[tburda]

my apologies on that, i was implying pretty much where a road test is required and you must be a licenced driver to obtain a motorcycle endorsement. the age 18 thing i think is about as much more tough as is going to get anywhere, and possibly requiring a MSF course, which is what we're pretty close to already, here in MI. even those regulations still arent going to change the way things are, cause there are plenty of squids on the road that took MSF to get their liscence. thats all im saying. i meant nobody is going to enstate some off the wall testing to make sure that if you have a cycle endorsement you're an A+ rider...more or less.



it's getting late. lol

[SKNL2]

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?

So let's say I point a loaded weapon at you. I don't pull the trigger, but you know the weapon is loaded when I am pointing it at you. I leave without discharging the weapon and you are unharmed. Victimless crime? No one was hurt or killed, no property damage. I might argue that the only thing I did wrong was choosing when and where I pointed my weapon.

Your dog doesn't hunt, sir.

The grey area I was discussing is the fact that cops are human beings with libidinal drives. They are not robots. They will act based on their mood, hunger, the weather, personal life, and anything else that affects anyone esle in the world. That's your grey area.


C.P., to understand the sociology of American driving as it stands, you would only have to look at post-war America. Big cars, big roads, big trips. Performance vehicles were, more or less, non-existant short of big blocks in land-yachts. This may explain Americans' relaxed attitude to the task of driving, as well.

I don't disagree with you about the speed limits being set low. Understand too that in the enforcement aspect, if the majority of officers are not ticketing until a given buffer of speed is reached, would it not stand then that you must post speed limits that are lower than what the highway will allow for? The majority of the public is going to exceed the posted limit, post it low to keep them where you want them. In simpler terms, give them 70 and they will be taking 80. If you want them to travel less than 80, give them 70. Capice?

No one would like to see stricter licensing laws than me. You can be brain dead and pass the average driving test. It is just indicitive, though, of a dumbed down USA -- a whole other subject.

[POP944]

I could devise a test that 80% of the public couldn't pass too. Does that mean they're necessarily more competent in the subject matter? Nope.

This is something those in "education" need to figure out - that simply rigging a test so that "X"% of the takers fail does not justify calling it a good test or that the particular test discriminates on the basis of ability the way it's supposed to.

Then again, in this "no child left behind" age, it's not too surprising that this simple fact is overlooked.

[The CyberPoet]

I don't disagree with you about the speed limits being set low. Understand too that in the enforcement aspect, if the majority of officers are not ticketing until a given buffer of speed is reached, would it not stand then that you must post speed limits that are lower than what the highway will allow for? The majority of the public is going to exceed the posted limit, post it low to keep them where you want them. In simpler terms, give them 70 and they will be taking 80. If you want them to travel less than 80, give them 70. Capice?

The "majority" of the public will stop exceeding the speed limit when the speed limit is set to some speed they would not exceed voluntarily without discomfort...

Although the German autobahns (& some Montana highways) are speed-limit-less in the majority of it's sections, the majority of people do not tend to drive at the absolute maximum their car will go, instead finding a speed that is comfortable for them, given their car, skills, mood, and ambient weather, lighting & traffic levels.

Each time you raise the limit, you'll get fewer that go faster (I remember 90, 100 & 120 mph limit signs here in Florida just before the 55-mph national cap was imposed). My guess is that a 100 mph limit on a straight section of no-exit interstate wouldn't be likely to cause the majority to do 110 -- in fact, odds are most wouldn't exceed 100, and with fuel prices as they are, the majority would probably be under it.

To intentionally create statutes and arbitrary limits that make the majority of individuals into law-breakers is just wrong on so very many levels... We could have an inverted lotto instead -- if your number gets pulled, you'll get a fine in the mail, and officers can spend their days doing something other than minor traffic enforcement (see related story: St. Pete Times - FHP: The Lost Patrol - efficiency down .

Then again, in this "no child left behind" age, it's not too surprising that this simple fact is overlooked.

I agree. My American written test was either 30 or 40 questions, half of them on signs, with 75% being a passing grade. My German instructor's written test was 400 questions, with complex scenarios (such as diagrams of 6-way intersections with 4 pedestrians, 6 cars, 3 bikes, 2 buses & 2 street-cars on tracks, asking which was the correct right-of-way order for the various vehicles).

Here's a simplified visual question of right-of-way from the "standard" test given to American military members (not the instructor's license):

In what order may the vehicles proceed?
a. 2-3-1.
b. 3-1-2.
c. 2-1-3.

