From kevina  Sun Aug  6 18:48:26 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id SAA05547 for kevina; Sun, 6 Aug 1995 18:48:26 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!mail.megaweb.com!kennystar
From: kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 1995 15:23:54
Organization: Megaweb
Lines: 42
Message-ID: <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @www_1_230.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: GNN Messenger 1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 1768
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 


In article <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> Scott Richard Rosenfeld wrote: 
(in Newsgroup rec.autos.driving)
>OK, OK, for a LONG time (since 1973/4) the speed limit has been a 
>federally mandated 55.  Now, it's not anymore.  55 was so widely 
>ignored that the concept of "you'll never get pulled over for less
>than 10 over" was the unwritten rule.  I'm 26.  I learned to drive 
>this way.  So a long trip meant just plunking the needle at 62 and
>keeping it there.  Nobody would bother you for that.
>
>Now, it's 65.  65, WOW, guess we can do 75?  80?
>
>A friend of mine in college got a ticket in South Carolina for 70 
>in a 65 zone.  A margin of error of +/- 5 mph is reasonable.  In 
>Maryland, along the I-95 corridor, you can and will be pulled over
>for doing 70.
>
>So basically, nothing has really changed, except that I can now 
>make my long trips at 67 instead of 62, and not worry about getting
>a ticket.  There are, undoubtedly, pockets where enforcement is 
>lax at best.  But don't expect the same policies to exist as when 
>the law was 55.
>
>BTW, when going from a 65 to a 55 zone, I find myself actually DOING
>between 55 and 60, whereas I used to (along w/everyone else) do about
>62.  Consider it a small price to pay for the luxury of cruising at
>68 without fear of reprisal.
>
>Anyone know if NY State has switched to 65 yet?
>-- 
>Member, Leukemia Society's "Team in Training." | Tax-deductible contributions
>Run/walk in Bermuda Marathon, Jan. 12-15, 1996 | accepted and welcome.  Email
>-----------------------------------------------| or call for more info.  All
>Scott Rosenfeld  Burtonsville MD  301-549-1022 | sponsors welcomed.  Thanks!
>

THIS is what I've been talking about!!!!! ATTITUDE!!!!!!

Kenny Morse
"Mr. Traffic"



From kevina  Sun Aug  6 18:49:00 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id SAA05644 for kevina; Sun, 6 Aug 1995 18:48:59 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!mail.megaweb.com!kennystar
From: kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Fri, 04 Aug 1995 15:29:54
Organization: Megaweb
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <3vu74s$60@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @www_1_230.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: GNN Messenger 1.1
Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:79192 ca.driving:18617
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 1521
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 


In article <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com> John P. Curcio wrote:
>In article <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>,
>Scott Richard Rosenfeld <ham@wam.umd.edu> wrote:
>
>...about 65mph limit....
>
>>So basically, nothing has really changed, except that I can now 
>>make my long trips at 67 instead of 62, and not worry about getting
>>a ticket.  There are, undoubtedly, pockets where enforcement is 
>>lax at best.  But don't expect the same policies to exist as when 
>>the law was 55.
>
and John writes:
>You are the type of person the gloom-and-doom insurance companies and
>safety nazis say don't exist.  You are proof that drivers will respect
>a reasonable limit (although I belive 65 might be 5-10 mph too low)
>and not hold speed limits in contempt, as happened before.

WHAT???? He's the type of person that the insurance company uses
to solidify their beliefs!  His willingness to speed even when the limit
is raised to 65!!!!!  He is EXACTLY why those of us who wish the
speed limits could be 75 won't get our wish.  Because the government
KNOWS that if they raise to 75....he  (and many others) will take that
as a sign to do 85!
>>

Kenny Morse
"Mr. Traffic" on
Los Angeles Radio & TV  responding to
>-JPC
>
>-- 
>=================================================================
============
>John P. Curcio  jpc@philabs.philips.com  Philips Labs  Briarcliff Manor, NY
>                "FOSTERS:  Australian for Bud, mate!!"
>   "No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'"  -BH
>



From kevina  Tue Aug  8 01:16:59 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA23948 for kevina; Tue, 8 Aug 1995 01:16:58 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!infoseek.com!news.onramp.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!usenet
From: gribble@primenet.com (Mr. Fun)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 03:04:05 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 58
Message-ID: <4045lc$sjd@nnrp1.primenet.com>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com> <3vu74s$60@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip16-082.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:79448 ca.driving:18666
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2580
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE) wrote:


>In article <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com> John P. Curcio wrote:
>>In article <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>,
>>Scott Richard Rosenfeld <ham@wam.umd.edu> wrote:
>>
>>...about 65mph limit....
>>
>>>So basically, nothing has really changed, except that I can now 
>>>make my long trips at 67 instead of 62, and not worry about getting
>>>a ticket.  There are, undoubtedly, pockets where enforcement is 
>>>lax at best.  But don't expect the same policies to exist as when 
>>>the law was 55.
>>
>and John writes:
>>You are the type of person the gloom-and-doom insurance companies and
>>safety nazis say don't exist.  You are proof that drivers will respect
>>a reasonable limit (although I belive 65 might be 5-10 mph too low)
>>and not hold speed limits in contempt, as happened before.

>WHAT???? He's the type of person that the insurance company uses
>to solidify their beliefs!  His willingness to speed even when the limit
>is raised to 65!!!!!  He is EXACTLY why those of us who wish the
>speed limits could be 75 won't get our wish.  Because the government
>KNOWS that if they raise to 75....he  (and many others) will take that
>as a sign to do 85!
>>>

>Kenny Morse
>"Mr. Traffic" on
>Los Angeles Radio & TV  responding to
>>-JPC
>>
>>-- 
>>=================================================================
>============
>>John P. Curcio  jpc@philabs.philips.com  Philips Labs  Briarcliff Manor, NY
>>                "FOSTERS:  Australian for Bud, mate!!"
>>   "No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'"  -BH
>>


I don't think there is any real basis for that.  Drivers drive, when left
alone, at reasonable speeds for known conditions.  That's why the old 85th
percent rule works so well for so many years - the speed limit was set at the
speed that 85% of the drivers drove at or below.  There was an intereseting
little "study" done some years back by one of the car mags.  They turned a
small group of drivers loose in an assortment of vehicles with the
speedometers blacked out but with a recording device connected.  What they
found was that everyone drove at perfectly reasonable speeds and that the
vehicle that averaged the highest speed was not the "sports car" (I forget
which one it was) but was some Van (something like a Ford Econoline).  People
aren't fools, for the most part, and will drive at a reasonable speed.  Of
course there will always be the exception who thinks it's Ok to do 110 thru
traffic but whatever the speed limit is it won't matter to those people
anyway.


