Highway deaths drop to record low

In article >,
Zigler > wrote:
>
>For example, if YOUR speeding causes ME an accident, then you damn
>well better hope it's a LOT more than a fender-bender, because I would
>crawl out of my car (if I could) and beat the absolute living **** out
>of you within a millimeter of your life... (then I would have to
>contend with the consequences of MY actions, including 1st degree
>assault, making me almost as big of an idiot... but hey, nobody's
>perfect...).

No, you wouldn't. Because you're about 4'10" with nothing but flab, a
regular ****ing Usenet Napoleon. In real life, if someone caused you
an accident you'd cringe inside your car, and if they came to your
window you'd cringe and say "please don't hurt me sir"... even if it
was a 16 year old girl.

>Better yet, just drive the ****ing speed limit, huh?

No. Now, what are you going to do about it?

>It's a wonder how many dumb speeding ****s end up at the next
>stoplight right next to me...

Guess they weren't speeding fast enough. I know my speeding has
carried me through many a light which I wouldn't have made if it
wasn't for speeding. I've even passed from a standing start slothly
drivers like you between lights and made the next one while they got
stopped. Anyway, you can't get ahead if you don't at least try.

>as if you really have anywhere to go that is that important...

Not for you to decide.

>or more important than the rest of us... as if your time is really worth so
>much compared to anyone else's...

My speeding doesn't impede your travel... though your sloth might
impede mine. If you think your time is as important as mine... speed up.

>as if chronic speeding assholes do
>any more than put others at risk, add stress to our commute, and
>CONTRIBUTE TO TRAFFIC CONGESTION by disrupting the natural, steady,
>smooth flow of traffic (think funnel).

Now you're just making **** up. It ain't speeding that contributes to
congestion, it's sloth.

>But we all know it has nothing to do with time; it's a need for speed
>and the slight Adrenalin flow that results. Well, there are PLENTY of
>ways to get your rocks off and play in the sun; just keep your ****ing
>playing OFF the public roads where your "fun" just adds to the stress
>and risk of everyday people, like me, who spend most days traversing
>the transportation system for their work.

We all know it has nothing to do with safety; it's a need for CONTROL
and the slight adrenalin flow which results. Well, **** you; driving
slow causes me stress and I don't intend to add to my own stress just
so you can indulge your control-freak nature.

>But cats like you are above the law and have absolutely zero regard
>for the feelings and safety of others, would be my guess.

Your feelings? Since they're irrational, I have little regard for
them.

>Correct me where I am wrong.

That would be a never-ending task.

>Me and my damn conservative views...
>
>Geeez...

Pronounced with a hard "G", no doubt.

--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Dave Head > wrote in
:


>
> The thing that will make this really low is the self-driving car.
> Then speeds can go up, and mistakes won't happen. Following too
> closely won't be a problem. Drafting will make gas mileage go up.
> All kindza pluses for self-driving cars.

Screw the self-driving car. That will cost a fortune. Lets just stop
coddling highway criminals and the highway death rate will drop 90%
overnight and it will SAVE us money too.

In article >,
Nate Nagel > wrote:
>
>Oh, I get it. gpstard has nym-shifted again.

Is it? I thought maybe it was Carl with some new tactics.


--
There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
result in a fully-depreciated one.

Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS wrote:
> Zigler > wrote in news:82d9811a-2639-496f-87b6-
> :
>
>
>>On Aug 16, 11:58 am, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are MURDERERS"
> wrote:
>>
>>>For openers i'd like to see drunk driving classified as a felony. That
>>>would be a severe penalty and wouldn't cost the taxpayers the way
>>>prison time does.
>>
>>Wow... even a little extreme for me? First offense, as well? And at
>>WHAT BAC level?
>>
>>Where I live, it is .08%. I actually think that is a little
>>ridiculous, but it can depend on the person. I'd like to consider
>>raising the limit back to .10,
>
>
>
>
> For cocaine the threshold level is zero. ANY amount of cocaine on you and
> the feds can charge you with felony possession. And you don't have to be
> driving a car or doing anything that poses a threat to others. In light of
> that, i think making first time DUI a felony is reasonable.

Because one law is asinine therefore another asinine law is reasonable?
What the hell are you smoking?

