response 26 of 111:

Jun 28 18:31 UTC 2003

i've been recruited to drive to spain. is my US driver's liscence valid?

response 28 of 111:

Jun 28 20:52 UTC 2003

   Re #10: Thanks.  I had missed the articles in the AA News.

response 30 of 111:

Jun 29 17:48 UTC 2003

        Back before Nixon turned many of his fellow Americans into
crooks by lowering the speed limit to 55, there was standards in
place as to when a freeway would be 55 and when a higher limit
could be used.  One of these was freeways in urban areas, or 
possibly measured by distance between exits, where there would
be the possibility of slower traffic, or exits/entrance ramps
that could not be build for longer deceleration/acceleration.

response 32 of 111:

Jun 30 16:12 UTC 2003

Re #20: It varies depending on what part of Michigan you're in, too. 
You're a lot less likely to be warned about road hazards in, say,
Keweenaw County than you are in Washtenaw County.  Up there they don't
generally post "PAVEMENT ENDS" signs, for example.  You're supposed to
notice that there's gravel in front of you. ;>

Re #31: One issue that traffic engineers are just starting to become
aware of is the psychological aspect of speed control.  It turns out
that if you post a road at, say, 30 mph, but build it wide and straight
so it looks like a faster road, people will drive faster.  If you add
stuff that makes the road look more city-like, or more difficult to
navigate, like safety islands or protruding curb areas, people tend to
drive slower.  Happily, a lot of these features are also more friendly
for pedestrians.  A safety island in the center of a major road makes
crossing it a lot safer, for instance, because it breaks it up into two
crossings with a pause to look for traffic in between.

response 34 of 111:

Jun 30 17:34 UTC 2003

re: way back there:  I drive a '96 Plymouth Grand Voyager, light blue.  (It
was cheap.)  When stopped, I was polite and resigned, had my insurance and
registration and stuff ready.  As it turned out, I had forgotten to renew my
license plates (the officer was nice about this; she wrote me a "waiveable
ticket", which basically means taht I had to go out and renew my registration
and present proof and the ticket would go away), so I think that even had the
officer been inclined towards mercy (unlikely, given some of the above
responses), she would have written me a ticket about that anyways.  The
ticket was written for the minimum possible (1-5 over), and the officer
didn't give me any of that "why were you going so fast?  where were you
going?  drive slower in the future" dialogue I usually get when pulled
over.  

This morning, as I drove the same route again, I made some observations.  The
speed limit where I get on (maple) is either 65 or 70 (not sure which; there
are no signs between the entrance and the next sign).  There is a bridge over
the highway a mile or so down the road; the sign there reads "Reduced speed
ahead - 55".  The next sign is the "Speed limit 55" sign, which is at the top
of a downhill leftward curve, at the bottom of which (maybe 1/4 mile from the
sign) is the Main street entrance ramp.  The place where the speed trap was
laid (and it was definitely a speed trap; there were several police cars
waiting there) was about halfway down the curve at a point where the left
shoulder is particularly broad, just barely out of sight of the sign around
the curve, maybe 200 meters past it.  
  In other words, it was a speed trap set up not only to catch people who
ignored the sign, but also anyone who saw the sign and was in the process
of decelerating slowly.  Since it was close to the bottom of a downhill
slope, they probably catch a lot more people than a disinterested observer
might consider to be actually breaking the law.  

So, to review.  The reasons as I see them to obey the speed limit go
something like this:
  1.  To obey the law as a matter of principle. 
  2.  To avoid getting an expensive ticket. 
  3.  To drive safely. 
  4.  To encourage other people to drive more slowly and therefore safely.

Am I missing any?

However...
  2.  I've made what I consider to be a reasonable effort (due diligence,
if you will) to obey the speed limit this past year, and I've gotten two
tickets for my trouble.  Moreover, based on my own observations (above) and
on what other people are saying (ticket quota increased, published speed
traps, etc.), I'm becoming convinced that the Ann Arbor law enforcement
establishment is using tactics that can result in my getting a speeding
ticket even if I am making an active effort to drive with in the speed
limit.  

