[The CyberPoet]

Unless you refuse to ticket speeders, then I think I like you very much.

We had an officer in Pinellas get dismissed (fired) for this not that far back. He pulled something like 900 traffic stops a year, but only wrote something like 2 DUI's & 4 for wreckless, plus the occasional bad equipment ticket. When called to defend his actions of writing zero speeding tickets (he was a local PD in a department that "owns" a small stretch of I-275 and revenues heavily on the stretch), he said that it was his personal belief that the serious beratings he gave the drivers explaining why they needed to slow down were at least as effective as a civil fine would be. Naturally, the chief wasn't happy...

I believe he was a member of this particular local PD, which is noted for writing tickets for as little as 2mph over the limit... (see SpeedTrap.org ).

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[VFRstar]

I'm not sure how much faith I would put into that site. A department in my county is listed in there. It says they employ photo radar and airplanes. One person even saying he was ticketed by the use of an airplane. This department doesn't have photo radar, and doesn't have the funds or the ability to use airplanes. Pretty funny really. Don't get me wrong, the place IS a speed trap. That little 4 man department writes more tickets than my entire department with greatly outnumbers them.

Just some of the information is incorrect.

I'm sure a lot of the information on this site is real, but don't believe everything there.

[freight dog]

Unless you refuse to ticket speeders, then I think I like you very much.

I don't suppose you see the hypocricy in that statement, either?

Actually, no I was being very consistent. What I was saying was, ticket everyone fairly, or don't ticket at all. If you stick to your standards, I really respect that. If you don't ticket at all, I respect that even more.

I am just kind of a libertarian. I think this country is becoming too much of a police state and any law regulating victimless crimes should be stricken from the books. Speed, in and of itself is a victimless crime. The majority of Americans do it all day, every day with no problems. To paraphrase the gun lobby; speed doesn't kill, accidents do.

[SKNL2]

Uh, surely you must be joking. I suppose the guy in the riced out import sailing down Main St. USA at 95MPH and wiping out into an ice cream stand queue would have done the same thing at the posted speed limit of 35MPH?

While we agree on the fact that speed limits do not immediately mean safe highways, to say that speed doesn't contribute to accidents and severity of accidents is just plain naive.

You cannot have your cake and eat it, too. You are looking at a grey situation with a checkerboard perspective. Ideals are fun in fantasy, but reality is what it is.

Speed is not a victimless crime. Though speed limits may be too low, other traffic is making judgements based on what they expect your speed to be. For instance, if I am attempting to enter a roadway whose speed limit is 45MPH, I should be able to expect the oncoming traffic is travelling at or near 45MPH. If I make my judgement based on that information, and some moron is plowing through at 65 or 70, I will probably be t-boned in a "victimless" crime.

If you don't want a speeding ticket, don't speed. If you choose to speed, you run, and assume, the risk of getting a ticket. Simple as that.

[slayergsxf1]

What? Do I gotta become a cop so I can be a member of the "speed whenever you want" club? Does the word "hypocrite" mean anything to these people?

My bud the trooper speeds like the rest of us ,controled and feeling the groove of a good twisty road....everyone and I mean everyone who owns a bike has gone over the speed limit at some point. whether 5 or 50 MPH over...I should explain my earlier post, we had in our area a VMS speed sign...so everyone with a fast bike car or moped let it fly to see what they could do...not that we all lined up and kept on it just when we happened to be on that road...the road also was about a 1 mile stretch with no intersecting roads...doesnt make it right but it was fun...cyber hit the nail right on the head cheers to his post...

[UH60FXR]

No problem with professional courtesy here Most recent experience being pulled over and let go because of my fire department sticker on my car, was doing 70 in a 45, officer was actually laughing and still on his cel phone when he approached my car, told me to slow it down though. Probably not the most tactical approach on his part if I was psycho or a car thief intent on doing him harm or escaping he would have definitely lost some advantage. I have also been let go when in BDU's, scrubs, and an EMT uniform.

[freight dog]

Well SKNL2, I guess I wasn't specific enough.

The 95 mph accident you describe would fall into an entirely different type of crime, and the actual speed itself is irrelevant. It isn't the fact that he is doing 95 that is the problem here. It is that he failed to use common sense regarding when and where he went that fast. Once there is an accident involved, of course it is no longer a victimless crime, but was the actual crime speeding or blatant disregard for the safety of others by where and when he chose to speed?

There really is no gray area. If no one was injured or killed and no property damaged or destroyed, there can be no victim, ergo a victimless crime.

Even if everyone always drove the speed limit, people would still die every day on the road. A 20 mph accident can still be fatal.

Does that mean obeying speed laws is not a victimless affair as well?

