From kevina  Fri Sep  8 18:20:42 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id SAA25331 for kevina; Fri, 8 Sep 1995 18:20:41 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uwm.edu!uwvax!fullfeed!NewsMaster
From: NMA <nma@genie.geis.com>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: RADAR calibration & certi
Date: 8 Sep 1995 16:51:38 GMT
Organization: National Motorists Association
Lines: 21
Message-ID: <42psaq$ic5@fullfeed.msn.fullfeed.com>
References: <u551584-0609951302260001@mdp93a.md.dow.com> <95090701590615051@giffy.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: nma.msn.fullfeed.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.2b4 (Windows; I; 16bit)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Length: 845
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

Little known fact:

Speed limit signs are traffic control devices, just like stop signs, 
traffic lights, etc.  THerefore, according to the federal Manual on 
Uniform Traffic Control Devices, a speed limit sign must be posted in 
accordance with a proper speed survey, not political whim.  It's been 
that way for 40 years or so.

Stop lights require surveys to be conducted before they're installed, 
should we not demand the same from speed limit signs and stop signs?  
(Drive thru any town and see if they -really- need all those stop signs. 
It's not likely; they're used for speed control purposes.  Unfortunately, 
the MUTCD does not specifically prohibit this practice, it just advises 
against it.)

-- 
National Motorists Association      Join the NMA!
nma@genie.geis.com                  $29 a year.
http://www.msn.fullfeed.com/nma



From kevina  Tue Sep 12 00:21:24 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id AAA04204 for kevina; Tue, 12 Sep 1995 00:21:23 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!tcsi.tcs.com!agate!howland.reston.ans.net!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.iag.net!firebug
From: firebug@iag.net (firebug)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: RADAR calibration & certi
Date: 9 Sep 1995 03:30:30 GMT
Organization: nowhere
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <42r1om$e2g@news.iag.net>
References: <u551584-0609951302260001@mdp93a.md.dow.com> <95090701590615051@giffy.com> <42psaq$ic5@fullfeed.msn.fullfeed.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: firebug.iag.net
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1032
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <42psaq$ic5@fullfeed.msn.fullfeed.com>,
NMA  <nma@genie.geis.com> wrote:
>Stop lights require surveys to be conducted before they're installed, 
>should we not demand the same from speed limit signs and stop signs?  
>(Drive thru any town and see if they -really- need all those stop signs. 
>It's not likely; they're used for speed control purposes.  Unfortunately, 
>the MUTCD does not specifically prohibit this practice, it just advises 
>against it.)

I'm familiar with the practice of using a stop sign for speed control (see
it all over - and it just makes the road less safe), but I saw something
that reached a new level of stupidity once (Actually, drove through the area
several times, then found a better way). A stop sign in the middle of a
road, not at an intersection. Not at a driveway, not at a crosswalk. Just a
stop sign.

It was by far the stupidest traffic sign I'd ever seen - and that's
including such gems as "Speed Limit 40", and then 75 feet down the road, a
yellow suggested speed sign for 45.