  3.  As has been said above, the speed limit is often not consistent with
safety.  Sometimes it's too slow for safety, sometimes too fast...  At any
rate, it's clear that every driver has the responsibility to drive safely
to the best of his or her ability, taking into acount the circumstances,
regardless of what the speed limit says.  So, IMO, the speed limit is
essentially irrelevant to safety concerns when driving.  

  4.  Again, it's been observed many times that driving slower than the
surrounding traffic is more dangerous than driving at the same speed.
Obstinately refusing to drive faster than the posted limit is not likely
(IMO) to get other people to slow down, it's more likely to irritate them
and impair their judgement.  This is akin to randomly tapping one's brakes
when someone is tailgating you.  Sure, it might be somewhat satisfying, but
it's almost certainly safer to change lanes or pull over and let them pass
you.  


So, basically, that leaves 1 as the only reason I consider valid for paying
any attention whatsoever to the speed limit, and the more I hear about
speeding tickets being used as a source of revenue rather than as an
attempt to enforce the law, the less I care about this.  After all, if this
is a sort of backhanded taxation, and I'm paying the tax, why shouldn't I
actually *do* the activity they're taxing me for?  If they (the law
enforcement/government community) are going to turn this into a game, why
shouldn't I play the game in such a way as to benefit myself?  Why should I
hold myself to a higher standard of compliance to a set of essentially
arbitrary rules than the bodies who make and enforce those rules?

response 36 of 111:

Jun 30 19:00 UTC 2003

For what it's worth, the point of the "reduced speed ahead" signs is
that you're supposed to reduce your speed before you reach the sign.
Parking tickets have been used as a revenue source for years by A^2.

response 38 of 111:

Jun 30 19:15 UTC 2003

(That sure got flem's goat. But I have no sympathy for him: he was
speeding, by admission, and got a ticket. His anguish ia irrelevant. I
suspect, though, there is more to it: I *don't* make a "reasonable effort
(due diligence, if you will) to obey the speed limit", though I note and
act upon it automatically if not exactly accurately - and very rarely get
speeding tickets (and then only on open empty roads in broad daylight when
I'm going 5 over and there is not a cop or even another driver in sight. I
don't know how they do this....)

response 40 of 111:

Jun 30 20:05 UTC 2003

        It's got more to do with what you drive, than how you drive, unless
you're driving like a complete nut.  I've had flashy or sketchy looking cars
before, and they consistently got attention, and I consistently got tickets.
Ordinary looking cars in good repair don't get as much attemtion, and have
lead to me being more-or-less ticket free.

response 42 of 111:

Jun 30 20:14 UTC 2003

        You hafta ask?

response 44 of 111:

Jun 30 20:18 UTC 2003

        No moving violations.

response 46 of 111:

Jun 30 20:46 UTC 2003

I'm not sure what rane seems to think gets my goat, other than rane himself.
Of course my anguish is irrelevant, as is rane's opinion of it.  
Yes, I was technically speeding, that's what the laser said and I 
believe it.  I've no interest in contesting the ticket.  That's not the 
point.  What is relevant (and, I think, interesting enough to spend time 
discussing) are the reasons for my "anguish", which rane seems to have 
missed.

Briefly, since I'm at work...  With regards to speeding, I don't believe it's
possible to obey the law without what I consider an excessive effort.  The
reason for this is not that the law is unreasonable, but that, as is the
situation for parking tickets, aggressive enforcement is *profitable* 
for the people who enforce the law.  Can you say "conflict of interest"?  

There's more to it than that, but I don't seem to be able to articulate it
briefly right now. 

response 48 of 111:

Jun 30 21:14 UTC 2003

I think flem just had some bad luck. I generally drive the speed limit 
but there are plenty of times when I dont. I could easily get a ticket.