|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,738
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,738 |
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Just because they were the only ones obeying one particular law doesn't mean they were alright to do what they did. The GA vehicle code prohibits blocking traffic by driving next to another car. They could also be nailed on a conspiracy charge. It doesn't matter if the people behind them wanted to do something illegal, thier roadblock was creating an unstable situation. Imagine if you were behind them with your wife in labor!
This was a stupid stunt. Yes, it was dramatic and pointed out some problems, but it didn't offer any solutions, or even attempt to make people think about solutions. They could have sat on that overpass with a radar gun and gotten the same information.
There were a few neurons firing when they realized the speed limits were enforced poorly, but instead of thinking about why they are, and what, if anything, needs to be done about it, they just proved that people speed. And put hundreds, if not thousands, of people in danger. Stupid.
Originally posted by Pimpalicious316:
being an aggressive driver is dangerous.
Yep. A driver's responsibility is not only to prevent their actions from causing harm, but also to be prepared for other's stupid actions.. Defensive driving, they call it. Blocking off a highway, regardless of the speed, is about as agressive as driving gets.
agree to disagree 
they were obeying the speed limit. granted they were potentially causing a problem, but i see speeding as a much greater threat than forcing people to do the speed limit. and they were hardly blocking off a highway. blocking off would mean they prevented people from going anywhere. people were still doing the speed limit. what more do you want?
and to clarify, i do not think this was the best possible way to show these things, but i do think it was effective.
~Andrew
2001 VW Jetta Wolfsburg Edition
20 valves of fury
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 3,037 |
Remember kids, the higher your average speed, the sooner you get home and off the roads.
"Think of it, if you like, as a librarian with a G-string under the tweed." Clarkson on the Mondeo.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140 |
Originally posted by Pimpalicious316:
they were obeying the speed limit. granted they were potentially causing a problem, but i see speeding as a much greater threat than forcing people to do the speed limit.
Absolutely not. Causing congestion and frustration is almost certainly going to cause incidents, while traveling at the real speed limit, the 70-75 that people know they can safely drive, is much safer.
They made the situation far, far more dangerous that the normal flow of traffic, which was ~15 mph faster. How, exactly, is speeding the bigger threat?
the relation between the speed traffic travels and the number on a sign has absolutely no impact on safety
Speeding and speed are two different things. Speeding is not at all dangerous: not even remotely. Speed does reduce the time people have to react, and so is mildly dangerous. Differences in speed, which they created, are far more dangerous than speeding or speed itself.
Originally posted by Pimpalicious316:
i see speeding as a much greater threat than forcing people to do the speed limit.
Again, how is speeding a threat at all?
And how can you say that there is not a very significant threat in affecting traffic flow like they did?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,978
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,978 |
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Absolutely not. Causing congestion and frustration is almost certainly going to cause incidents, while traveling at the real speed limit, the 70-75 that people know they can safely drive, is much safer.
Do you have stats to back that statement up? Or is it just wishful thinking? Just because I can drive at 75mph on roads in my svt and be safe that doesn't mean that somebody in a dodge omni going 75 would be safe as well. I've seen some POS cars go flying by me and are definitly unsafe.
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
the relation between the speed traffic travels and the number on a sign has absolutely no impact on safety
Again, I'm going to need some stats before I swallow that one. 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,738
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
OP
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Oct 2003
Posts: 3,738 |
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Again, how is speeding a threat at all?
And how can you say that there is not a very significant threat in affecting traffic flow like they did?
you actually think speeding isn't a threat? that is perhaps the most ridiculous thing i have heard yet in this thread. their are speed limits for a reason. it's not to make sure it takes you longer to get to work. it is for safety. speeding naturally gives people less time to react if an incident occurs. the momentum carried by that vehicle is higher so it is potentially more dangerous to not just the driver/passengers but to everyone else on the road. are you going to try and tell me an accident at 70-75 is as safe as one at 55? it isn't about eliminating risk, as that is unreasonable. it is about minimizing it.
and i did say they were potentially causing a problem. i never once mentioned that what they did wasn't dangerous. i just see speeding as more dangerous. i didn't see anyone in that video causing damage or extreme danger except the idiots who insisted on speeding and passed on the shoulder. brilliant.
