When will speed limit be lowered to 55?

wrote:
> Arif Khokar wrote:

>> Speed choice doesn't have a significant effect on the
>> danger level of multi-tasking.

> What is your reasoning behind this statement? Multi-tasking increases
> your reaction time and speed choice can compensate by giving you
> this time back.

It can't. Multi-tasking can increase your reaction time from 0.5
seconds (when not multi-tasking) to 5 or more seconds. Slowing down 10
mph isn't going to address that at all, hence the lack of difference in
danger level.

wrote:
> Arif Khokar wrote:

>> It isn't. Simply stop driving and start riding.

> Ok Jesus, please explain how you propose to convince 100 million
> people to do this?

I'm not interested in doing that because I like the status quo just
fine. It's just that my solution for decreasing fuel use is far better
than yours and just as practical.

> The costs you mention to change the speed limit are drops in the ocean.

Sorry, but that's not true at all.

In article .com>, wrote:
> necromancer wrote:
>> Moron. It was tried once and it failed. The simple fact is that We
> The > People rejected 55MPH once, and we will reject ir again. Don't
> like it? > Tough ****.
>>
>
> It is a sad reflection of human beings that we would rather die
> than change our habits. The world is going to come to a rude
> awakening when oil starts running out in the middle east and more of
> those countries acquire nuclear weapons.

Since you believe the 55mph fraud, it makes sense you'd believe the peak
oil fraud as well.

There is too much oil on the planet. That's why it's being sequestered,
to artificially drive up the price. Remember when Iraq was pumping like
mad to pay off the iran-iraq war debt? That's where Saddam Hussain fell
out of favor with those who trained him and set him up to take power.
That's why he was then told the USA would do nothing if he invaded kuwait
and got sucker punched.

Anyway... there's enough oil in the americas alone to run on for hundreds
of years so long as we are willing to pay lower prices than todays.
($40/bbl vs. $65/bbl)

In article .com>, wrote:

> My argument is that driving 55 MPH will is more productive since it
> frees your mind to multi-task.

Driving is not to be multi-tasked. That's the problem with slow speeds,
it encourages mind wandering.

Talk about unsafe habbits. You mind-wandering slow drivers are a bigger
hazard than the most reckless a-hole doing a 120mph in a 75mph flow.

In article .com>, wrote:
> Alan Baker wrote:
>>
>> You are an idiot and a danger to everyone around you if you think
>> that driving at 55 "frees your mind" any more than driving at 70
>> mph.
>
> And you must be a bigger edyot for not understanding the physics
> behind this. A car's energy is proportional to the SQUARE of it's
> velocity.

Here's a big clue for you. You crashing at 55mph while you're
multi-tasking is far worse than not crashing while just driving at any
greater speed.

On May 30, 3:30 pm, wrote:
> I am praying for the day when this country will lower the speed
> limit back to 55 MPH. Gas prices have increased enormously yet I
> still see people in their gas guzzlers driving 75 mph. I dont think
> people realize how much more economical , safer and less stressful it
> is to drive at 55 MPH. And please, time is not money unless you are a
> billionaire..

Dear moron,

**** right off.

nate

(wait, there's speed limits *above* 55 MPH?)

N8N:
> On May 30, 3:30 pm, wrote:
> > I am praying for the day when this country will lower the speed
> > limit back to 55 MPH. Gas prices have increased enormously yet I
> > still see people in their gas guzzlers driving 75 mph. I dont think
> > people realize how much more economical , safer and less stressful it
> > is to drive at 55 MPH. And please, time is not money unless you are a
> > billionaire..
>
> Dear moron,
>
> **** right off.

That's the best reply to this knothead I've seen yet!

> nate
>
> (wait, there's speed limits *above* 55 MPH?)

You need to get out of DC more often, Nate.....



--
"Years ago i had a vehicle in which i rigged up a switch so the horn
would stay on continuously. I used it when backing up or when
driving thru a congested area. Worked real well though it prolly
wouldn't if everybody had one."
--Speeders & Drunk Drivers Are MURDERERS, a.k.a SADDAM, LBMHB, lb-VH..
12/6/2006, 0141hrs

Ref: http://tinyurl.com/y72pnu
Message ID:

:
> Alan Baker wrote:
> > (sleeping, eating, washing) those 36 hours mean *at least* three
> > whole days worth of my free time; time you can never get back.
>
> My argument is that driving 55 MPH will is more productive since it
> frees your mind to multi-task.

Are you ****ing kidding me? Driving should never be multitasked with
*anything* at all. You don't have time to devote 100% of your attention
to driving, GET OFF THE ROAD!!!

> I like to listen to audiobooks while driving.

So?

> I find myself unable to concentrate at speeds above 70 mph.

So, what makes you think you will be any better at 55? And why should
the rest of us have to drive on dumbed down roads to satisfy you? You
can't concentrate at 70MPH? Stick to the surface streets.

> So by driving 55 I can absorb far more of the book, thereby

you are a disaster waiting to happen. Unfortunately, when it does
happen, most likely you will come out of it unscathed while some
innocent party takes a trip to the morgue. Do you mind if I feed you to
an Anaconda before that happens?

> increasing the value of my time spent getting from A to B.

Do us road users a favor and shoot yourself before someone of importance
gets killed. You are a menace on the roads.



--
"I always heard that primitave hoo-mans lacked intelligence,
but I never thought they'd be this stupid."
--Quark

In article .com>,
wrote:

> Alan Baker wrote:
> >
> > You are an idiot and a danger to everyone around you if you think
> > that driving at 55 "frees your mind" any more than driving at 70
> > mph.
>
> And you must be a bigger edyot for not understanding the physics
> behind this. A car's energy is proportional to the SQUARE of it's
> velocity.

What you're not getting is that it doesn't matter how much more energy
the car has after you get to the lethal speed. And a crash from 55 mph
is potentially lethal.

Moreover, who cares?

The idea is not to crash *at all*. To do that requires *attention* and
not "multi-tasking".

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."

In article .com>,
wrote:

> Arif Khokar wrote:>
> > Sorry, but only those in denial or idiots believe that it's
> > appropriate to multi-task while driving. If you need to do other
> > things besides driving while traveling, then hire a chauffeur, or
> > take mass transit.
>
> I agree with you here, which is why I take bus, subway, train, and
> planes as often as I can. My original point is that multi-tasking at
> 55 is safer and more productive than at 65. Their increased
> productivity more than makes up for the loss of time from driving 10
> mph slower.

And driving with due care and attention at *100* is safer than
"multi-tasking" at 55.

--
Alan Baker
Vancouver, British Columbia
"If you raise the ceiling four feet, move the fireplace from that wall
to that wall, you'll still only get the full stereophonic effect if you
sit in the bottom of that cupboard."