Obeying the Law is Dangerous

[Tittles]

OMG Anyone here watched Dumb and Dumber? :laugh:

When the 1 guy had to take a wiz, so the other person passed them an empty beer bottle. So, of course he couldn't stop, and got another bottle, etc... So, the cop pulls them over for drinking and driving, and after questioning them about boozing it, he wants to take a sip to confirm it's alchohol They try to warn the cop, but the cop tells them to shut up, and gets a taste for more then he bargained for.

Sends them on their way, telling them to just get out of there, and then stands by the side of the road puking and all Call it mid-terms tomarrow, call it tiredness, call it whatever, but the mention of throwing beer bottles at them; brought this to mind just now :laugh:

Who hasn't seen that movie :laugh:

The whole movie is worth mentioning too

 

[Rayski]

The cop asked if it was Grandad's cough medicine?

That actor has always cracked me up!

 

[omg its nlm]

Great video, I would of pass them on the sholder and then thew stuff at their cars. (just make sure they are not off duty cops)

 

[Mastershakes]

great video ... watching it only demonstrates our need to increase speedlimits...

How so?

the cost of additional superhighways is staggering. upping the speedlimit 20mph would probably double the capacity of the existing highways.

Proper investment in 'Green' Urban Mass Transit systems would more than double the 'capacity' of the existing system.

some would argue this isnt safe ... no one said operating a car is safe ... its as safe as you make it ... i believe higher speeds would lead to many safety innovations only found on the exotics. the german and italian supercars are very safe at high speeds .... hell look at the formula one racers ... 200mph recks and they walk away... no reason why a family carshouldnt be able to do that.

Formula 1 cars cost 80-90 million a year not including R&D

Speed kills. Period. If you have more and more people travelling at higher speeds the discrepancy between the slower drivers and faster drivers will increase.... = more accidents. Tons more. Example - get up to about 120 MPH (~ 200 KPH) and watch how the motorists that share the highway with you look like they are parked.

then there is the more fuel issue ... more fuel equals more taxes raised to spend on something other than additional highways ... like schools in rural areas whos taxes support the super highways in big metropolitan areas anyway.

Huh? Higher limits = faster driving = less efficiency. Most cars have top efficiency at around 70MPH (120 or so KPH)

anyway ... good find on the video ... i just hade slow speed states ... its bullcrap really

I hope you lose your license in one. :lick:

I agree the speed limit should go up - but that pushes that 'safe window' above the limit as well. We generally drive between 120-130 KPH here. (70 some odd MPH ? )

 

[Son Goku]

Proper investment in 'Green' Urban Mass Transit systems would more than double the 'capacity' of the existing system.

Though interstates can be used for going around a city, the main purpose is for those who are travelling, well, inter-state, or over large distances. Urban mass transit won't do much for people travelling cross country, or to another state...

Only something similar to replacing all the rail roads in the country with something like "light rail", or that super-conductive train they have in Japan would be sufficient ot get people a long ways, and at a reasonable amount of time. It would also need to be cheaper then airplane travel to convince people to go 80-100 miles on the thing (without paying much more then they would in gasoline), and offer the convenience of less travel time (like the service in Japan can provide, by traveling at high speed). It doesn't go on tracks though, being suspended by super-conductors... I'm sure Japan put a pretty penny into that thing, and also has the advantage of a smaller country to traverse.

Speed kills. Period. If you have more and more people travelling at higher speeds the discrepancy between the slower drivers and faster drivers will increase.... = more accidents. Tons more. Example - get up to about 120 MPH (~ 200 KPH) and watch how the motorists that share the highway with you look like they are parked.

By that argument, one could equally well say that slow driving kills. It's more the discrepency, and that they don't make people over a certain age take reaction time tests, to make sure they can still drive safely, and react quick enough. The argument could go both ways on this...

Some of the rural areas in the US don't have speed limits (at least Montanna didn't on the interstates when I was last there. Otherwise, people end up speeding anyhow, and just buy radar detectors, or the Phaser, to avoid getting caught

In either case, safe would be people going more with the flow of traffic, which means if more people speed like on i78... Reason the cops there don't enforce 55 mph... What those people did in that video, was unsafe, however one looks at it.

There is another route some states have taken to minimize this however. They started putting minimum speed limit signs on various streets, and will site/ticket people for driving too slow. In fact here in New Mexico, there isn't a minimum speed limit sign; however it is on the books that won't won't go below 50 mph on the interstate (albeit not posted). Cops can pull one over, and site them for breaking this law, and it has happened. It's also stated in the law itself, that one is not to drive below the speed limit in the left most lane, else obstruction of traffic can be charged...

Of course reason is also employed, so if heavy interstate traffic prevents everyone from going faster due to a pileup, such minimums aren't going to be enforced...

