A Cars forum. AutoBanter

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Go Back   Home » AutoBanter forum » Auto newsgroups » Driving
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

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



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old July 5th 08, 08:24 PM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
H.B. Elkins
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 184
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 09:40:26 -0700 (PDT), Jeff Morrison wrote:

>Anything over 80 IS reckless driving.


No it isn't.


--
To reply by e-mail, remove the "restrictor plate"
Ads
  #12  
Old July 5th 08, 08:25 PM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Arif Khokar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,804
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

Jeff Morrison wrote:

> Anything over 80 IS reckless driving.


Hardly. That's the speed of traffic (or maybe 3 to 5 mph faster ) on
many interstates.
  #13  
Old July 5th 08, 08:27 PM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Arif Khokar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,804
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

Bill wrote:

> 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.


Not only that, but they could also stop collecting the federal gas tax
(and lower the gas price a little bit).
  #14  
Old July 5th 08, 09:41 PM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
necromancer in CNY (hint - its not an airport)
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 02:12:30 -0700 (PDT), 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.


Dear Allah in Paradise, are they dredging that dead horse up again? I
guess the old saying is true: those who don't learn from history are
doomed to repeat it. Good thing my frequent flyer account is still
active.
--
"The record run in oil prices is related more to
speculation and a weakening dollar than supply
and demand in the market. In terms of fundamentals,
fear of supply reliability is overblown."

--Exxon-Mobil CEO Rex Tillerson
  #15  
Old July 6th 08, 01:03 AM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Nate Nagel[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,686
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

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.


It is better to keep one's mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open
it and remove all doubt. (author unknown, but commonly attributed to
Mark Twain)

--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  #16  
Old July 6th 08, 01:04 AM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Nate Nagel[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 4,686
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

Bill wrote:
> "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.
>


Not gonna happen, as if anything states today are more dependent on
Federal highway funds than they were back in 1974.

nate


--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
  #17  
Old July 6th 08, 01:05 AM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Jason Pawloski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 214
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

On Jul 5, 12:27*pm, Arif Khokar > wrote:
> Bill wrote:
> > 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.

>
> Not only that, but they could also stop collecting the federal gas tax
> (and lower the gas price a little bit).


Oooookay, I'm having difficulty understanding this. If you do not take
federal money for roads, you are off the hook for the federal gas tax?
The reason why this sounds wrongs to me is about half the states
receive less than they send to Washington for the federal gas tax, so
the optimal strategy would be to not pay the gas tax, not receive
federal funds, and increase the state tax by an equivalent value. And
you would still lower the gas price a little bit.
  #18  
Old July 6th 08, 01:44 AM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Free Lunch
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 151
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

On Sat, 5 Jul 2008 17:05:22 -0700 (PDT), Jason Pawloski
> wrote in misc.transport.road:

>On Jul 5, 12:27*pm, Arif Khokar > wrote:
>> Bill wrote:
>> > 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.

>>
>> Not only that, but they could also stop collecting the federal gas tax
>> (and lower the gas price a little bit).

>
>Oooookay, I'm having difficulty understanding this. If you do not take
>federal money for roads, you are off the hook for the federal gas tax?


Of course not.

>The reason why this sounds wrongs to me is about half the states
>receive less than they send to Washington for the federal gas tax, so
>the optimal strategy would be to not pay the gas tax, not receive
>federal funds, and increase the state tax by an equivalent value. And
>you would still lower the gas price a little bit.

  #19  
Old July 6th 08, 02:29 AM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Arif Khokar
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,804
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

Jason Pawloski wrote:
> On Jul 5, 12:27 pm, Arif Khokar > wrote:
>> Bill wrote:


>>> 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.


>> Not only that, but they could also stop collecting the federal gas tax
>> (and lower the gas price a little bit).


> Oooookay, I'm having difficulty understanding this. If you do not take
> federal money for roads, you are off the hook for the federal gas tax?


Well, if the federal government *refuses* to distribute funds to a
particular state because they won't enact a specific law (55 mph limit,
21 year old minimum drinking age, etc.), then why should the state
continue to collect the federal gas tax?
  #20  
Old July 6th 08, 02:31 AM posted to misc.transport.road,rec.autos.driving
Jason Pawloski
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 214
Default 55 returning? It had better not-the dumbest law since Prohibition

On Jul 5, 6:29*pm, Arif Khokar > wrote:
> Jason Pawloski wrote:
> > On Jul 5, 12:27 pm, Arif Khokar > wrote:
> >> Bill wrote:
> >>> 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.
> >> Not only that, but they could also stop collecting the federal gas tax
> >> (and lower the gas price a little bit).

> > Oooookay, I'm having difficulty understanding this. If you do not take
> > federal money for roads, you are off the hook for the federal gas tax?

>
> Well, if the federal government *refuses* to distribute funds to a
> particular state because they won't enact a specific law (55 mph limit,
> 21 year old minimum drinking age, etc.), then why should the state
> continue to collect the federal gas tax?- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -


I mean, I agree in principle, but I don't there is anyway that
argument would ever jive.
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
what is the dumbest thing u have ever been pulled over for? ricer1991 Driving 32 August 18th 07 08:16 AM
South Dakota to impose total alcohol prohibition on anyone convicted of drunk driving. Brent P[_1_] Driving 19 March 3rd 07 02:24 AM
This may very well be the dumbest question ever posted but here goes... Leslie BMW 8 January 10th 06 01:24 PM
Dumbest car commercial ever 223rem Driving 32 November 18th 05 09:23 PM
Survey: Northeast has dumbest [sic] drivers Arif Khokar Driving 3 May 28th 05 03:36 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 AutoBanter.
The comments are property of their posters.