilane roadways also making it even safer. In the US the standard interstate has only two lanes going one direction except near major cities making large differences in speed between the two lanes at times. Interstate roads have cars all driving the same direction and limited merging traffic from other roads compared to roads in towns or even rural roads in the country. Speeding on these other roads causes a lot more deaths and injuries and accidents. The other roads often follow the contour of the land having far more small hills and turns and cross streets than interstate roadways making it far more likely to have accidents.

That being said it is still more dangerous to travel an interstate road at a faster speed than to have everyone drive slower speed. Every year I see dozens of cars going in the ditch, usually because of too fast for conditions. People are used to driving the speed limit or more and slow down only slightly when roads are not 100%. There are days in the winter where you see a car in the ditch every mile or so. During good conditions there are far fewer accidents but when they do have them and when they are going very fast they can and often are bad. It has been proven that many drivers start driving more and more aggressively. The longer they do it the more aggressive they drive with faster speeds because their confidence level then increases until they have an accident or a near accident or get caught by the police a few times.

You said that you increased your speed from 90+ mph to 125+ mph for your last 25 miles or so of your trip to make dinner on time. Do you realize that you only saved 4 minutes or less driving like crazy decreasing you mileage by a large percentage and increasing pollution and increasing your chance of death even if it is a small amount.

By tracker on Aug 6, 2008

There are national standards for all interstate roads. Federal highways maintained and subsidized by tax dollars from federal fuel taxes at the pump pay for the building and upkeep of federal interstates. The state tax pays for the matching funds to D.C., and local taxes pay for local funding. How do you think the federal government got all fifty states to lower the standard to 55 mph under the Carter Administration.

The problem lies with the fact that no two drivers in separate vehicles drive comparatively the same. Every limit is simply a set standard and drivers are not free to set their standard above the one set. The standard is legal by the codes and ordinances of the local jurisdiction. I am sorry to say that no matter how small the percentages are that nation-wide we have jurisdictions that use enforcement of speeding violations for revenue and not safety, they have the legal right without setting limits on quotas.

I have had too many people tell me how much our local revenues are enhanced by out-of jurisdiction travelers who simply passed a sign lowering the speed from 55 to 45 at a time of day when no one is on the road and most people are asleep because they travel a lot. Most of these are fines over $100.00 for less than 15 mph over because local politics says ten miles over the limit is Ok. We ticket 11 and more.

My protest is that some officers feel every stop no matter how trivial deserves a citation. Since joining NMA I have watched my driving and read the articles and blogs concerning speeding tickets, and do not fully agree that speeding is a primary reason for traffic stops. Red light cameras, traffic congestion and numerous other problems related to driving incite behaviors in normally rational people which leads them to monumental irrational decisions which should be questioned by LEOs’

I personally have been given other peoples citations because the LEO would not give me the courtesy of allowing me to speak. Those are the citations I go to court over because my speed, all five or six miles over the posted maximum makes me the easiest one to pull over.

How easy is it to clock the average speeder at 80 or more mph on the freeways at rush hour and give it to an out of county resident. This was not the case in my stop. The officer could not pull over the driver ahead of me because oncoming traffic, double lines showing he was not exercising caution if he did pass, and the fact I tried to keep my 4 cylinder stick-shift vehicle under the 45 mph limit climbing hills and braking downhill while maneuvering around corners because he was tailgating me.

The vehicle in front of me crossed the county line when my revenue agent finally turned on his Blue-lights special. This is an off the wall town that has recently voted out the riff-raff and still practice traffic enforcement, but no longer with the percentages they did in the past.

By Randy on Aug 5, 2008

Doug to keep it short, 41 mpg on my car right now with an epa highway rating of 35 mpg. That was with mixed highway and some stop and go driving. Not at 100 mph for sure.

By JOE on Aug 5, 2008

Randy, go back and check any of my posts. I’ve never said what you have proposed. You have me mixed up with someone else. What is my agenda?

By Doug on Aug 5, 2008

Although I pledged not to do it, I am sort-of responding to Randy’s comments.

Last year, Germany had the lowest TOTAL amount of deaths on its highways since 1953 - the year it began keeping records. Speed on unrestricted portions of the Autobahnen are usually between 130 and 160Km/h (that’s about 80-100MPH in US measurement). Two weeks ago, I drove from my apartment in Kaiserslautern to Baden Baden and back. Door to door, I averaged 9,6L/100Km (that’s slightly over 24,5MPG US). Traffic was fairly heavy going there so, in unlimited sections, I was not able to drive much over 150Km/h (93MPH) and only for brief periods. Coming back, I drove a little faster until I was within about 40Km from home where traffic became fairly light. Here, I was able to run at 200-210Km/h (about 125-130MPH). I usually don’t drive much over 180 but I was running late and didn’t want to miss dinner.