From kevina  Tue Aug  8 01:18:27 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA24272 for kevina; Tue, 8 Aug 1995 01:18:26 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!cs.utexas.edu!usc!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!mail.megaweb.com!kennystar
From: kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 02:51:42
Organization: Megaweb
Lines: 50
Message-ID: <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @www_4_131.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: GNN Messenger 1.1
Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:79466 ca.driving:18672
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 2775
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 


In article <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com> mckay_michael wrote:
>   I think you are being over strident on this issue.  If you compare two 
>speeds that are both too low, you end up with the same result (ie. people are
>willing to break the law to speed over the limit).  If the 85% on the
>the road the guy was talking about was truly 65mph, than you might have a
>point; as it is, the evidence is still inconclusive.  
>   When you ask your class about "if they would still exceed the speed
>limit", I think that you are not taking two things into account when listening
>to their answers.  First, it is rare to find a maximum speed limit (in the
>US) that is consistent with the 85 percentile.  Your class people just don't
>have much exerience with "reality" based speed limits (they would have to be
>in their late 40's or older).  As I pointed out in a post, I have found a few
>places in my area where the speed limit is high, and the majority of people
>drive under the speed limit (not above it like you claim).

Michael.....

This is true. The majority of my class students have little or no experience with
75mph speed limits.  But since the relativity they DO have is going from 55
as the law to 65 in the boonies, and NOW they have a chance to fly at a 
speed they think is more "fair", they go 75-80.  YOU may have found
a few places where the 65 mph has traffic below it, but those are few and
far between.  Remember....YOU know what happens to you and your friends...
I know what happens to the MAJORITY of people who get caught, which is
just a slice of life of the total of all drivers.  Also, I talk to people on the air.
MY polling, as far as I'm concerned, reflects reality. I don't make a thing
up...I don't have to. People tell me everything.
.
When I hear from a professional like myself who has contact with the
huge numbers of drivers and cops that I do, who has another opinion, THEN
I'll be surprised. I do NOT negate yours or others who express their
opinions within...quite the contrary, I appreciate it when it is expressed
intelligently (as yours was).  I only point out that between us, I'm the
one who hears from the majority.  Anyone who thinks that people
who land in traffic school are NOT a slice of the general public because
they can afford to go, is not in touch with reality.  The ONLY people
that my students DON'T represent are the illegals who are driving in
this state.  Even the poor come to traffic school (come to my class in
Santa Ana Central Court next Saturday and see the gringos and the
Spanish class) because they don't want to lose the driving priviledge, and
they'll have to pay the same money anyway! The cost of traffic school is
$35 more.

Thanks for your post.  Well said!

Kenny Morse
"Mr. Traffic"



From kevina  Tue Aug  8 01:20:18 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA24822 for kevina; Tue, 8 Aug 1995 01:20:17 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!swrinde!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!lll-winken.llnl.gov!fnnews.fnal.gov!nntp-server.caltech.edu!addam
From: addam@cco.caltech.edu (Adam Neil Villani)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: 7 Aug 1995 21:45:19 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 43
Message-ID: <4061hf$ft9@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com> <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: piccolo.cco.caltech.edu
Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:79651 ca.driving:18693
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2139
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:
>This is true. The majority of my class students have little or no experience with
>75mph speed limits.  But since the relativity they DO have is going from 55
>as the law to 65 in the boonies, and NOW they have a chance to fly at a 
>speed they think is more "fair", they go 75-80.  YOU may have found
>a few places where the 65 mph has traffic below it, but those are few and
>far between.  Remember....YOU know what happens to you and your friends...

OK, Kenny, I won't be so confrontational this post.

You've often mentioned the fact that people with tickets from city driving
(limit 55) are often about 70 or so, and people with tickets from rural
driving (limit 65) are often about 80. You say that this means "people
will go 10-15 mph over the speed limit." I think you're misinterpreting
the facts here. I think people go 70 in the city and 80 in farm
country because those are appropriate speeds in those areas, not because
those appropriate speeds happen to be 15 miles per hour over the speed
limit. There's less traffic out on the 5, the road is much straighter,
there is less merging and exits/entrances. Of course the ambient
speed is higher. But 65 is no more a reasonable limit in farm country
than 55 is in the city. Think about it: if people drive 70 in the
city, then why would they go down to 65 in the country just because
it's legal? 

The T&W study is not being touted as showing "People drive at the
same speed no matter what the limit is," it is being touted as
showing "People drive the same speed no matter what the limit
is *on a particular road*." This is an EXTREMELY important difference.
The roads that have 55 mph speed limits today are different roads
than the ones that have 65 mph speed limits. The real comparison
that you want to look at is the difference in speeds on the 5
before the 65 mph limit at after the 65 mph limit. This is the
kind of information that you need.




-- 
Adam Villani
addam@cco.caltech.edu
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~addam
"I was in this prematurely air-conditioned supermarket..."

From kevina  Tue Aug  8 01:24:49 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA25826 for kevina; Tue, 8 Aug 1995 01:24:49 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!mail.megaweb.com!kennystar
From: kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Mon, 07 Aug 1995 17:20:43
Organization: Megaweb
Lines: 85
Message-ID: <406apr$6ui@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com> <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com> <4061hf$ft9@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @www_4_254.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: GNN Messenger 1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 4134
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 


In article <4061hf$ft9@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Adam Neil Villani wrote:
>In article <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
>KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:
>>This is true. The majority of my class students have little or no experience with
>>75mph speed limits.  But since the relativity they DO have is going from 55
>>as the law to 65 in the boonies, and NOW they have a chance to fly at a 
>>speed they think is more "fair", they go 75-80.  YOU may have found
>>a few places where the 65 mph has traffic below it, but those are few and
>>far between.  Remember....YOU know what happens to you and your friends...
>
>OK, Kenny, I won't be so confrontational this post.

