AutoBanter

AutoBanter (http://www.autobanter.com/index.php)
-   Driving (http://www.autobanter.com/forumdisplay.php?f=6)
-   -   55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition (http://www.autobanter.com/showthread.php?t=280369)

XOZ July 5th 08 10:12 AM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
On Jul 5, 3:56 am, "Matt Wiser" > wrote:
> Anyone notice Sen. John Warner (R-VA) proposing a National Speed Limit? It's easy for him
> to do so, as he's retiring from the Senate, and won't have to face the wrath of angry voters.
> According to AP, he's contacted the Dept. of Energy to ask what speed limit (either 55 or
> 60) would be most fuel-efficient. 55 may have been OK east of the Mississippi, but here out
> West (I'm in CA), it stank. Anyone try an L.A. to Salt Lake at the despised double-nickel?
> Or SF to Dallas or Seattle to Denver? Brock Yates said it best in 1975: The 55 speed limit
> is/was the dumbest law since Prohibition. Speed limits should be set by the
> states, period. If CA wants to go to 70 on Interstates and other rural freeways, or AZ, NV,
> UT, and NM want 75, let them. Like the Sammy Hagar song goes: "I can't drive 55."


How dare any of the speed nazis from Vagina propose anything. Those
people in the "Commonwealth" should put everybody in the legislature
out of office for what they're doing to their own citizens with speed
enforcement. Any return to the 55 MPH is highway robbery, plain and
simple. And btw, try driving I-16 in South Georgia at 55...it's not
just those western states that an unreasonable 55 MPH would be a
police state bonanza for.

Nate Nagel[_2_] July 5th 08 11:26 AM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
XOZ wrote:
> On Jul 5, 3:56 am, "Matt Wiser" > wrote:
>
>>Anyone notice Sen. John Warner (R-VA) proposing a National Speed Limit? It's easy for him
>>to do so, as he's retiring from the Senate, and won't have to face the wrath of angry voters.
>>According to AP, he's contacted the Dept. of Energy to ask what speed limit (either 55 or
>>60) would be most fuel-efficient. 55 may have been OK east of the Mississippi, but here out
>>West (I'm in CA), it stank. Anyone try an L.A. to Salt Lake at the despised double-nickel?
>>Or SF to Dallas or Seattle to Denver? Brock Yates said it best in 1975: The 55 speed limit
>>is/was the dumbest law since Prohibition. Speed limits should be set by the
>>states, period. If CA wants to go to 70 on Interstates and other rural freeways, or AZ, NV,
>>UT, and NM want 75, let them. Like the Sammy Hagar song goes: "I can't drive 55."

>
>
> How dare any of the speed nazis from Vagina propose anything. Those
> people in the "Commonwealth" should put everybody in the legislature
> out of office for what they're doing to their own citizens with speed
> enforcement. Any return to the 55 MPH is highway robbery, plain and
> simple. And btw, try driving I-16 in South Georgia at 55...it's not
> just those western states that an unreasonable 55 MPH would be a
> police state bonanza for.


Hell, the DC Beltway or Dulles Toll Road is downright dangerous at 55
(even though that's the posted speed limit.) Don't blame Virginians, we
know better. Just blame this one guy that had a dumbass idea.

nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel

Otto Yamamoto July 5th 08 01:12 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
As far as I know, though I'll admit to not being the most educated on this,
we don't have a supply problem, we have a price problem. The Nixon Memorial
Speed Limit won't do anything to help that. Just moar smoke and mirrors to
deflect attention away from the real issue: namely hueg erl company
profits.

--
Comrade Otto Yamamoto
http://mryamamoto.50megs.com
Guaranteed 100% Fabricated!

[email protected] July 5th 08 04:39 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
On Jul 5, 5:12*am, XOZ > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 3:56 am, "Matt Wiser" > wrote:
>
> > Anyone notice Sen. John Warner (R-VA) proposing a National Speed Limit? It's easy for him
> > to do so, as he's retiring from the Senate, and won't have to face the wrath of angry voters.
> > According to AP, he's contacted the Dept. of Energy to ask what speed limit (either 55 or
> > 60) would be most fuel-efficient. 55 may have been OK east of the Mississippi, but here out
> > West (I'm in CA), it stank. Anyone try an L.A. to Salt Lake at the despised double-nickel?
> > Or SF to Dallas or Seattle to Denver? Brock Yates said it best in 1975: The 55 speed limit
> > is/was the dumbest law since Prohibition. Speed limits should be set by the
> > states, period. If CA wants to go to 70 on Interstates and other rural freeways, or AZ, NV,
> > UT, and NM want 75, let them. Like the Sammy Hagar song goes: "I can't drive 55."

>
> How dare any of the speed nazis from Vagina propose anything. *Those
> people in the "Commonwealth" should put everybody in the legislature
> out of office for what they're doing to their own citizens with speed
> enforcement. *Any return to the 55 MPH is highway robbery, plain and
> simple. *And btw, try driving I-16 in South Georgia at 55...it's not
> just those western states that an unreasonable 55 MPH would be a
> police state bonanza for.


I would agree, Virginia seems to have a "Hard-On" against speeding
more than any state I can think of. They consider anything over 80 to
be Reckless Driving and nail you accordingly.