~Andrew
2001 VW Jetta Wolfsburg Edition
20 valves of fury
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197
I have no life
|
|
I have no life
Joined: May 2000
Posts: 21,197 |
And what happened to the law of staying in the right lanes except to pass someone going under the speed limit?! What a bunch of tools.
-'96 SE MTX 3L
-'98 SVT 1,173 of 6,535
-'05 Mazda 6s, loaded, g/f's ride
-Need a 96-00 manual on CD? PM or email me
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,155
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Dec 2003
Posts: 4,155 |
Frankly I'd be one of the ones blocking the roadway. Until those numbers change to 75: do the speed limit. The only way I justify speeding 75,80; is for an emergency situation. Interpret that how you will but I don't speed just to get downtown for a party  And some of you that are against these people doing what they're doing: They are doing the speedlimit, anyone behid them who spins out, slams a wall, clips other cars, while trying to get ahead of them, is their own fault. It's not obstruction if they are travelling the speed limit. Which does lead to my next concern, though. I'll bend a bit and say I feel it was incredibly stupid to block off the fast lane. Ambulances? Someone bleeding perfusely in their car needing medical attention? That happens every day. So, aside from the fast lane, I'd be setting the traffic back too. Which would null the point of it anyways.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140 |
Originally posted by Berry Tweaker:
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
Absolutely not. Causing congestion and frustration is almost certainly going to cause incidents, while traveling at the real speed limit, the 70-75 that people know they can safely drive, is much safer.
Do you have stats to back that statement up? Or is it just wishful thinking? Just because I can drive at 75mph on roads in my svt and be safe that doesn't mean that somebody in a dodge omni going 75 would be safe as well. I've seen some POS cars go flying by me and are definitly unsafe.
Look at what happened! People were jockeying for position and passing on the shoulder. It's completely obvious from watching that that there was a dangerous situation. I have a lot of statistics about accidents, but you can make them say anything. Published numbers that reflect speed being a "factor" are not that: they are accidents where someone was speeding. There is no effort taken to determine if the accident would have occured had the speeder been below the limit. I have yet to see ANY traffic/accident statistics that were collected fairly and scientifically.
Yes, it is not as safe to travel at a higher rate of speed, and that is a bigger factor for some vehicles than others. But the situation they created was more dangerous! Causing people to travel the speed limit by strict enforcement will make things safer, forcing cars to clog up behind a rolling roadblock will make things more dangerous. That's self-evident.
Quote:
Originally posted by Auto-X Fil:
the relation between the speed traffic travels and the number on a sign has absolutely no impact on safety
Again, I'm going to need some stats before I swallow that one.
How could a number make any difference at all? The fact that traffic is going 90 instead of 50 makes a difference, but the number on the sign is irrelevant. All other factors equal, going 50 in a 50 is just as safe as going 50 in a 30. But one is speeding and one is not.
Be careful with your terms: speed makes a difference, speeding does not!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,978
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 2,978 |
Originally posted by todras:
And what happened to the law of staying in the right lanes except to pass someone going under the speed limit?! What a bunch of tools.
Well in the video the one in the far right hand lane was going faster then the others... turns out his problem was that he'd be breaking the law if he was passing them. I don't think there are seperate speed limits for different lanes, are there?
I am not saying what they did was not stupid... it was. But it shouldn't have been.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140
Hard-core CEG\'er
|
|
Hard-core CEG\'er
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 4,140 |
It is illegal and dangerous to block the whole road. Going 55 in the right lane is fine, but what they did is not.
Yes, the people behind them were at fault as well. Any accidents caused were only indirectly the cause of the blockade.
But Speeding and speed are two different things!
Go drive the D.C. beltway at 5pm, and tell me it's safer to go 55 than 70. If everyone went 55, that would be great, but they don't, so it's safer to go with the flow.
|
|
|
|
|