No prob being confrontational as long as you stay civil, my friend.
I appreciate your intelligence....totally disrespect name calling.
>
>You've often mentioned the fact that people with tickets from city driving
>(limit 55) are often about 70 or so, and people with tickets from rural
>driving (limit 65) are often about 80. You say that this means "people
>will go 10-15 mph over the speed limit." I think you're misinterpreting
>the facts here. I think people go 70 in the city and 80 in farm
>country because those are appropriate speeds in those areas, not because
>those appropriate speeds happen to be 15 miles per hour over the speed
>limit. There's less traffic out on the 5, the road is much straighter,
>there is less merging and exits/entrances. Of course the ambient
>speed is higher. But 65 is no more a reasonable limit in farm country
>than 55 is in the city. Think about it: if people drive 70 in the
>city, then why would they go down to 65 in the country just because
>it's legal? 

Adam....

Although I agree that 55 is a farce and SHOULD be raised, and that
65 MIGHT....MIGHT be too slow for the rural areas (I'll even say
probably too slow)....I think to say that people go what they think
is APPROPRIATE is EXACTLY the point I HAVE BEEN MAKING...
the questions I have been posing is WHAT CRITERIA DO
PEOPLE ARRIVE AT WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THEM???
It is my experience that people do NOT speed because of percieved
unfairness of the speed laws (to which I agree)...it is their own personal
sense of what THEY can "get away" with and hope NOT to get caught.
YOU may drive at a speed YOU consider to be appropriate.  If you
break the law, get caught...don't complain when you have to pay
mega$$$ to the insurance companies.  What IS REALLY appropriate??
This.....drive at a speed that is both SAFE, and probably (keyword) NOT
going to get you ticketed and all the crap that falls from that moment.  Until
the laws change (which they should and are), THAT is what is appropriate.
We CANNOT have everyone deciding what is appropriate at THIS point
in time because of the diversity of cultures evident in this state, the lack of
adequate education and testing, and the lack of courtesy or consideration
that is also evident on our roads....and trying to blame it on archaic speed
laws begs the REAL issue as to why people behave the way they do (which I
addressed in a previous post).

You keep telling me that people speed because they feel it's appropriate
no matter WHAT the zone (like the study says) and I keep answering its
WAY more complex than that....and I only wish it wasn't.

BTW...I'd be interested to know what you are majoring in...what year...how old
if you care to share the info?

Kenny Morse
"Mr. Traffic"
>
>The T&W study is not being touted as showing "People drive at the
>same speed no matter what the limit is," it is being touted as
>showing "People drive the same speed no matter what the limit
>is *on a particular road*." This is an EXTREMELY important difference.
>The roads that have 55 mph speed limits today are different roads
>than the ones that have 65 mph speed limits. The real comparison
>that you want to look at is the difference in speeds on the 5
>before the 65 mph limit at after the 65 mph limit. This is the
>kind of information that you need.
>
>
>
>
>-- 
>Adam Villani
>addam@cco.caltech.edu
>http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~addam
>"I was in this prematurely air-conditioned supermarket..."
>



From kevina  Tue Aug  8 01:41:24 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA28239 for kevina; Tue, 8 Aug 1995 01:41:24 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!convex!news.duke.edu!eff!news.umbc.edu!haven.umd.edu!cville-srv.wam.umd.edu!ham
From: ham@wam.umd.edu (Scott Richard Rosenfeld)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: 65 means 65
Date: 4 Aug 1995 17:25:23 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Lines: 31
Message-ID: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: rac1.wam.umd.edu
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1535
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

OK, OK, for a LONG time (since 1973/4) the speed limit has been a 
federally mandated 55.  Now, it's not anymore.  55 was so widely 
ignored that the concept of "you'll never get pulled over for less
than 10 over" was the unwritten rule.  I'm 26.  I learned to drive 
this way.  So a long trip meant just plunking the needle at 62 and
keeping it there.  Nobody would bother you for that.

Now, it's 65.  65, WOW, guess we can do 75?  80?

A friend of mine in college got a ticket in South Carolina for 70 
in a 65 zone.  A margin of error of +/- 5 mph is reasonable.  In 
Maryland, along the I-95 corridor, you can and will be pulled over
for doing 70.

So basically, nothing has really changed, except that I can now 
make my long trips at 67 instead of 62, and not worry about getting
a ticket.  There are, undoubtedly, pockets where enforcement is 
lax at best.  But don't expect the same policies to exist as when 
the law was 55.

BTW, when going from a 65 to a 55 zone, I find myself actually DOING
between 55 and 60, whereas I used to (along w/everyone else) do about
62.  Consider it a small price to pay for the luxury of cruising at
68 without fear of reprisal.

Anyone know if NY State has switched to 65 yet?
-- 
Member, Leukemia Society's "Team in Training." | Tax-deductible contributions
Run/walk in Bermuda Marathon, Jan. 12-15, 1996 | accepted and welcome.  Email
-----------------------------------------------| or call for more info.  All
Scott Rosenfeld  Burtonsville MD  301-549-1022 | sponsors welcomed.  Thanks!

From kevina  Tue Aug  8 01:43:44 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA28659 for kevina; Tue, 8 Aug 1995 01:43:43 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!news.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.internetmci.com!solaris.cc.vt.edu!news.duke.edu!acheron!philabs!nobody
From: jpc@philabs.philips.com (John P. Curcio)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: 4 Aug 1995 14:34:33 -0400
Organization: Philips Laboratories, Briarcliff, NY 10510
Lines: 48
Distribution: inet
Message-ID: <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: condor.philabs.philips.com
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2290
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>,
Scott Richard Rosenfeld <ham@wam.umd.edu> wrote:

...about 65mph limit....

>So basically, nothing has really changed, except that I can now 
>make my long trips at 67 instead of 62, and not worry about getting
>a ticket.  There are, undoubtedly, pockets where enforcement is 
>lax at best.  But don't expect the same policies to exist as when 
>the law was 55.

I don't necessarily agree that nothing has changed.  The de facto
speed limit has not changed, but now at least if I get caught driving
72 in a 65 I get a ticket for doing 72 in a 65, not a ticket for 72 in
a 55.  That 10 mph the cops would give you disappeared when the ticket
was written.  This can make a difference in regards to the severity of
the fine and number of points put on your record.

Also, now that we have 65 here in New York on a number of roads, there
are a few which didn't get raised (aside from the ones banned by
federal law, others weren't raised for political reasons).  The NYSP
say that they will be enforcing them a lot tighter than before.  In
other words, the "10 over" tolerance is gone altogether, so the de facto speed limit on those such roads has actually dropped.

>BTW, when going from a 65 to a 55 zone, I find myself actually DOING
>between 55 and 60, whereas I used to (along w/everyone else) do about
>62.  Consider it a small price to pay for the luxury of cruising at
>68 without fear of reprisal.