 

[Mastershakes]

By that argument, one could equally well say that slow driving kills. It's more the discrepency, and that they don't make people over a certain age take reaction time tests, to make sure they can still drive safely, and react quick enough. The argument could go both ways on this...

Some of the rural areas in the US don't have speed limits (at least Montanna didn't on the interstates when I was last there. Otherwise, people end up speeding anyhow, and just buy radar detectors, or the Phaser, to avoid getting caught

In either case, safe would be people going more with the flow of traffic, which means if more people speed like on i78... Reason the cops there don't enforce 55 mph... What those people did in that video, was unsafe, however one looks at it.

There is another route some states have taken to minimize this however. They started putting minimum speed limit signs on various streets, and will site/ticket people for driving too slow. In fact here in New Mexico, there isn't a minimum speed limit; however it is on the books that won't won't go below 50 mph on the interstate (albeit not posted). Cops can pull one over, and site them for breaking this law. It's also stated in the law itself, that one is not to drive below the speed limit in the left most lane...

Of course reason is also employed, so if heavy interstate traffic prevents everyone from going faster due to a pileup, such minimums aren't going to be enforced...

Even if your name is fata1ity (#1 gamer in world) and you have the fastest reactions on the planet, speed will still kill as you have less and less time to react. The minimum on our highways is 60KM and is enforced. As both of us intoned, it's the discrepancy that is the most dangerous.

Flow of traffic, yes. That is the way to go. When the posted limit is 70KMH on several arteries here in MTL, the actual flow is 110, 120. - It's elevated, so the cops can't really mess with anybody, they have nowhere to hide. What I would like to see is a system put in place that forces a certain amount of distance between cars.

If they figure that out - no more traffic jams.

 

[falconguard]

Flow of traffic, yes. That is the way to go. When the posted limit is 70KMH on several arteries here in MTL, the actual flow is 110, 120. - It's elevated, so the cops can't really mess with anybody, they have nowhere to hide. What I would like to see is a system put in place that forces a certain amount of distance between cars.

If they figure that out - no more traffic jams.

Yeah something like a 140db air horn and some kind of lighting system, more than the idiot lights already installed on cars.:laugh:


"Warning! You are too close you d@#$!" :laugh:
Didn't Isaac Asimov propose this on safe operating systems and robotics on cars?

Although you can go faster than you want, as long as you go the with the flow of traffic most of the times you will not be cited. It is the race jockeying that most highway patrol frown on.

 

[Mastershakes]

I was tinkin magnetic forces.... perhaps along Asimov lines. Perhaps advanced sensors that take into account speed and distance. When you begin to tailgate, the comp takes over slightly and despite flooring the gas, slows the car to match the proper distance again.

At 65MPH - designate and maintain no less than 3 car lengths in front, and behind.

They would have to be really advanced though, so as to not mess up passing, exiting the freeway and such. The logistics would be pretty crazy, and I don't envy the programmer(s) who have to do it.

 

[falconguard]

Darn, I really wish I could remember the publication. But what you said was eerily simliar to a report on the nature of traffic in the future in which Ray Bradbury, Asimov and some others contemplated traffic in the future. They mentinoed some of the concepts you are thinking of 15-20 years ago.

 

[Mastershakes]

It would work, and perhaps even augment reaction time artificially.

In a time where travelling just below the speed of sound in a tin can 2 miles above the ground is safer than driving - it makes good sense to start employing some of these technological advancements. I bet the insurance companies would buy in / invest in it.

 

[Sazar]

70 kmph?

That's like 5 mph. My grandmother walks faster than that :smoker:

 

[Mastershakes]

Actually it's 43.495857 MPH - but you were close enough

 

[Mastershakes]

Darn, I really wish I could remember the publication. But what you said was eerily simliar to a report on the nature of traffic in the future in which Ray Bradbury, Asimov and some others contemplated traffic in the future. They mentinoed some of the concepts you are thinking of 15-20 years ago.

Here's something similar FalconGuard...

http://www.ornl.gov/info/ornlreview/v32_2_99/driving.htm

Not quite the magnetic sensors - but sensors nonetheless.... even for your blind spot.

 

[Son Goku]

Even if your name is fata1ity (#1 gamer in world) and you have the fastest reactions on the planet, speed will still kill as you have less and less time to react.

No it doesn't. That's a bit of a generalization, there... Faster reaction time, and better vehicle response time means one doesn't need as much time to react. If we in fact could get rid of controls altogether, and replace it with a direct neuro-interface, which worked off brain waves and had much more instantanious reaction; people could in fact go rather fast, and safely.