Oh, wait, it's *you.* Never mind, I don't want to know.

nate

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

Matthew T. Russotto wrote:
> In article >,
> Nate Nagel > wrote:
>
>>Oh, I get it. gpstard has nym-shifted again.
>
>
> Is it? I thought maybe it was Carl with some new tactics.

It was the CDL thing. To my knowledge neither C*rl T**l*r nor Aunt Judy
have ever claimed to have same.

nate

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

On Sat, 16 Aug 2008 22:03:08 -0500, "Speeders & Drunk Drivers are
MURDERERS" guzzled a liter of the blood of a newborn infant and then
spewed forth this:

>Dave Head > wrote in
:
>
>
>>
>> The thing that will make this really low is the self-driving car.
>> Then speeds can go up, and mistakes won't happen. Following too
>> closely won't be a problem. Drafting will make gas mileage go up.
>> All kindza pluses for self-driving cars.
>
>Screw the self-driving car. That will cost a fortune. Lets just stop
>coddling highway criminals and the highway death rate will drop 90%
>overnight and it will SAVE us money too.

And self driving cars would drop the death rate 100%. Why do you want
to send 4200 people to their graves, you psychopath?

And you *are* parking your SUV in the tank area, right?
--
"I'm all for making the SUV owners park in the rear of the lot. It
should be handled like handicapped parking. A special sticker on the
plate designating this vehicle as a highway tank that must be parked in
the tank area."

--Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend, 10/23/05
Ref: http://tinyurl.com/dnox5 http://tinyurl.com/c92qg
Message .com

On Sun, 17 Aug 2008 02:51:58 +0100, Eeyore
> wrote:

>
>
>"C. E. White" wrote:
>
>> Motorcycle crashes stand out as a growing problem. Deaths were up 6.6
>> percent last year, the department said.
>
>Same in the UK. Bikers don't seem to believe the law applies to them. Cyclists
>too come to think of it.
>
>Graham

It wouldn't matter if they obeyed every law on the planet, motorcycles are
death machines. Its the other guy's mistake that gets motorcyclists killed to
a great degree. That, or some damn deer runs out into the roadway and the
motorcyclist splats into a tree after hitting it. The death rate is up because
there are more people riding them because they get great gas mileage.

Its another case of unintended consequences. The safety nazis insist that cars
be able to crash at 40 mph, so the car companies have a hell of a time building
cars that weigh less than 3000 lbs, so the 3000 lb car that gets 30 mpg could
be a 2000 lb car that gets 45 mpg. 30 mpg isn't good enough, so people are
turning to motorcyles. A high performance machine like a Harley Sportster
still gets 59.7 mpg according to the advertising. Some of the lesser
performace cycles get over 100 mpg. Sure people are going to turn to that. If
I had a little bigger death-wish I'd have a Sportster myself.

On Aug 14, 9:51*pm, Brent P >
wrote:

> > She credited safer vehicles, aggressive law enforcement and government
> > programs for the improvements.
>
> Government always credits their intervention, thuggary, and coercion.

If we didn't have government "intervention, thuggary, and coercion" we
wouldn't have any highways.

To be a highway advocate and anti-government is contradictory.

On 2008-08-18, > wrote:
> On Aug 14, 9:51*pm, Brent P >
> wrote:
>
>> > She credited safer vehicles, aggressive law enforcement and government
>> > programs for the improvements.
>>
>> Government always credits their intervention, thuggary, and coercion.
>
> If we didn't have government "intervention, thuggary, and coercion" we
> wouldn't have any highways.

False. Highways can be built without corruption and within
constitutional bounds. People simply choose to build them with
corruption and ignore the constitution.

> To be a highway advocate and anti-government is contradictory.

Who's a highway advocate?

On Aug 18, 3:27*pm, wrote:
> On Aug 14, 9:51*pm, Brent P >
> wrote:
>
> > > She credited safer vehicles, aggressive law enforcement and government
> > > programs for the improvements.
>
> > Government always credits their intervention, thuggary, and coercion.
>
> If we didn't have government "intervention, thuggary, and coercion" we
> wouldn't have any highways.
>
> To be a highway advocate and anti-government is contradictory.

In some places, highways are built and operated by private contractors
- for example, the Dulles Greenway.

nate