Here's a sample question I've never seen on an American test, which on the standard (non-instructor) German test:
If the vehicle starts skidding while braking, the driver should do which of the following?
a. Downshift and take foot off gas pedal.
b. Turn the steering wheel in the direction that the rear of the vehicle is skidding and pump the brakes lightly.
c. Immediately apply pressure to brakes.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[philwecksr]

What is the answer to the 3-D model? I think its A but I want to know for sure. This is based on the assumption that those yellow diamonds are a form of yield or just general "hey pay attention" signs, and that whatever sign the white car has is a yield or stop.

[The CyberPoet]

What is the answer to the 3-D model? I think its A but I want to know for sure. This is based on the assumption that those yellow diamonds are a form of yield or just general "hey pay attention" signs, and that whatever sign the white car has is a yield or stop.

Looking at the pic, the answer is "A"
Yellow diamond means this piece of road has right of way over any sidestreets.
The black & white road sign under the yellow diamond which segment of road has right of way (the thicker line is the primary road with right-of-way).
Since someone turning has to yield to someone following the primary road, the bicyclist has to wait for the red vehicle to clear (and any vehicles behind the red vehicle), while the white vehicle has to wait for both of the other legs of the insection to be clear of traffic.

The version of the German driving handbook and test for US forces in Germany can be found here (which is where I got the pic):

http://rmv.hqusareur.army.mil/drivrman/ss190-34.htm

** note that the "for Germans" test is a bit harder than the US Forces version, and the instructor's test is much harder yet again.

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[philwecksr]

bookmarked

[Black_peter]

. 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...

Which will freak the #$$% out of you as you're doing 200 klicks and you don't speak german!!! (CP left out that the radio goes to a preset volume as well!!)

[The CyberPoet]

Which will freak the #$$% out of you as you're doing 200 klicks and you don't speak german!!! (CP left out that the radio goes to a preset volume as well!!)

I guess it never occurred to me, since I do speak German! Most radios have a way of turning the feature off. Some also have the feature to over-ride any other music source as well (CD/DVD/etc).

200 klicks isn't that fast... I've done 250-280 kph regularly

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[Black_peter]

Which will freak the #$$% out of you as you're doing 200 klicks and you don't speak german!!! (CP left out that the radio goes to a preset volume as well!!)

I guess it never occurred to me, since I do speak German! Most radios have a way of turning the feature off. Some also have the feature to over-ride any other music source as well (CD/DVD/etc).

200 klicks isn't that fast... I've done 250-280 kph regularly

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

Well I was in a rented Escort. Also dispite what Y'all think they do
have "speed limits" There was rain so the "posted" (electronic signage)
was 180.. So 200 was fast enough!!
What were you doing 280 in??

[The CyberPoet]

What were you doing 280 in??

Many things... my Audi 200T, a number of BMW's (M5 comes to mind), etc... Fuel was dirt cheap when the exchange rate was 3.5 to 4 Marks to the dollar and I got military fuel pricing (no tax surcharges).

Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[SKNL2]

Montana repealed their "no speed limit" laws, CP. Seems what was supposed to be "prudent" turned into "let's take our car up there and test it." Which follows my point. In areas that it would be "safe" to do 100MPH consistently, the ones that want to run that fast, already do. Sounds like you just want amnesty when you do it.

I speed, and often. I also know that if I get caught, there are consequences. That's something I can live with.

[The CyberPoet]

Which follows my point. In areas that it would be "safe" to do 100MPH consistently, the ones that want to run that fast, already do. Sounds like you just want amnesty when you do it.

As I mentioned above, I'm used to driving 260-280 kph (about 160 - 175 mph) on the autobahns, and I restrict myself very heavily as it is in the US in general... I don't want blanket amnesty for the type of speeds I would voluntarily choose (given empty roads & clear sailing), but I do think that too often limits are set arbitrarily lower than reasonable for reasons that go against common sense. A long, long time ago, speed limits in the US were set by not raising signs when the road was first built, then taking the predominant average speed of 85% of the traffic and pegging it to that. Now they use a formulation that takes the predominant speed and knocks it down (often more than that 5 to 10 mph differentiation that you spoke of between posting & enforcement), when they use a measure & set method at all.

I speed, and often. I also know that if I get caught, there are consequences. That's something I can live with.

I pay my "freedom taxes" and go on my merry way too... because I am very rational about where/when/how I speed, I average under a ticket a year. I'm not looking for a free "out", I'm just looking for some rationality in the establishment of the limits, esp. on roads built specifically for high-speed travel (most interstates, esp. in the south).


Cheers,
=-= The CyberPoet

[gpggnnn]

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

[ghost]