You are the type of person the gloom-and-doom insurance companies and
safety nazis say don't exist.  You are proof that drivers will respect
a reasonable limit (although I belive 65 might be 5-10 mph too low)
and not hold speed limits in contempt, as happened before.

>Anyone know if NY State has switched to 65 yet?

Yes, as of 12:01AM on 1 August 1995.  Do be careful, however-- it is
not on all roads, and the armed revenue collectors are concentrating
enforcement on those area where the limit changes, and wasting more
money on LIDAR units.

-JPC

-- 
=============================================================================
John P. Curcio  jpc@philabs.philips.com  Philips Labs  Briarcliff Manor, NY
                "FOSTERS:  Australian for Bud, mate!!"
   "No goats, no boats, no motorcars, not a single 'yes-siree!'"  -BH

From kevina  Tue Aug  8 01:55:02 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA00536 for kevina; Tue, 8 Aug 1995 01:55:02 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!genmagic!sgigate.sgi.com!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!EU.net!howland.reston.ans.net!math.ohio-state.edu!pacific.mps.ohio-state.edu!freenet.columbus.oh.us!magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu!cis.ohio-state.edu!nntp.sei.cmu.edu!bb3.andrew.cmu.edu!andrew.cmu.edu!nn22+
From: "Nathan J. Nagel" <nn22+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Mon,  7 Aug 1995 15:06:23 -0400
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Lines: 41
Message-ID: <Mk9aEj600YUwIK7ZQM@andrew.cmu.edu>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com>
	<3vu74s$60@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: po8.andrew.cmu.edu
In-Reply-To: <3vu74s$60@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2071
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

Excerpts from netnews.rec.autos.driving: 4-Aug-95 Re: 65 means 65 by
KENNY MORSE@megaweb.com 
> and John writes:
> >You are the type of person the gloom-and-doom insurance companies and
> >safety nazis say don't exist.  You are proof that drivers will respect
> >a reasonable limit (although I belive 65 might be 5-10 mph too low)
> >and not hold speed limits in contempt, as happened before.
>  
> WHAT???? He's the type of person that the insurance company uses
> to solidify their beliefs!  His willingness to speed even when the limit
> is raised to 65!!!!!  He is EXACTLY why those of us who wish the
> speed limits could be 75 won't get our wish.  Because the government
> KNOWS that if they raise to 75....he  (and many others) will take that
> as a sign to do 85!
> >>

    I disagree... I think that I would do around 80 on most roads
without a speed limit.  I think that reasonable limits are a great idea,
and indeed, I am far more likely to make an effort to obey the 65 MPH
limit than the ridiculous 55 bulls**t that we've had to put up with for
so many years.
    I, for one, am all in favor of a higher limit.
    Another advantage to a higher limit is the fact that one is more
attentive to driving... case in point: last time I was driving late at
night on a 65 MPH stretch of road I passed quite a few people doing only
about 55-60.  I took a mental assessment of the road conditions to see
if there were any dangerous conditions that would cause people to be
driving so slowly.  I was forced to conclude that it was simply l late t
nighrt and that these people were not comfortable driving fast at night.
 However, had the limit been 55, I would not have thought that they were
uncomfortable at azll, and I would have blown merrily past, since I
would have thought that they were merely obeying the signs like good
sheep.  Now in this case, there was no reason for me not to have been
riving fast, but had there been, I would probably noticed it sooner than
with a lower limit.

(and no, smartass, it's not because I was driving faster <g>)

later,

N

From kevina  Wed Aug  9 04:38:08 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id EAA25679 for kevina; Wed, 9 Aug 1995 04:38:07 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!pagesat.net!nntp-server.caltech.edu!addam
From: addam@cco.caltech.edu (Adam Neil Villani)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: 8 Aug 1995 03:16:20 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Lines: 122
Message-ID: <406ku4$9vl@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com> <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com> <4061hf$ft9@gap.cco.caltech.edu> <406apr$6ui@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: piccolo.cco.caltech.edu
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 6401
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <406apr$6ui@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:
>
>In article <4061hf$ft9@gap.cco.caltech.edu> Adam Neil Villani wrote:
>>You've often mentioned the fact that people with tickets from city driving
>>(limit 55) are often about 70 or so, and people with tickets from rural
>>driving (limit 65) are often about 80. You say that this means "people
>>will go 10-15 mph over the speed limit." I think you're misinterpreting
>>the facts here. I think people go 70 in the city and 80 in farm
>>country because those are appropriate speeds in those areas, not because
>>those appropriate speeds happen to be 15 miles per hour over the speed
>>limit. There's less traffic out on the 5, the road is much straighter,
>>there is less merging and exits/entrances. Of course the ambient
>>speed is higher. But 65 is no more a reasonable limit in farm country
>>than 55 is in the city. Think about it: if people drive 70 in the
>>city, then why would they go down to 65 in the country just because
>>it's legal? 
>
>Adam....
>
>is APPROPRIATE is EXACTLY the point I HAVE BEEN MAKING...
>the questions I have been posing is WHAT CRITERIA DO
>PEOPLE ARRIVE AT WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THEM???
>It is my experience that people do NOT speed because of percieved
>unfairness of the speed laws (to which I agree)...it is their own personal
>sense of what THEY can "get away" with and hope NOT to get caught.

Hmm. I like to drive fast, but I do not like to feel unsafe, and I
also do not want to get caught by a cop. I think we can establish
a few things about drivers, with the exception of a few maniacs:

Nobody wants to get caught by cops. Nobody wants to get in an
accident. Therefore there are two limiting factors to a driver's
speed: Slow enough not to get caught by cops *and* slow enough
to feel reasonably safe. People drive up to the speed that they
feel will make them more likely to be caught by cops or more
likely to get in an accident, whichever is slower (unless they
just don't feel like driving that fast).

You might think that safety doesn't enter people's minds, but it 
does. If there were no speed limit, would the majority of people
drive at the physical limits of their cars? If you're driving
along the 405 and see a bunch of brakelights ahead of you, you
slow down because there's the hazard of slow cars ahead, not because
you're afraid of being ticketed. Even if you know that the cops 
hardly ever drive down your street, you still don't floor it,
because you know what a safe speed is for your street.