It seems, when the government and its patsies rant about how dangerous speed is and how it wastes natural resources, they always ignore Germany. Germany’s autobahn death rate is 3,22/100Million Km whereas the US death rate is 5,22. And at ca. $9,50 for a US Gallon of gasoline, no one is wasting fuel. Vehicles are NEVER left idling, traffic lights are turned OFF when not needed, most lightly traveled intersections are controlled by YIELD signs or traffic circles, drivers turn off their motors when standing at train crossings or long traffic lights and many people from all walks of life and income levels use their bicycles for short distances.

Germany showed a long time ago speed does not kill. Would fuel be saved if a speed limit were imposed? Maybe, if it did not cause more traffic congestion as it has in Italy. If a speed limit were imposed, among other negative economic consequences, a freedom would be lost. Germany is a highly regulated Country and the Autobahn is a place where the heavy hand of government is lifted. Fast driving is as cherished a right as guns are in the United States.

Gee- maybe I got off the subject a little but each time I visit this blog, I’m glad I no longer have to tolerate driving in the US.

By Highway on Aug 5, 2008

randy, I hate to respond to you because you’re an inglorious internet troll, but I have to say that your logical fallacies and willful ignorance of what people actually say repeatedly indicate that you are not trying to have a dialogue. You’re just yammering on and on. Please find another site to do so on.

By Randy on Aug 5, 2008

Yes Joe or James I do not believe your agenda. Anyone that says it is safe to drive 50 to 60 mph in town in a 35 mph zone should be locked up. Anyone that says it is safer to have everyone drive 80 to 100 mph on 2 lane interstates with truck traffic will never convince me that it is safer to do so. Anyone that says it does not take much if any more fuel driving 80 to 100 mph is not going to convince me that it is true. The facts support me. Not the facts that are made up or exagerated or inferred like what is brought up here.

By JOE on Aug 5, 2008

Let me try this again…

{you will not believe anything that does not support your agenda.)

Randy, look who’s talking.

By JOE on Aug 5, 2008

Randy, look who’s talking.

By Randy on Aug 3, 2008

James Young maybe I was wrong in saying it was you that said that miles driven calculations are incorrect. It is a supported statement by NMA that says such figures are not accurate. You can look that up. The states were picked because they were surrounding states to Iowa and Iowa was looking to see what speed increases would do to their states and why not look at surrounding states? Would you thinik it is smarter to look at states 1000 miles away? As I have said all along, you will not believe anything that does not support your agenda.

By James Young on Aug 3, 2008

{No james again you are showing your ignorance. This is a report done in and for Iowa. The states picked are surrounding states to Iowa.}

We have no assurance the data agree with federally-reported data (and no, I’m not going to look it up).

{As you have said in the past reports that show miles driven are not accurate. You said that many times. why use it in calculations then? This report shows the truth. There was not one state that was picked but there was several and they all showed the same thing.}

That’s why they were picked. Where exactly have I alleged that miles driven (as in VMT) are not accurate and under what context? If you do not understand why measures of activity are required for valid comparisons of events related to activity, then I cannot help you.

By Randy on Aug 3, 2008

No james again you are showing your ignorance. This is a report done in and for Iowa. The states picked are surrounding states to Iowa.

As you have said in the past reports that show miles driven are not accurate. You said that many times. why use it in calculations then? This report shows the truth. There was not one state that was picked but there was several and they all showed the same thing.

By James Young on Aug 3, 2008

Randy writes: {I see no problem with absolute numbers and by the way there are percentage changes shown. It is 10 times better than most of the other reports that have been displayed here. Many others show only one state. The report is also more realistic because the mid-west roads for the most part are less congested than some roads in other states except for the large cities like Madison WI.}

Bill got 100 hits last baseball season; Tom got 75 hits. Which one is the better hitter? Bill had 525 at-bats for an average – a rate – of .190, below the Mendoza line. Tom had 200 at-bats for an average of .375, enough for the league batting championship.

What the Iowa data fail to tell us is the rate at which these fatalities occurred, i.e., the number of vehicle miles traveled, a measure of activity.

Do you have any idea why these states were chosen? Because the data showed what the author wanted to show, i.e., they were cherry-picked to demonstrate a desired outcome. Do you want me to do the same thing and show an opposite outcome? Or do you want to use the data from all 50 states (+ DC) so we can get a better understanding of the phenomenon and develop a policy to address it?

{I forgot the report is written so that anyone can read and understand that. Something that you do not like because you can not interpret it for everyone.}

Such reports are available for use by the public. I would prefer not to have to interpret them.

By Randy on Aug 3, 2008

I forgot the report is written so that anyone can read and understand that. Something that you do not like because you can not interpret it for everyone.

By Randy on Aug 3, 2008

james I see no problem with absolute numbers and by the way there are percentage changes shown. It is 10 times better than most of the other reports that have been displayed here. Many others show only one state. The report is also more realistic because the mid-west roads for the most part are less congested than some roads in other states except for the large cities like Madison WI.

By James Young on Aug 3, 2008

It’s cherry-picked data and it deals with absolute numbers rather than rates.