Sunday, October 01, 2006
Speed and Freedom
So today my "twin" and I went to the Wally World in Warsaw. (Say that ten times fast) I had to get some new shoes, and Wes picked up some snack food since he was getting low. On the way back south on 19A, this red Dodge Stratus flew by me. The driver, by the way, was a very cute female about our age. When she started the pass I was doing 62 or so in a 55, and after she passed I sped up to 65-66 (as fast as I dared in light of my little collection of speed trophys I have aquired over the past year) to see if I could stay close enough to discover where this young lady was going in such a hurry. But she kept receding into the distance at a fairly quick pace. That is, until one of New York's finest whipped a U-turn in front of me and pulled Miss Lead Foot over. Poor girl. My heart goes out to you. I am sure you were not quite as scared, however, as one young Vermont male was a few months ago for going 36 mph over the speed limit. Yep thats right. 101 mph on the interstate. You were only doing 20 over max. Still sucks though huh? Join me then, in the fight for liberty. Get the word out! Speed limits are unconstitutional! Yep that's right, unconstitutional. So are the laws against radar detectors in this state. As are driver's licenses. And car registration. And seat belt laws. Look around you folks, the government restricts hundreds, no, thousands of things that you can't do. And you think we live in a free country. No, it is only the illusion of freedom, aided by the mirror of socialist countrys the world over that make our government SEEM small.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Technically, though, governments own the roads and can regulate them as they see fit for safety and commerce etc....
ReplyDeleteThe Constitution lists roadways as one of the govt's biggest responsibilities...
As a Reagan Republican I am, as well, against big government but speed limits make good sense.
Yes, the government owns the roads, but the Constitution only provides for the establishment of "post Roads" and does not say anywhere that it has the power to lay speed limits. BTW, you would be hard pressed to back up your arguement that "speed limits make good sense."
ReplyDeleteThe National Center for Policy Analysis says that "no consistent
correlation between speed enforcement and traffic safety improvement
has been shown." They cite the safety record of Germany's Autobahn where, despite minimal speed enforcement, fatality rates are
virtually identical to the U.S. interstate system, where millions of speeding tickets are issued.
In addition, one study found that only 2.07% of ALL accidents are caused by exessive speed, while 50% are caused by alcohol. Another study found that drivers traveling well over the speed limit on the interstate caused many fewer accidents than drivers going at or below the speed limit. Still a third study found that lowering the speed limit 10 mph lowered actual avg. speed by 1 mph, and a fourth showed that raising speed limit by 10 mph raised actual speed by 1.8 mph.
In short, faster drivers are safer, alcohol is 2500% more likely to cause a crash than speed, and people drive at the speed they feel comfortable with no matter the limit.
A.) The German Autobahn is less congested than our roadways and are not navigated by such a widely diverse group of drivers, per age and ability.
ReplyDeleteB.) The Congress is also called upon to regulate commerce between the states - roadways being pivotal to that.
C.) If driving faster so conclusively proves a safer road, why not suggest that the US govt force its citizens to floor it?
D.) I agree that alcohol is mostly responsible for the tragedies on our roadways - and a good sign of a drunk driver is a lead foot.
Our officers are so inclined then to pull over and check on a subject who is not operating within the speed limit.
E.) You'd get much further by railing against driver's licenses.
F.) At the end of the day the govt owns the roads. Run for office and work to do away with speed limits if you are passionate about it. I think some places in Montana do have no speed limit.
A.) Could be true, but there are other studies showing countries with higher speed limits than the U.S. have lower accidnt rates than either the U.S. or Germany. The NCPA was just pointing out that there is not a consistent correlation between speed and accident rates, there are many other factors that are more important, which was my point.
ReplyDeleteB.)Hmm interesting point... But I still think thats stretching it a bit.
C.) Driving faster does not lead to a safer road. Faster drivers are safer drivers. There is a difference. Those who drive fast are, in general, better drivers than those who drive slow, and therefore they should not be denied the right to go faster when they are posing no additional threat. Those who want to drive slow would continue to do so with a removal of speed limits, as shown by the 3rd and 4th studies I mentioned.
D.) Allright, so let the officers pull over fast drivers who seem suspicious. But they can't issue tickets unless the driver really was drunk, high, or otherwise impaired.
E.) Probably correct. But you see, if I rail for the extreme, my opponents will be much more willing to give me some consessions toward my liking: i.e. if I railed against driver's licenses, my opponents would fight tooth and nail to give that to me and would offer some lesser comprimise; on the other hand, if I rail against speed limits, my opponents think that granting me no drivers licenses would be a good compromise. You're welcome for the insight on how libertarians think.
F.) a) Correct. But I still don't think they should be able to tell us how fast we can go on them. Our taxes, after all, payed for them. The Government wouldn't have had the ability to build them or own them if we all hadn't payed for them. Therefore, I think it is stretching it for them to tell us what we can and can't do on something we payed for. b) I, like many other libertarians, have come to the conclusion that running for office is much less effective than informing people.
I find this discussion hilarious. Think about it... you crash @ 55 mph or you crash @ 110 mph... which is more likely to be fatal?
ReplyDeleteIt was an intrepid that passed us, BTW, not a stratus :-P