You frequently cite the fact that people have a great trust in you
and feel free to tell you why they speed. But what they actually
do is tell you why they _think_ they speed. This may or may
not really be why they speed. How often do you think about why
you slow down when turning corners? The conscious reason for
a person's behavior may be different than their unconscious reason
for their behavior. It's foolish to not actually monitor a person's
behavior when collecting data, and only rely on what they tell
you. They may not be lying to you, but they aren't necessarily
aware of all their actions and their reasonings behind them.
(Likewise, collecting nothing but quantitative data is stupid.)
Asking people if they would speed if the limit were raised by 10
mph is not worthless, but it is certainly not the final say in
the matter. To draw a reliable conclusion, you'd have to raise
the limit by 10 mph and see how fast they actually drove.

>YOU may drive at a speed YOU consider to be appropriate.  If you
>break the law, get caught...don't complain when you have to pay
>mega$$$ to the insurance companies.  What IS REALLY appropriate??
>This.....drive at a speed that is both SAFE, and probably (keyword) NOT
>going to get you ticketed and all the crap that falls from that moment.  Until
>the laws change (which they should and are), THAT is what is appropriate.

This is the point, that the laws _should_ be changed to reflect appropriate
driving behavior. Put the speed limit at a level that accurately 
reflects what a safe driving speed is for a road, and let the cops
ticket only those who truly are driving at an inappropriate speed.

>We CANNOT have everyone deciding what is appropriate at THIS point
>in time because of the diversity of cultures evident in this state, the lack of
>adequate education and testing, and the lack of courtesy or consideration
>that is also evident on our roads....and trying to blame it on archaic speed
>laws begs the REAL issue as to why people behave the way they do (which I
>addressed in a previous post).

Of course, everyone has their own idea of what is appropriate. And 
certainly with better driver training and more stringent certification,
people will become better judges of what is or is not appropriate
driving. But keeping asinine speed laws is no way to make our roads
better. We may not know what is truly an appropriate speed for a 
road, (in fact, it's different for every driver) but surely 70%
of the drivers (an approximation of how many drivers exceed the speed
limit) are not driving at unsafe speeds. If anything, bad speed
laws make criminals out of otherwise good drivers and ensure greater
speed differentials on roads, which is one major factor in causing
accidents. This is because there will be a minority of drivers that
keep their speeds artificially low to comply with the law rather
than safety.

>no matter WHAT the zone (like the study says) and I keep answering its
>WAY more complex than that....and I only wish it wasn't.
It is complex, but raising speed limits to reasonable levels would
be a good first step toward making the roads safer, more efficient,
and more enjoyable.


About me... I'll be 22 in a month, and in the fall I'll be a senior
in Geology at Caltech. Being a student, I can't afford a car of
my own, so I only drive when I can borrow someone else's. I live,
work, and go to school on campus, so I rarely have to drive for
"business." Instead, I drive for entertainment, both to get to
fun places (I go to the movies more than once a week) and for
the sake of driving itself. I've lived in Southern California
since 1975.

Feel free to take a look at my web page to see some more stuff
of or by me.


-- 
Adam Villani
addam@cco.caltech.edu
http://www.ugcs.caltech.edu/~addam
"I was in this prematurely air-conditioned supermarket..."

From kevina  Wed Aug  9 04:38:58 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id EAA25824 for kevina; Wed, 9 Aug 1995 04:38:57 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!infoseek.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!svc.portal.com!portal.com!cup.portal.com!Floyd_-_Meyer
From: Floyd_-_Meyer@cup.portal.com
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: 8 Aug 1995 10:20:03 -0700
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 21
Sender: pccop@unix.portal.com
Message-ID: <143338@cup.portal.com>
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com>
  <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com> <4061hf$ft9@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
  <406apr$6ui@news-e1a.megaweb.com> <406ku4$9vl@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 156.151.4.12
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 970
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

   All this talk about the speedlimit is missing the point. In politics
there is nothing that "Just happens". The 55 mph was passed by the state
legislators under pressure of the federal government. The pretext was
to save oil. The oil shortage was then and is now a political scam.

   President Nixon had visions of becoming a dictator. Watergate ruined that
but President Clinton is hard at it. Once the people have their guns 
taken away (it's being set up), then enforce the 55 mph after raising
the fines about 500%. Raise the price of fuel to about $5.00 a gallon
after opening the borders to cheap labor which forces wages to $5.00
an hour.

    The white collar crooks have stole trillions of dollars and are the
super rich. They have the money and do not need the economy to survive.

   If the economy plunges the crooks can buy the realestate at 10 cents 
on the dollar with their stolen money.

   The phoney 55 mph is a time bomb waiting it's time.

Floyd

From kevina  Wed Aug  9 05:27:52 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id FAA05117 for kevina; Wed, 9 Aug 1995 05:27:52 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!infoseek.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!spool.mu.edu!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.ultranet.com!zombie.ncsc.mil!news.duke.edu!godzilla.acpub.duke.edu!yhn1
From: Scott Nguyen <yhn1@acpub.duke.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Tue, 8 Aug 1995 13:57:19 -0400
Organization: Duke University, Durham, NC, USA
Lines: 6
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.91.950808135521.2054B-100000@godzilla.acpub.duke.edu>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu>
NNTP-Posting-Host: godzilla.acpub.duke.edu
Mime-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> 
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Length: 401
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

I went through NY in June and it was still 55.  Although it was at night 
with no cars, so I barely dropped below 85..  California is the best, bo 
doubt..  The Bay area has relatively few CHP and they must pace you to 
get your speed.. On my daily drive from San Jose to Berkeley, I can 
average ~83-85 mph...  But when they are around, they are viscous.  My 
bro got a tix for doing 61 in a 55!!!  

From kevina  Fri Aug 11 15:25:32 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id PAA25072 for kevina; Fri, 11 Aug 1995 15:25:30 -0400
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!in1.uu.net!pravda.aa.msen.com!sdd.hp.com!hpscit.sc.hp.com!hpax!sranade
From: sranade@cup.hp.com (Shrikant Ranade)
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Sender: news@hpax (News Admin)
Message-ID: <DD42qq.1qE@cup.hp.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 20:11:13 GMT
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com>  <406ku4$9vl@gap.cco.caltech.edu> <1995Aug9.151442.5945@cmkrnl>
Nntp-Posting-Host: hpcuhe.cup.hp.com
Organization: Hewlett Packard, Cupertino
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
Lines: 19
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 956
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems (jeh@cmkrnl.com) wrote:

: And there is a very real problem here; the speed limit signs are like 
: the boy who cried wolf.  If motorists could believe that posted limits 
: really did reflect maximum, or even typical, safe speeds, we would then 
: have more tendency to obey the occasional speed limit that has to be 
: set low to reflect a non-obvious hazard... a blind curve coming up 
: with an intersection just beyond, a hazardously banked road, etc.  