[TheKlic]

I personally think speeding tickets are issued a little excessively and unassured clear distance far too infrequently.
Tailgaters cause so many more wrecks around here. and running red lights
speeding rarely causes any

[kiba]

Speed is not a victimless crime. Though speed limits may be too low, other traffic is making judgements based on what they expect your speed to be. For instance, if I am attempting to enter a roadway whose speed limit is 45MPH, I should be able to expect the oncoming traffic is travelling at or near 45MPH. If I make my judgement based on that information, and some moron is plowing through at 65 or 70, I will probably be t-boned in a "victimless" crime.

If there wern't speed limits, you wouldn't be entering the intersection with the asumption that everyone will be moving at 45...

[The CyberPoet]

While we agree on the fact that speed limits do not immediately mean safe highways, to say that speed doesn't contribute to accidents and severity of accidents is just plain naive.

But can we also agree that artificially low speed limits increase driver risk by making them likely to be less attentive to the situation and increase their feeling of boredom? Several gov't & private studies have pointed this out in the past few years.

I think more than any other "controllable" factors (controllable in the bigger picture sense -- by various gov't bodies, not as individuals), the three primary things we as a society can do to reduce accidents are change the license issuing criteria (more training, harder testing), set red lights to overlap by two seconds instead of having one light turn grean the instant the other turns red (95% reduction in intersection accidents), and increase the level of driver participation in the actual driving experience by removing artificially low speed limits.

There's this funny story I sometimes tell about how the Germans couldn't sell many cars in the USA for the longest time... They built great cars, good acceleration, nimble handling, great technology, high reliability, great pricing even (because of a strong dollar at the time), but they just couldn't move them off the showroom floors. After almost a decade, the German automotive industry brought in American consultants to show them why they weren't getting the market penetration they should. You know what it came down to? Cup holders. Seriously...
Germans are trained to "drive" -- serious training, serious testing, lifetime license. Drive full speed, 100% attention given, and to them that means you take a break when you want a cup of coffee or a soda (time for a cafe or pitstop!). Even the concept of roving the stereo dial (figuratively or literally) is almost lost on them, since standard German car radios have ARDS, which automatically (temporarily) retunes the stereo to whatever station is broadcasting a traffic warning for the duration of that warning... No tendency to retune the stereo every 90 seconds...
Thus, the concept of being able to place an open drink next to the driver was totally lost on their engineers. And because such minor issues as cup holders are actually very critical to a buying American public, it was killing their sales. As soon as the drink holders (& similar conveniences) went in, their sales shot way up. Which to me, says a whole lot about the American driving mentality by comparison...

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[zer0skilz]

Where's the cup holder on my bike, damnit!?

[freight dog]

Good stuff CP. Along those same lines. I would not have a problem with annual training similar to what we do in commercial aviation, with emphasis on the decision making process. It wouldn't have to last several days because cars are much simpler. But a driver simulator complete with realisitic blowouts, little old ladies jumping out in the road, noisy kids in the back seat hitting you over the head with a doll, and black ice everywhere would probably contribute to a much better safety record than random speed traps.

[The CyberPoet]

Good stuff CP. Along those same lines. I would not have a problem with annual training similar to what we do in commercial aviation, with emphasis on the decision making process. It wouldn't have to last several days because cars are much simpler. But a driver simulator complete with realisitic blowouts, little old ladies jumping out in the road, noisy kids in the back seat hitting you over the head with a doll, and black ice everywhere would probably contribute to a much better safety record than random speed traps.

Annual training wouldn't be bad, but a totally new level of training and testing from the outset (from initial licensing) would be much more effective IMHO. For people with existing licenses, either grandfather them in or give them a four-year grace period to complete the conversion. We Germans kid about your Kmart blue-light specials when it comes to driver's licenses -- $30 and an hour later, you're licensed? Mind-blowing.

The simulator would work if it was complex enough (able to change parameters to match specific cars in terms of sliding, etc), but using real cars would probably be better and cheaper if you had to do entire masses of people. In Germany, you go to a private school to learn and test (every town has at least a couple, cities can have literally dozens), and then the instructor certifies you to the judge that you are OK to be licensed... An entire industry in and of itself.

Here's another real-world example from about 2000:
// RANT //
I had bought a VW Golf from a friend who was leaving the country (foriegn exchange student going home) at the last minute, with the intent of turning it over at the start of the next semester. My GF came home and asked if I'd give her the car as one of her XMas presents... I told her yes, but that she couldn't drive it until after it had been to the garage and gone over from end-to-end, which would be mid-January because of $$ issues (I knew it needed a CV joint, & I'd have the water pump/thermostat/timing belt replaced if we were keeping it).