As to a neuro-interface, this is something the US military had been looking into, for the benefit of our pilots. Keep in mind, not only the speed at which military jets move, but also the number of controls to operate... The thinking was, that if the pilots didn't have to do so much with their hands... The contraption would work off EEG patterns, with people learning how to "signal the thing" through doing stuff to their EEG pattern,as they learn through bio-feedback. Speed wise, it would also elliminate the need for a nerve impulse to travel down the spinal cord, and into the arms/legs, as well as the time it takes for muscle movement to be initiated.

In practice, last I heard, they only got as far as moving a vehicle forwards or backwards. Some of the more complex stuff (like stearing), weren't worked out...

Otherwise, many road conditions could also be elliminated, if they could make them hover a bit above the ground, aka Jetson's style... We don't however have near the funds for a more advanced road system, using much more advanced tech however. Likewise, the super-conductor train they built in Japan some time ago, would also be prohibitively expensive.

That said however, if the cars could hover, "different lanes" could be stacked vertically if you wil, as well as horizontallyl...which would also help traffic probs. And less accumulation (or good moving traffic rather then congestion), will tend to be safer itself... Of course, it would mean people would have to get used to thinking/visualizing in 3 dimentions while driving. Some people are better at thinking in space (vs. just a planar or 2d view) then others. Some peeps seem to have trouble with 2 dimentions, as they think forward only and have trouble figuring out lane switches.

Among that, or some of these elderly drivers who go to the end of the on-ramp to the interstate, and stop at the end; being thoroughly confused on how to use an interchange...

 

[mlakrid]

I clearly understand the need for increasing interstate speeds and increasing mass transit in major cities or the surrounding suburbs.

The problem with MORONS like this is that what they did served absolutely NO purpose... there are already plans in place to do the same things that many of you are talking about, and guess what... remember if you are saying they need to raise the speeds quite possibly are the same ones who would be the first to complain about the tax increases as soon as it were to happen... why a tax increase?

Faster speeds = more street erosion which = more $$ needed for road repairs, think about the condition of the roads in your areas, I dont know about you, but there are parts of Tampa where you can not drive, because of the condition of those roads.

Those students, did not obey the law, yielding the right of way is also law, which is why Florida tried to pass an anti-road rage law...

 

[rushm001]

I do that to people who tailgate me. I useally drive 85-95 on the interstate in a 75. Or 65ish in the 55 areas, when people tailgate me but won't pass I simply show them how well my brakes work. I have had pooeple follow me for it and start yelling, till I get out and start after them.

Had one lady that was tailgaiting in a 30 where I was going 45, then got piessed as she tapped the back of my truck when I hit the brakes. Pretty new camaro with a large scrape in the hood. Funny how asfter ahs didn't want to call the cops, but I got her plate number.

There are two kinds of drivers, the ones who tailgate to try and get the person in front to go faster, and the driver who slows down to the speed limit when someone tailgates, and quite often it is driver 2 in front of driver 1!

 

[Son Goku]

Part of it is how silly some beuracrats can be about road repairs however... Two things come to mind here:

- When I lived in Maine, the stupid beuracrats who didn't do much about the roads for a long time (as they fell apart); got the "bright idea" to first resrface the road.

Only after they were completely done resurfacing it, painting the lines, etc, did they then chose to send out blasting crews with explosives, to start blasting holes into the freshly paved road. They did this to lay sewer pipe. And when done, did they re-surface again? Nope, they put hot tar patches into the road, that under normal weather conditions (for that far north), wore out in about 2 weeks.

Now why wouldn't they start by working under the road? Blasting em holes into the old road? And then paving it after? I don't know; but I imagine it would just be too logical for the minds of many beuracrats.

- This one road in Massechuesettes, they had according to some been working on for 20 years. When they got done, they started all over, re-doing the thing, so they could still collect money for the work. From indication of some who drove through there, they don't plan on ever getting done :laugh:

Probably, some of the traffic manageament also comes down to a bit of a problem, when beuracrats get in charge of something, with the typical beuracratic mentality. Rather then figure out how to do something logically, they do things such as what I mentioned at first, and then send it up to committee, as each person gets to argue over who should be appointed to do the thinking today, after things don't quite work... Oh, and lets not forget the ever popular beuracratic turf war :angel:

 

[Mainframeguy]

Sad - sad clip - sad thread - hope no one on here ever lost any family in a RTA....

As for mentioning democracy in the thread - get outa here.

Bunch of spoilt brats causing trouble on the roads with nothing better to do IMHO. Their reaction to the white van speaks volumes. Shame clip did not end with their arrest - it is possible - it is not so simple as a speed limit - driving in a formation could easily have been construed by highways cops as unsafe and they coulda hauled their asses to jail - that would have made for a much better ending to the clip!

 

[Grandmaster]

If you guys couldn't tell by the tone of my post, I wasn't being serious. Heh.

And Mainframeguy: My family and I came pretty close a few months ago...

 

[Mainframeguy]

it's cool GM...

ya know - maybe you guys could consider something we do over the pond - trains?