Well said.  In fact, the way things are, we treat the yellow "caution"
signs with more respect than we give to speed limits.  If a freeway
has a curve signed for 45,  I will be more likely to slow down to 45mph
than if, instead, the speed limit was lowered to 45 for that stretch.

It appears that Caltrans is aware of this.  Why else put up "caution"
signs for 55 on a road for which the speed limit is 55 as well? :-)

--Shrikant Ranade
--sranade@cup.hp.com

From kevina  Fri Aug 11 19:47:00 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id TAA06505 for kevina; Fri, 11 Aug 1995 19:46:59 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!news.primenet.com!usenet
From: gribble@primenet.com (Mr. Fun)
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 04:09:39 GMT
Organization: Primenet
Lines: 46
Message-ID: <40er2g$e8s@nnrp3.primenet.com>
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com> <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: ip189.phx.primenet.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Free Agent 1.0.82
Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:80230 ca.driving:18782
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2273
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE) wrote:




>Michael.....

>This is true. The majority of my class students have little or no experience with
>75mph speed limits.  But since the relativity they DO have is going from 55
>as the law to 65 in the boonies, and NOW they have a chance to fly at a 
>speed they think is more "fair", they go 75-80.  YOU may have found
>a few places where the 65 mph has traffic below it, but those are few and
>far between.  Remember....YOU know what happens to you and your friends...
>I know what happens to the MAJORITY of people who get caught, which is
>just a slice of life of the total of all drivers.  Also, I talk to people on the air.
>MY polling, as far as I'm concerned, reflects reality. I don't make a thing
>up...I don't have to. People tell me everything.
>.

You're crazy.  If you think you are exposed to a statistically balanced
cross-section of drivers thru your contact in Driving School or your radio
show you are really quite out of touch with reality.  The place where ALL of
us are in touch with a statistically meaningfull sample of drivers is ON THE
ROAD where we observe what they do in the wild.  

>When I hear from a professional like myself who has contact with the
>huge numbers of drivers and cops that I do, who has another opinion, THEN
>I'll be surprised. I do NOT negate yours or others who express their
>opinions within...quite the contrary, I appreciate it when it is expressed
>intelligently (as yours was).  I only point out that between us, I'm the
>one who hears from the majority. 

Must be hard to find hats to fit that big head of yours....
   you are not hearing from any "majority" anyplace other then on the highway
just like the rest of us.  The people you see in school are not a typical
cross section of drivers - from my occassional visits to such classes, they
are heavily biased toward the lower socioeconomic groups who can't afford the
ticket and/or higher insurance or "another" ticket.  The higher socio groups
seem to prefer not to waste the time in class and just mail in the money.
Ditto for who you see in court - it's almost exclusively the lower
socio-economic group, again, that's my obeservation but it's been quite
consistent over many years in several juristicstions.





From kevina  Fri Aug 11 19:47:47 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id TAA06647 for kevina; Fri, 11 Aug 1995 19:47:45 -0400
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving,ca.driving
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!newsfeed.internetmci.com!hookup!nic.wat.hookup.net!noc.tor.hookup.net!ve3ied!whome!gts!bokonon!silver
From: bokonon!silver@uunet.uu.net (Hi Ho Silver)
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Organization: Followers of Bokonon
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 19:28:04 GMT
Message-ID: <DCyGqs.5B7@bokonon.UUCP>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com> <3vu74s$60@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
Lines: 24
Xref: news.clark.net rec.autos.driving:80285 ca.driving:18795
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1180
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <3vu74s$60@news-e1a.megaweb.com> kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE) writes:
$WHAT???? He's the type of person that the insurance company uses
$to solidify their beliefs!  His willingness to speed even when the limit
$is raised to 65!!!!!  He is EXACTLY why those of us who wish the
$speed limits could be 75 won't get our wish.  Because the government
$KNOWS that if they raise to 75....he  (and many others) will take that
$as a sign to do 85!

   Pardon?

   When the limit was 55, he did 62 - that's 7 over.

   When the limit is 65, he does 68 - that's 3 over.

   You follow the trend.  I'm not suggesting that he'll do 1 under
at 75, but clearly he's doing as most drivers would do - driving
some mixture of the legal speed limit and a reasonable speed for
the road and conditions (which is almost always higher than the
legal speed limit, at least in Canada and the States).
-- 
 ______________________________________________
/  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  Fri Aug 11 20:08:07 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id PAA24919 for kevina; Fri, 11 Aug 1995 15:24:51 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!infoseek.com!uunet!in2.uu.net!news.sprintlink.net!crash!cmkrnl!jeh
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com (Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Message-ID: <1995Aug9.151442.5945@cmkrnl>
Date: 9 Aug 95 15:14:42 PDT
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com>  <406ku4$9vl@gap.cco.caltech.edu>
Organization: Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego, CA
Lines: 22
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 1123
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <406ku4$9vl@gap.cco.caltech.edu>, addam@cco.caltech.edu 
(Adam Neil Villani) writes:
> If anything, bad speed
> laws make criminals out of otherwise good drivers and ensure greater
> speed differentials on roads, which is one major factor in causing
> accidents. This is because there will be a minority of drivers that
> keep their speeds artificially low to comply with the law rather
> than safety.

"Criminals" is going a bit far, since most simple speed violations 
aren't criminal offenses, but these too-low limits do make scofflaws 
out of a majority of motorists. 

And there is a very real problem here; the speed limit signs are like 
the boy who cried wolf.  If motorists could believe that posted limits 
really did reflect maximum, or even typical, safe speeds, we would then 
have more tendency to obey the occasional speed limit that has to be 
set low to reflect a non-obvious hazard... a blind curve coming up 
with an intersection just beyond, a hazardously banked road, etc.  