Xmas eve, GF calls me and says she's at her dad's place & would I join her? I asked how, since she took my car... she said she had gotten there with the Golf to show her dad. I was really cranky at this instant, but didn't want to be a jerk on Xmas eve, so I swallowed it and joined her. On the way back, she was following me and the golf had a catastrophic brake failure (blown caliper piston seal released all the brake fluid)... I watched her in the rear view as she just repeatedly stamped on the brake without sucess and failed to any of the other things that they teach us to do -- at least at German driving schools -- such as downshifting (it was a manual), picking an alternative path to avoid hitting stuff while losing speed (even if it means running into the grass on the side of the road), and/or pulling up the emergency brake. She mangled the back of my car (volvo took all the damage -- golf was almost totally unaffected).

POINT OF THE STORY: When I asked her why she didn't pull the emergency brake, she asked "What emergency brake?" -- turns out through all her training, she had always been taught that was a "parking brake" designed to keep the car from rolling and never instructed that it had a secondary use in case of brake failure. Nor had she ever been tested nor taught what else to do in case of brake failure, steering system failure, black ice, or any of three dozen other crisis situations...
// RANT OVER //

Now imagine calling your insurance company on Christmas eve and telling them Car A on your policy (for four days at that point!) totalled Car B on your policy... It's funny in retrospect, but not really funny at the time.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[tburda]

ok this is my first post here...


all the ideas thrown out about harder licencing, more tests skilled tests etc are all GREAT ideas in my mind. i've taken some extra drivers training and stuff like that for advanced riding/driving.

Ok here's the reality. we already have a system, and they're not gonna change it. as much as we all want it to they wont. they're not gonna start retesting elderly every year, they wont make teenagers drive more, they wont change motorcycle licencing to limited CC's for your first bike etc.... it's just something we've got to live with and accept.

as far as police giving professional courtesy.

i actually thought long and hard about this last night. it was sortof already mentioned, because i thought once about becoming a cop, just to be the cop that busts everyone else. i live on the same road as a state cop post and watched one that was next to me the other day, slam that crown vic handle down and he must have been going 80-45, just to lay on the brakes and turn into the post...must have been late to punch out....

Now my take on this is i wish i could be a cop and write all the other cops tickets, however, i would not be liked, and would have to drive 110% perfect everywhere i go, because for those few times we might roll a stop in the middle of nowhere, someone might see. that 2mph you go over the speed limit, fellow LEO might see. so i think this is where they get their "breaks" from. it would make for an awkward work environment. you'd be that one a-hole that writes everyone tickets, even if you just wrote one, and everyone would inevitably be out to get you back or just not like you. Every job has it's perks in one way or another.

[The CyberPoet]

Ok here's the reality. we already have a system, and they're not gonna change it. as much as we all want it to they wont. they're not gonna start retesting elderly every year, they wont make teenagers drive more, they wont change motorcycle licencing to limited CC's for your first bike etc.... it's just something we've got to live with and accept.

This statement tells me that you are quite young (nothing wrong with that). In Florida, where I got my first MC license, the policies changed quite rapidly over a few years from (note dates are approximate):
(A) 1980: To have a motorcycle license, simply ask for it at the time you get your car license. Permits available age 15, full license age 16;
(B) 1982: To have a motorcycle license, simply ask for it at the time you get your car license and pay a $1.50 or $3 surcharge. Permits available age 15, full license age 16;
(C) 1984: To have a full motorcycle license, you have to decide on class 1 or 2, and take a driving (parking lot) test. Class 1 was under 500cc, class 2 was 500cc & over. You could only get the test for the size you showed up on -- i.e. a 400cc bike could not test for the class 2 MC license. Permits available age 15, full license age 16;
(D) 1988: Class differenciation eliminated. To have a motorcycle license, you had to take the driving (parking lot) test. One license, any size bike. Optionally, you could get the permit without taking the driving test, and were then not permitted to take passengers at all (second limitation was you couldn't ride after dark under age 16 either).
(E) 2000: Riders encouraged to take MSF; driving test waivered if MSF course passed. Direct testing still available. All first time driver's license applicants (any age, any type of license) have to take a 4-hour Drug Alcohol Traffic Awareness (DATA) seminar. MC Permits & licenses available at age 16. Restrictions on hours 16/17 year old drivers can drive.
(F) 2004: Riders encouraged to take MSF -- riders under age 21 have no choice but to take the MSF or equivilent; driving test waivered if MSF course passed. Direct testing still available for those over 21. Anyone under 18 must have a learner's permit for a year with zero points on it before they can get a full license OF ANY KIND. MC Permits available at age 16, full license only after a year of permit with zero points. Restrictions on hours 16/17 year old drivers can drive (hours changed).
(G) 2006: PENDING/PROPOSED All riders required to take MSF course to obtain the MC license, state will eliminate it's own MC driving-test programs. It was also suggested that the state eliminate the "motorcycle-only" class of driver's license. Other requirements/restrictions remain the same. This may also make an artificial age-18 requirement because there is talk that the MSF doesn't want the liability involved for those under 18 to take their course.

As you can see, regulations do change and testing can be made tougher.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet