Re: Repeal of the National Speed Limit Law
In article <firstname.lastname@example.org>,
Arlene Marilyn Schauer <aschauer@leland.Stanford.EDU> wrote:
>In article <email@example.com>,
>John P. Curcio <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
>>This is why the repeal bothers me. The asshole Democrats, who were
>>against repealing the limit in the first place, decided that they
>>would keep it for trucks and busses. Now, we can have huge speed
>>differentials between cars and trucks. That is perhaps the WORST
>>thing they could have done.
>I disagree with you. Trucks weigh a lot more than cars, that means
>that the faster that they travel, the greater the force will be at
But, in 99.999999% of all cases there isn't going to be any impact!!!
When people argue against higher speed limits, why do they always
assume there will be more accidents? Studies have shown that this
isn't true! In fact, speed differential has been shown to be more of
a contributing cause to accidents than speed alone. Mandating a speed
differential isn't a smart thing to do...
>PLus, it's also a well know fact that it takes longer to
>stop a vehicle the faster the speed it has. The best thing to do
>is to be courteous to trucks and make sure that they're not
This is common-sense advice, but too many idiots on the road don't
follow it. If trucks are limited to 65 yet cars are allowed to do 85,
what is going to happen when a truck wants to pass another truck? The
truck will cause big problems if there is even moderate traffic on the
>And all Democrats aren't assholes.
I've yet to see proof of that....
-<=>- Just say NO! to Budmilloors... Support your local MICROBREWERY -<=>-
John P. Curcio email@example.com Philips Labs Briarcliff Manor, NY
"If nothing beats a Bud, given the choice, I'd take the nothing..."
"No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'" -BH