From kevina Wed Jun 21 23:14:57 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id XAA11391 for kevina; Wed, 21 Jun 1995 23:14:56 -0400 Newsgroups: ca.driving,ca.politics Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!hatunen From: hatunen@netcom.com (DaveHatunen) Subject: Re: Speed limits Message-ID: Organization: As little as you're likely to find anywhere References: <3s9e9b$hek@ftp.amcc.com> Date: Wed, 21 Jun 1995 20:06:21 GMT Lines: 23 Sender: hatunen@netcom4.netcom.com Xref: news.clark.net ca.driving:17802 ca.politics:66552 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1381 Apparently-To: kevina Status: RO X-Status: F In article <3s9e9b$hek@ftp.amcc.com>, Jeremy Hansen <"jeremyh@amcc.com"> wrote: >Ok, so now that Congress is putting speed limits into the hands >of the states, who can we contact to get these speed limits >raised in California? Or maybe even eliminated on those long, >straight, lonely roads..! Give 'em time. Those of us old enough remember that state control of speed limits was the way it was up till the Arab oil crisis. Up until then, speed limits had been rising steadily, and Nevada didn't even have a speed limit. For instance, during the 1960s Arizona raised its Interstate speed limit from 65 to 75 mph. OTOH, I remember the early 1950s in Ohio when the speed limit was 45 mph, and what a thrill it was when it went up to 60/50 day/night. And that was NOT on the Turnpike. -- **************************************************************** * As one IS manager put it, "If you make an interface so easy * * that any Bozo can use it, every Bozo will, and they'll all * * want IS support, and they'll all be in my office asking how * * to make their own Home pages the way horny undergraduates go * * around asking each other's majors and astrological signs." * * * * --InfoWorld, Vol 17, Issue 5, June 19, 1995 * **************************************************************** From kevina Wed Jun 21 23:16:14 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id XAA11776 for kevina; Wed, 21 Jun 1995 23:16:11 -0400 Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!nntp.crl.com!pacbell.com!lll-winken.llnl.gov!enews.sgi.com!sgigate.sgi.com!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!icon!hpchase.rose.hp.com!barry From: barry@mothra.rose.hp.com (Barry Fowler) Newsgroups: ca.driving,ca.politics Subject: Re: Speed limits Followup-To: ca.driving,ca.politics Date: 21 Jun 1995 20:28:10 GMT Organization: Reorg. of the Month Club Lines: 20 Message-ID: <3s9vcq$p2@hpchase.rose.hp.com> References: <3s9e9b$hek@ftp.amcc.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: mothra.rose.hp.com X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8.4] Xref: news.clark.net ca.driving:17807 ca.politics:66570 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1091 Apparently-To: kevina Status: RO X-Status: F Jeremy Hansen (jeremyh@needa) wrote: : Ok, so now that Congress is putting speed limits into the hands : of the states, who can we contact to get these speed limits : raised in California? Or maybe even eliminated on those long, : straight, lonely roads..! Definitely not Barbara Boxer or Diane Feinstein. They voted to have the Feds continue to tell us what the CA speed limits should be. I guess they don't trust themselves so set their own speed limits properly. Additionally, mentioned in today's Sacto. Bee newspaper, related changes that are now in the works are 1) Removing federally imposed seatbelt laws, 2) removing Federally imposed truck speed limit laws (in the Assembly now), and changes to helmet laws on motorcycles. I doubt if CA will move to bring the speed limits up on many highways. The CHP spoksman indicated that they'd only do it on an estimated 1500 miles of CA highways. Let's face it. Giving speeding tickets allows them to get new toys, along with filling a nearly-bankrupt state's treasury and it's unlikely that they'll give up this revenue source. From kevina Thu Jun 29 14:43:35 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id OAA16124 for kevina; Thu, 29 Jun 1995 14:43:35 -0400 Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!newsbf02.news.aol.com!not-for-mail From: cbort@aol.com (CBort) Newsgroups: ca.driving,ca.politics,rec.autos.driving Subject: Re: Speed limits Date: 29 Jun 1995 14:17:31 -0400 Organization: America Online, Inc. (1-800-827-6364) Lines: 24 Sender: root@newsbf02.news.aol.com Message-ID: <3suqnr$6s2@newsbf02.news.aol.com> References: <3ssgr4$ak_001@sc.intel.com> Reply-To: cbort@aol.com (CBort) NNTP-Posting-Host: newsbf02.mail.aol.com Xref: news.clark.net ca.driving:17980 ca.politics:67167 rec.autos.driving:73657 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1156 Apparently-To: kevina Status: RO X-Status: > Correct me if I'm wrong, but didn't many California two-lane highways > have 65-mph limits? When I first started driving in California in the early 70's, most highway speed limits were 65 mph and some freeways had a limit of 70 mph. Those were the days... Of course, the speed limit for trucks (and autos w/ trailers) has *always* been 55. I always found it interesting that the truckers were one of the most vocal opposition groups when the speed limit for everyone was dropped to 55 -- but that's a different subject... 