Jim K. Georges

Jeff Morrison July 5th 08 05:40 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
On Jul 5, 10:39*am, wrote:
> I would agree, Virginia seems to have a "Hard-On" against speeding
> more than any state I can think of. They consider anything over 80 to
> be Reckless Driving and nail you accordingly.
>
> Jim K. Georges


Anything over 80 IS reckless driving.

Brent P[_1_] July 5th 08 06:04 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
On 2008-07-05, Jeff Morrison > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 10:39*am, wrote:
>> I would agree, Virginia seems to have a "Hard-On" against speeding
>> more than any state I can think of. They consider anything over 80 to
>> be Reckless Driving and nail you accordingly.
>>
>> Jim K. Georges

>
> Anything over 80 IS reckless driving.


What a crock of ****. Go to Germany and ride with someone who lives
there and has a decent car. a 100mph+ is perfectly safe. What's reckless
is the stupid lane and other behavior that is permitted on US roads.


Bill[_12_] July 5th 08 07:56 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 

"XOZ" > wrote in message
...
> On Jul 5, 3:56 am, "Matt Wiser" > wrote:
>> Anyone notice Sen. John Warner (R-VA) proposing a National Speed Limit?
>> It's easy for him
>> to do so, as he's retiring from the Senate, and won't have to face the
>> wrath of angry voters.
>> According to AP, he's contacted the Dept. of Energy to ask what speed
>> limit (either 55 or
>> 60) would be most fuel-efficient. 55 may have been OK east of the
>> Mississippi, but here out
>> West (I'm in CA), it stank. Anyone try an L.A. to Salt Lake at the
>> despised double-nickel?
>> Or SF to Dallas or Seattle to Denver? Brock Yates said it best in 1975:
>> The 55 speed limit
>> is/was the dumbest law since Prohibition. Speed limits should be set by
>> the
>> states, period. If CA wants to go to 70 on Interstates and other rural
>> freeways, or AZ, NV,
>> UT, and NM want 75, let them. Like the Sammy Hagar song goes: "I can't
>> drive 55."

>
> How dare any of the speed nazis from Vagina propose anything. Those
> people in the "Commonwealth" should put everybody in the legislature
> out of office for what they're doing to their own citizens with speed
> enforcement. Any return to the 55 MPH is highway robbery, plain and
> simple. And btw, try driving I-16 in South Georgia at 55...it's not
> just those western states that an unreasonable 55 MPH would be a
> police state bonanza for.


For those who weren't around for the original 55 law, it should be pointed
out that the law itself didn't change any speed limits outside of federal
property. Instead it coerced the individual states into lowering their speed
limits by threatening to withhold federal highway dollars for those that did
not comply. This is the same technique used to impose the 21-year-old
drinking requirement, among others. No state can be forced to lower their
limit by federal law, just "encouraged". So even if a federal law were
passed, there is always a faint hope that at least some state legislatures
will have some backbone, and not sell out their citizens for their 30 pieces
of federal gold.




[email protected] July 5th 08 08:02 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
On Jul 5, 12:40*pm, Jeff Morrison > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 10:39*am, wrote:
>
> > I would agree, Virginia seems to have a "Hard-On" against speeding
> > more than any state I can think of. They consider anything over 80 to
> > be Reckless Driving and nail you accordingly.

>
> > Jim K. Georges

>
> Anything over 80 IS reckless driving.


Not True! On an urban interstate in moderate to heavy traffic, weaving
in and out OK, but on a rural Interstate, staying in your lane with a
speed limit of 65 or 70 among minimal traffic in perfect weather
conditions, no, it's not reckless.

Jim K. Georges

gpsman July 5th 08 08:08 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
On Jul 5, 1:04 pm, Brent P > wrote:
> On 2008-07-05, Jeff Morrison > wrote:
>
> > Anything over 80 IS reckless driving.

>
> What a crock of ****. Go to Germany and ride with someone who lives
> there and has a decent car. a 100mph+ is perfectly safe.


No, it's often true.

Evidently you are unaware of the definitions of "perfect" and
"safe" (what are those, words learned in 5th grade? Elementary school
anyway).

But, 80mph is "relatively safe", depending on where. You are not
permitted to drive 80 through or around major German urban areas, same
as in the US.

> What's reckless
> is the stupid lane and other behavior that is permitted on US roads.


On that we agree, where we differ is what constitutes reckless and
stupid.
-----

- gpsman

Brent P[_1_] July 5th 08 08:15 PM

55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition
 
On 2008-07-05, > wrote:
> On Jul 5, 12:40*pm, Jeff Morrison > wrote:
>> On Jul 5, 10:39*am, wrote:
>>
>> > I would agree, Virginia seems to have a "Hard-On" against speeding
>> > more than any state I can think of. They consider anything over 80 to
>> > be Reckless Driving and nail you accordingly.

>>
>> > Jim K. Georges

>>
>> Anything over 80 IS reckless driving.

>
> Not True! On an urban interstate in moderate to heavy traffic, weaving
> in and out OK, but on a rural Interstate, staying in your lane with a
> speed limit of 65 or 70 among minimal traffic in perfect weather
> conditions, no, it's not reckless.


Weaving would indicate a failure to keep right except to pass in many cases.




All times are GMT +1. The time now is 01:03 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
AutoBanter.com