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego CA
Internet: jeh@cmkrnl.com (JH645)  CompuServe: 74140,2055  

From kevina  Sat Aug 12 16:24:22 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id QAA20325 for kevina; Sat, 12 Aug 1995 16:24:22 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!mail.megaweb.com!kennystar
From: kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Fri, 11 Aug 1995 00:12:02
Organization: Megaweb
Lines: 59
Message-ID: <40f015$ber@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com> <404ns0$7st@news-e1a.megaweb.com> <40er2g$e8s@nnrp3.primenet.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @www_2_202.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: GNN Messenger 1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 2717
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 


In article <40er2g$e8s@nnrp3.primenet.com> Mr. Fun wrote:
>kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE) wrote:
>
>>Michael.....
>
>>This is true. The majority of my class students have little or no experience with
>>75mph speed limits.  But since the relativity they DO have is going from 55
>>as the law to 65 in the boonies, and NOW they have a chance to fly at a 
>>speed they think is more "fair", they go 75-80.  YOU may have found
>>a few places where the 65 mph has traffic below it, but those are few and
>>far between.  Remember....YOU know what happens to you and your friends...
>>I know what happens to the MAJORITY of people who get caught, which is
>>just a slice of life of the total of all drivers.  Also, I talk to people on the air.
>>MY polling, as far as I'm concerned, reflects reality. I don't make a thing
>>up...I don't have to. People tell me everything.
>>.
>
Mr Fun replied:
>You're crazy.  If you think you are exposed to a statistically balanced
>cross-section of drivers thru your contact in Driving School or your radio
>show you are really quite out of touch with reality.  The place where ALL of
>us are in touch with a statistically meaningfull sample of drivers is ON THE
>ROAD where we observe what they do in the wild.  
>>
>Must be hard to find hats to fit that big head of yours...

It sure is! But luckily, people like YOU provide me with the income
to afford the custom job.
.
>   you are not hearing from any "majority" anyplace other then on the highway
>just like the rest of us.  The people you see in school are not a typical
>cross section of drivers - from my occassional visits to such classes, they
>are heavily biased toward the lower socioeconomic groups who can't afford the
>ticket and/or higher insurance or "another" ticket.  The higher socio groups
>seem to prefer not to waste the time in class and just mail in the money.
>Ditto for who you see in court - it's almost exclusively the lower
>socio-economic group, again, that's my obeservation but it's been quite
>consistent over many years in several juristicstions.
>
Wrong again, Fun man. If you had been in Harbor Court in
Newport Beach tonight for class, we had 600 people (in
4 courtrooms, who's average income was probably way 
above yours OR mine! You should have seen the cars
in the parking lot....the Lexus' (or is it Lexii?), the Corvettes,
the Supras, and just a few (like a dozen) Mercedes. I had
a guy in my class who owned a new SL 500 (which I saw him
pull up in so I asked him the cost.....he told me the RETAIL
(which to ME is a dirty word)...$138,000.

Nice try though.

Kenny Morse
"Mr. Traffic"
http:www.usbusiness.com/mr_traffic.html

P.S. Thanks for helping my swelled head get bigger too.



From kevina  Sat Aug 12 16:25:18 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id QAA20473 for kevina; Sat, 12 Aug 1995 16:25:17 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!newshost.marcam.com!usc!crash!cmkrnl!jeh
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com (Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Message-ID: <1995Aug12.084411.5964@cmkrnl>
Date: 12 Aug 95 08:44:11 PDT
References: <9508070140.AA25287@aladdin.ac.tandem.com>  <40f015$ber@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
Organization: Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego, CA
Lines: 40
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2143
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <40f015$ber@news-e1a.megaweb.com>, kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE) writes:
> In article <40er2g$e8s@nnrp3.primenet.com> Mr. Fun wrote:
>>   you are not hearing from any "majority" anyplace other then on the highway
>>just like the rest of us.  The people you see in school are not a typical
>>cross section of drivers - from my occassional visits to such classes, they
>>are heavily biased toward the lower socioeconomic groups who can't afford the
>>ticket and/or higher insurance or "another" ticket.  The higher socio groups
>>seem to prefer not to waste the time in class and just mail in the money.
>>Ditto for who you see in court - it's almost exclusively the lower
>>socio-economic group, again, that's my obeservation but it's been quite
>>consistent over many years in several juristicstions.
>>
> Wrong again, Fun man. If you had been in Harbor Court in
> Newport Beach tonight for class, we had 600 people (in
> 4 courtrooms, who's average income was probably way 
> above yours OR mine! You should have seen the cars
> in the parking lot....the Lexus' (or is it Lexii?), the Corvettes,
> the Supras, and just a few (like a dozen) Mercedes. I had
> a guy in my class who owned a new SL 500 (which I saw him
> pull up in so I asked him the cost.....he told me the RETAIL
> (which to ME is a dirty word)...$138,000.
> 
> Nice try though.

"Nice try", yourself.  This is just what I mean when I tell you that
you don't understand statistics, specifically sampling theory...

... I suppose it NEVER occurred to you that you're drawing from a
population with a significantly higher income than average?  Do you
seriously expect me to believe that you can draw conclusions about the
typical speeder's (or traffic school attendee's) income and other
circumstances, from a sample drawn from NEWPORT BEACH?!?  

Sure, the wealthy were over-represented in that group, because they're 
SIGNIFICANTLY over-represented in the population of that region!  

Where's your next "random sample" coming from?  Bel Air? 

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego CA
Internet: jeh@cmkrnl.com (JH645)  CompuServe: 74140,2055  

From kevina  Sun Aug 13 01:09:49 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA00544 for kevina; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 01:09:48 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!news.sprintlink.net!howland.reston.ans.net!news-e1a.megaweb.com!mail.megaweb.com!kennystar
From: kennystar@megaweb.com (KENNY MORSE)
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: Thu, 10 Aug 1995 13:49:29
Organization: Megaweb
Lines: 34
Message-ID: <40drhi$8sc@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com> <40dcbc$kf6@bug.rahul.net>
NNTP-Posting-Host: @www_2_108.gnn.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: GNN Messenger 1.1
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Length: 966
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 


In article <40dcbc$kf6@bug.rahul.net> Grant Robinson  wrote:
>In article <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
>KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:
>>
>>In article <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> Scott Richard Rosenfeld wrote: 
>>>
>>>Now, it's 65.  65, WOW, guess we can do 75?  80?
>>
>>THIS is what I've been talking about!!!!! ATTITUDE!!!!!!
>
>Real life Anecdote:  Just got back from Missoula Montana.  Posted limit on
>I90 is 65.  I drove at 65, and so did everyone else, got passed once during
>the 35 miles I spent on the highway. YMMV
>-- 
>Grant Robinson,	VP Sales & Marketing
>		  http://www.bats.com/bats
>		    408.653.0202  grant@bats.com
>		      BreakAway Technology Services, Inc.

Grant.....

There are PLENTY of places where people DO observe the 
speed limit. Obviously. And plenty more where they don't...
obviously.

BTW....what does Break away Technology break?