8) IMHO, we should revert to the Basic Speed Law (as fast as conditions allow) with no specific speed limit, at least on freeways and other limited access roadways. If we did so, however, I'd also like to see better driver training to teach all those new drivers to handle the speed... | /\/\ -----------------| ( oo ) /) Christopher Bort | ==\JL/== mmhrrrrrrrrrraaoow // cbort@aol.com | /--\ ___ _ _ __ _ \\ -----------------| || || | | | |_) |_| |_ |_) || | || || | |_| | | | |__ | \ || | OOO__OOO=======================/ From kevina Sun Jul 2 12:34:37 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id MAA07687 for kevina; Sun, 2 Jul 1995 12:34:37 -0400 Newsgroups: ca.driving,ca.politics Path: news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!noc.netcom.net!netcom.com!msadams From: msadams@netcom.com (Michael Adams) Subject: Re: Speed limits Message-ID: Followup-To: ca.driving,ca.politics Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL1] References: <3s9e9b$hek@ftp.amcc.com> <3sco60$19kd@violin.aix.calpoly.edu> Date: Thu, 29 Jun 1995 02:33:47 GMT Lines: 16 Sender: msadams@netcom19.netcom.com Xref: news.clark.net ca.driving:17965 ca.politics:67149 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 756 Apparently-To: kevina Status: O X-Status: Kenneth E. Long (klong@violin.aix.calpoly.edu) wrote: : >speed limits was the way it was up till the Arab oil crisis. Up until : >then, speed limits had been rising steadily, and Nevada didn't even : >have a speed limit. For instance, during the 1960s Arizona raised its : >Interstate speed limit from 65 to 75 mph. : It was also just a few years ago when Nevada tried to flip the Feds the : bird by eliminating their speed limit once again. But they caved when : they were threatened with the withholding of federal highway funds. Montana also did not have a speed limit during daylight hours. The first state to eliminate their speed limit gets my travel dollars. Michael Adams -- msadams@netcom.com From kevina Mon Jul 3 15:57:44 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id PAA27774 for kevina; Mon, 3 Jul 1995 15:57:43 -0400 Path: news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!howland.reston.ans.net!ixnews.netcom.com!netnews From: patwelch@ix.netcom.com (Patrick Welch ) Newsgroups: talk.politics.drugs,alt.law-enforcement,rec.autos.driving Subject: Re: speed limits Date: 2 Jul 1995 22:30:15 GMT Organization: Netcom Lines: 34 Distribution: world Message-ID: <3t76ln$76q@ixnews3.ix.netcom.com> References: <3t49kd$a09@oasis.ot.com> <3t6nki$2s1@newsbf02.news.aol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ix-bst-ma1-02.ix.netcom.com Xref: news.clark.net talk.politics.drugs:42011 alt.law-enforcement:23507 rec.autos.driving:73963 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1057 Apparently-To: kevina Status: O X-Status: In <3t6nki$2s1@newsbf02.news.aol.com> vector95@aol.com (VECTOR95) writes: > >How is it possible that anyone can suggest that the establishment of speed >limits is intended for the police to detain the public for any reason? >Speed restrictions are made law by elected officials, presumaby because >that's what his or her constituents demand. Please tell me you are being a devils advocate here...and that you don't believe what you are saying.. You are saying that speed limits that were considered safe in 1960 (w/ cars that had 1960 technology...safety)...are applicable to modern vehicles?? The fact is..the state depends so much on revenue from speeding citation and parking citations...that they want you to speed...and modern cities (Like Boston..where I live)..could not exist if everyone didn't speed to increrase traffic flow....NMA members have gone through Boston and I93 artery at the speed limit...and created a disaster...Its a very complex issue. BUT one thing is sure...it has nothing to do w/ the needs of the constituents. From kevina Mon Jul 10 23:11:22 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id XAA00086 for kevina; Mon, 10 Jul 1995 23:11:21 -0400 Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,talk.politics.drugs,alt.law-enforcement Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!uunet!in1.uu.net!fonorola!infoshare!whome!gts!bokonon!silver From: bokonon!silver@uunet.uu.net (Hi Ho Silver) Subject: Re: speed limits Organization: Followers of Bokonon Date: Sun, 9 Jul 1995 19:15:33 GMT Message-ID: References: <3t49kd$a09@oasis.ot.com> <3t6nki$2s1@newsbf02.news.aol.com> Lines: 33 Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:75019 talk.politics.drugs:42659 alt.law-enforcement:24088 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1825 Apparently-To: kevina Status: RO X-Status: In article <3t6nki$2s1@newsbf02.news.aol.com> vector95@aol.com (VECTOR95) writes: $Speed restrictions are made law by elected officials, presumaby because $that's what his or her constituents demand. The vast majority of these same constituents clearly demonstrate their regard for said laws by routinely ignoring them. Actions, it is said, speak louder than words. But then again, apart from specific areas of specific roads, I don't recall having heard of the general public demanding speed limits be lowered. It's a moot point, of course, to ask whether the general public wishes to see speed limits put in place, as they've been in place on all of our public roads around here for decades anyway. An initial study of Ontario's photo radar showed that at six sites selected for the study, the percentage of all vehicles which exceeded 5 km/h over the speed limit prior to the introduction of photo radar were roughly 65%, 75%, 70%, 70%, 55%, and 65%. Note that these results also include all hours of the day, including the heavily- congested "rush" hours. Obviously, when roads are not congested, the number of speeders will increase, and if you define "speeder" as "one who exceeds the legal speed limit" rather than "one who exceeds the legal speed limit by at least 5 km/h" (the former being a more reasonable definition), the numbers will increase again, so it's probably safe to say that given the opportunity to speed at these sites, 75-80% is a conservative estimate of the proportion of drivers who do speed. -- ______________________________________________ / Hi Ho Silver, who likes the idea of having \ __________________________ \ SNTF and large h00ters in the same package \/ silver@bokonon.UUCP \ \______________________________________________/ ...{!uunet}!bokonon!silver \ From kevina Mon Jul 17 01:49:12 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA12547 for kevina; Mon, 17 Jul 1995 01:49:12 -0400 Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,talk.politics.drugs,alt.law-enforcement Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!newstf01.news.aol.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news2.new-york.net!sls4.asb.com!baudmax From: baudmax@unix.asb.com (Maximillien Baudelaire) Subject: Re: speed limits X-Nntp-Posting-Host: sls4.asb.com References: <3t49kd$a09@oasis.ot.com> <3t6nki$2s1@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3u3uds$14t@matra.meer.net> <3u9evh$665@status.gen.nz> Sender: news@news2.new-york.net (Network News) X-Nntp-Posting-User: (Unauthenticated) Organization: ASB Date: Sun, 16 Jul 1995 16:41:22 GMT X-Newsreader: Trumpet for Windows [Version 1.0 Rev B final beta #4] Message-ID: Lines: 49 Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:75969 talk.politics.drugs:43123 alt.law-enforcement:24681 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 2465 Apparently-To: kevina Status: RO X-Status: F In article <3u9evh$665@status.gen.nz> peppiatt@iconz.co.nz (DAVID PEPPIATT) writes: >From: peppiatt@iconz.co.nz (DAVID PEPPIATT) >Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,talk.politics.drugs,alt.law-enforcement >Subject: Re: speed limits >Date: 15 Jul 1995 22:20:33 GMT >Message-ID: <3u9evh$665@status.gen.nz> >References: <3t49kd$a09@oasis.ot.com> <3t6nki$2s1@newsbf02.news.aol.com> <3u3uds$14t@matra.meer.net> >Can anybody out there throw any light on the latest move by the governor >of the Province of Ontario who, according to a few snippets of a news >item I heard, has 'banned' speed cameras, citing them as immoral and >nothing more than revenue collectors. >If anyone can find details on this isuue, and especially provide me with >an E-mail of fax address for the person responsible for this incredible >weapon in the fight against speed cameras, please let me know ASAP. >David Peppiatt Well, I'm not too sure about any Ontario "Ban" on speed cameras, tho I think I saw a great way of knocking these cameras out of commission (from the Green Pather's Action Manual). If you have speed cameras in your area, you might like to consider purchasing a paintball-gun with a decent scope (like they use in those Survival! games), and a good supply of black paintballs. Then just scope out speed camera locations, and shoot the lens sometime in the off-hours, late at night. Kinda hard for them to photograph anybody's license plate through a thickcoat of black paint, eh? Not to mention, now instead of being a "great" revenue generater, they become a constant maintenance expenditure! ;} Blind the cameras, and you have blinded the automated traffic violations system! ;} Speed limits in residential areas & such may be justified, but rediculously low limits on highways is nothing short of highway robbery by the State. Another way to attack speed limit enforcement would be to deface speed limit signs with regular paint (or paintballs if yer lazy/in a hurry). If there is no POSTED speed limit, then I can't see how they could still give you a ticket as long as you're only doing whatever the Max speed limit happens to be in your State. This is a great tactic for those 40-45-50 MPH highway zones, who SHOULD be allowed to do a decent speed without interference from the State. Of course, these are just hypothetical ideas; I wouldn't suggest or encourage anyone to actually implement them! ;} ;} ;} -Max From kevina Sat Aug 12 16:47:56 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id QAA25677 for kevina; Sat, 12 Aug 1995 16:47:55 -0400 Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!ix.netcom.com!netcom.com!laurence From: laurence@netcom.com (Andrew Laurence) Subject: Re: Speed Limits (WAS: Re: AAA autoclub: why?) Message-ID: Sender: laurence@netcom20.netcom.com Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) X-Newsreader: Forte Agent .99.82 References: <3vbdo6$714@condor.philabs.philips.com> <3vm0m7$btq@male.ebay.sun.com> <3voc9m$ok6@condor.philabs.philips.com> Date: Sat, 12 Aug 1995 00:22:10 GMT Lines: 14 Content-Type: text Content-Length: 616 Apparently-To: kevina Status: O X-Status: >>Every study I have seen shows that speed kills. Why would insurance >>companies and the highway patrol lie about this? >You must be joking-- quite obviously, the bottom line is money. >Insurance companies are allowed to financially rape otherwise safe >drivers for speeding ticket convictions. If speed limits were >properly set, their profits would plummet. Actually, if speed limits were reasonably set, the insurance companies would simply make up the difference by raising rates across the board, or by raising them even MORE for those drivers who still were caught speeding under the new, higher limits. From kevina Tue Aug 15 17:02:52 1995 Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id RAA07619 for kevina; Tue, 15 Aug 1995 17:02:52 -0400 Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.deltanet.com!usenet From: piela@deltanet.com (Alexander Lygin) Newsgroups: ca.driving Subject: Speed limits Date: 13 Aug 1995 21:30:29 GMT Organization: Delta Internet Services, Anaheim, CA Lines: 24 Message-ID: <40lqtl$mke@news1.deltanet.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: ppiela.deltanet.com X-Newsreader: WinVN 0.92.6+ Content-Type: text Content-Length: 1544 Apparently-To: kevina Status: O X-Status: Hi! Regarding raising spped limits: I agree that speed limits are to be raised and I think at least to 75 mph. But I also think that this proposal must be followed by another: reform of licensing drivers. The procedure as it is now allows almost anybody if hs/she is not completely fool get a driver license, which doesn't assure that one can handle car at such high speeds. Those people who get their DL in Russia remember the hell on their exam. They have to pass figure driving, make 8 backing up and have to proof much more of their skills. Thus I propose before spped limits are raised make all drivers pass qualification exams in 6 months or so and prove that they are able to handle their cars. It will create very big hussle, I agree, but it may be another revenue: make them pay for this qualification, say $20. And after that new speed limits may come in force. Because I really have seen few people that feel themselfes shaky when go on a freeway - especially old grand paps and mams. And make pretty high fine for those caught on freeway for speeding and not having passed the qualification exam. As for me, I have been a junior car racer in Russia and I know many things that others don't about handling car, not counting expirience. I think that my proposal sounds reasonable, doesn't need additional funding and may make additional revenue for DMV or whatever. As for drivers - it would not be big hussle to any of us to pay $20 and spend 30 minits to be qualified. What do you think about it? Sincerely, Alexander.