Kenny Morse
"Mr. Traffic"
http://www.usbusiness.com/mr_traffic.html
>



From kevina  Sun Aug 13 01:20:48 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id BAA02380 for kevina; Sun, 13 Aug 1995 01:20:47 -0400
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
Path: news.clark.net!rahul.net!a2i!bug.rahul.net!a2i!news.erinet.com!uunet!in1.uu.net!cs.utexas.edu!news.sprintlink.net!hookup!nic.wat.hookup.net!noc.tor.hookup.net!ve3ied!whome!gts!bokonon!silver
From: bokonon!silver@uunet.uu.net (Hi Ho Silver)
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Organization: Followers of Bokonon
Date: Mon, 7 Aug 1995 19:35:29 GMT
Message-ID: <DCyH35.5Fv@bokonon.UUCP>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com>
Lines: 41
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 2196
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <3vtp7p$9ob@condor.philabs.philips.com> jpc@philabs.philips.com (John P. Curcio) writes:
$Also, now that we have 65 here in New York on a number of roads, there
$are a few which didn't get raised (aside from the ones banned by
$federal law, others weren't raised for political reasons).  The NYSP
$say that they will be enforcing them a lot tighter than before.  In
$other words, the "10 over" tolerance is gone altogether, so the de facto speed limit on those such roads has actually dropped.

   What the police say and what the police do are not always one and
the same.

   When we had photo radar in Ontario, the official police line was
that speeding was a very severe offence, the most important contributor
to accidents, and that photo radar was a good way of helping people to
slow down.

   When photo radar was eliminated, the government replaced it with
more officers with instructions to go after _bad_ drivers, and
not necessarily speeders.  The official police line became that
there are a lot of bad driving habits which many drivers have,
and that it's important for the cops to go after people who drive
on shoulders, tailgate, make bad lane changes, drive with one or
zero hands while doing something else, etc.

   There was soon a story in the paper telling how these new officers
did on their first day, and giving examples of the bad drivers
(other than speeders) they had caught and either ticketed or warned.

   A few days later, there was a picture of one of these officers
sitting by the side of the road on a busy highway with a radar gun.

   It's nice to at least have them paying lip service to the fact
that speeding and dangerous driving are not synonymous, and it's
also nice to see that they're at least making some effort to
go after bad drivers and not just speeders.  Hopefully they'll
keep moving in the direction of balanced enforcement of the
driving laws.
-- 
 ______________________________________________
/  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  Wed Aug 16 20:22:14 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id UAA19034 for kevina; Wed, 16 Aug 1995 20:22:13 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.internex.net!agis!ns2.mainstreet.net!bug.rahul.net!a2i!grantr.a2i!grantr
From: Grant Robinson <grantr@rahul.net>
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: 10 Aug 1995 16:32:44 GMT
Organization: a2i network
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <40dcbc$kf6@bug.rahul.net>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bolero.rahul.net
NNTP-Posting-User: grantr
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 627
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:
>
>In article <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> Scott Richard Rosenfeld wrote: 
>>
>>Now, it's 65.  65, WOW, guess we can do 75?  80?
>
>THIS is what I've been talking about!!!!! ATTITUDE!!!!!!

Real life Anecdote:  Just got back from Missoula Montana.  Posted limit on
I90 is 65.  I drove at 65, and so did everyone else, got passed once during
the 35 miles I spent on the highway. YMMV
-- 
Grant Robinson,	VP Sales & Marketing
		  http://www.bats.com/bats
		    408.653.0202  grant@bats.com
		      BreakAway Technology Services, Inc.

From kevina  Wed Aug 16 20:22:40 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id UAA19227 for kevina; Wed, 16 Aug 1995 20:22:40 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!in2.uu.net!news.erinet.com!bug.rahul.net!a2i!grantr.a2i!grantr
From: Grant Robinson <grantr@rahul.net>
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: 14 Aug 1995 22:34:19 GMT
Organization: a2i network
Lines: 19
Message-ID: <40oj1b$43b@bug.rahul.net>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com> <40dcbc$kf6@bug.rahul.net> <40drhi$8sc@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bolero.rahul.net
NNTP-Posting-User: grantr
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 659
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <40drhi$8sc@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:

>There are PLENTY of places where people DO observe the 
>speed limit. Obviously. And plenty more where they don't...
>obviously.

This corrects my understanding of your previous position, I thought it was
that people will always drive at the speed limit + X.  Now it's only in
certain areas?  Any ideas as to the basis for this phenomenon?

>BTW....what does Break away Technology break?

Speed limits on the Infobahn.
-- 
Grant Robinson,	VP Sales & Marketing
		  http://www.bats.com/bats
		    408.653.0202  grant@bats.com
		      BreakAway Technology Services, Inc.

From kevina  Wed Aug 16 20:27:33 1995
Received: (kevina@localhost) by clark.net (8.6.12/8.6.5) id UAA21380 for kevina; Wed, 16 Aug 1995 20:27:32 -0400
Path: news.clark.net!europa.chnt.gtegsc.com!usenet.eel.ufl.edu!news.uoregon.edu!tank.news.pipex.net!pipex!newsfeed.internetmci.com!news.sprintlink.net!news.internex.net!agis!ns2.mainstreet.net!bug.rahul.net!a2i!grantr.a2i!grantr
From: Grant Robinson <grantr@rahul.net>
Newsgroups: ca.driving
Subject: Re: 65 means 65
Date: 10 Aug 1995 16:32:44 GMT
Organization: a2i network
Lines: 17
Message-ID: <40dcbc$kf6@bug.rahul.net>
References: <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: bolero.rahul.net
NNTP-Posting-User: grantr
Content-Type: text
Content-Length: 627
Apparently-To: kevina
Status: O
X-Status: 

In article <3vu6pl$3m@news-e1a.megaweb.com>,
KENNY MORSE <kennystar@megaweb.com> wrote:
>
>In article <3vtl63$p50@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> Scott Richard Rosenfeld wrote: 
>>
>>Now, it's 65.  65, WOW, guess we can do 75?  80?
>
>THIS is what I've been talking about!!!!! ATTITUDE!!!!!!

Real life Anecdote:  Just got back from Missoula Montana.  Posted limit on
I90 is 65.  I drove at 65, and so did everyone else, got passed once during
the 35 miles I spent on the highway. YMMV
-- 
Grant Robinson,	VP Sales & Marketing
		  http://www.bats.com/bats
		    408.653.0202  grant@bats.com
		      BreakAway Technology Services, Inc.

