Conflict of Interest

"DTJ" > wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 20 Nov 2005 10:39:07 -0500, necromancer
> > wrote:
>
>>Dave Head, > was motivated to say this in
>>rec.autos.driving on Sun, 20 Nov 2005 15:10:19 GMT:
>>> Isn't conflict of interest usually illegal? Yes, unless it is the
>>> government
>>> doing it.
>>
>>Just like speeding is illegal - except when it is a cop according to a
>>certain LEO who frequents this group.
>
> Most cops don't give a **** about any laws. They don't obey them, and
> they sure as hell don't turn in their co-workers when they break the
> law.

Yes they do.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

"Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
...
> jaybird wrote:
>
>> "Arif Khokar" > wrote in message
>> ...
>
>>>>Irrelevant. Currently no state limit is set faster than 75 mph
>
>>>Texas does.
>
>> 75 is the max in Texas.
>
> It's 80 mph in certain counties in western TX along I-10 and I-20 (if it
> isn't now, it soon will be).

Not likely unless they get the state law changed. Under TRC 545.353 the max
can only be 75. A county or municipality can be more restrictive than state
law, but not less so.

>
>>>The only thing driving at a lower speed accomplishes is wasting more time
>>>driving.
>
>> Well, it does keep people safer too...
>
> It doesn't. Fatality and crash rates have poor correlation with the
> actual posted limit.

No they don't. We've been over this before.

>
>>>>Speed limits are set using data
>
>>>Perhaps we can continue this debate when you decided to stop pulling
>>>facts out of your ass in order to support your argument.
>
>> No, he's pretty accurate.
>
> He isn't. Read some of the speed limit laws in states such as PA and MD.
> They reference that they're in compliance with the NMSL (despite the fact
> that that law was repealed 10 years ago). Unlike TX, these states will
> sign their interstates at 55 mph (where traffic goes 70 mph) and 65 mph
> (where traffic goes 75 to 80 mph). Those limits have nothing to do with
> data or safety, but they do have something to do with a defunct federal
> law.

They still use data to determine those limits even if they're still the same
as the repealed NMSL.

>
>>>Do you seriously think that someone will be able to devote enough
>>>attention to the driving task going 120 mph while on the phone?
>
>> Nope, but they'll sure try it.

>
> Just an assumption that won't pan out. Even those street racers don't try
> talking on the phone while driving at high speeds on city streets.

Oh, I'm sure it will. I see people speeding on cell phones daily.

--
---
jaybird
---
I am not the cause of your problems.
My actions are the result of your actions.
Your life is not my fault.

>> Most cops don't give a **** about any laws. They don't obey them, and
>> they sure as hell don't turn in their co-workers when they break the
>> law.
>
> Yes they do.
>

Well some of them do, before they learn the term "blanket party". -Dave

"gpsman" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Arif Khokar wrote:
>>
>> What's your prediction regarding how fast those who drive 70 mph in a 55
>> mph zone would drive if the speed limit was set to 90 mph?
>>
>> What's your prediction regarding how fast those who currently drive 70
>> mph in a 55 mph zone would drive if the speed limit was set to 105 mph?
>>
>> What's your prediction regarding how fast those who currently drive 70
>> mph in a 55 mph zone would drive if the speed limit was set to 120 mph?
>>
>> What's your prediction regarding how fast those who currently drive 70
>> mph in a 55 mph zone would drive if the speed limit was set to 135 mph?
>>
>
> Irrelevant. Currently no state limit is set faster than 75 mph... and
> won't be in our lifetimes.
>

It's not irrelevant. Speed limits posted at roadside have almost no
influence on the way people drive. If you raise the speed limit 30MPH, 85th
percentile moves less than 5MPH upward. Same if you lower it 30MPH . . .
85th percentile moves less than 5MPH downward. The only benefit AT ALL that
can be realized from changing the speed limit is to maximize revenue by
setting it lower than the 1% range. But there is no need to do that, as
it's already been done on almost every street in the U.S.A. -Dave

> You're not going to get through to these people in here. The points you
> brought up mirror mine and that of law enforcement, but the most important
> one is about what people think they can get away with. People here use
> the premise of the 85th percentile as a basis of their argument. That
> information is included in a speed survey, but is only one factor of many,
> not the sole determining source. People will continue to drive as fast as
> they think they can get away with


Well, you're CLOSE, jaybird. People drive the way they drive. A very few
might drive as fast as they think that they can get away with. But the vast
majority drive the speed that they are most comfortable with. It has been
found that raising or lowering the speed limit does NOT influence how fast
the vast majority of drivers drive. So they are selecting speeds NOT based
on what they think they can get away with. I can understand how it would be
easy for an LEO to make that false assumption, though. -Dave

gpsman wrote:

> This would be a GREAT idea if it weren't so stupid... Speed limits
> aren't unreasonable... even if *everybody* thinks so or chooses to
> ignore them. The ENTIRE street and highway infrastructure is designed
> and set up for the speed limits now in place.

Your evidence for that?

Near my house is a narrow winding street, with trees both sides,
and many cars parked on both sides too, and often there are
poor kids playing on the footpath or in the road. In my opinion
a safe speed there is 35km/h, and traffic regularly does this speed.

Near my old house, is a long stretch of road that's at least 3 car
lengths wide, with no roadside hazards. One side of the road is
a unused grassy expanse and the other is industrial. Visibility
is excellent. In my opinion the safe speed is at least 70 km/h
and in fact traffic regularly does this speed once it sees there
is no speed enforcement equipment present.

However both zones have a posted limit of 50km/h.
Care to explain?

necromancer wrote:
> gpsman, > was motivated to say this in
> rec.autos.driving on 20 Nov 2005 13:12:35 -0800:
>> Speed limits are set using data that you'll never consider including
>> the reduction of injury and death in the event...
>>
>
> If that's your arguement - that speed kills and slower is better, then
> why don't we adopt a 35MPH limit and reduce the death/injury count
> even more? Or just outlaw private ownership of vehicles entirely and
> cut the highway death rate to zero?
>
> Or is it that you are perfectly willing to send people to their
> mangled deaths so you can zip along to the yacht club at your
> prescious 55MPH?

It's "manicurist", not yacht club.

And if gpsman doesn't have a manicurist, it's because most mass-murderers
don't have manicurists and that Hitler didn't have a manicurist.

jaybird, > was motivated to say this in rec.autos.driving
on Sun, 20 Nov 2005 23:11:02 GMT:
>
> So, New Jersey cops speeding through the state to get home faster would
> be in violation of the law?


> The real question is, would Texas ticket them?
>
> I'm not familiar with NJ law, so I don't know. And no, Texas wouldn't
> ticket them.

The NJ cops he was referring to were speeding through VA on their way
back to NJ from Katrina duty in either LA or MS. It was discussed in
this group a few months ago.

Hypothetical: Say they were OK cops speeding through TX on their way
home from similar duty after Rita. Would you ticket them? Especially if
they were using their vehicles to intimidate other drivers like the NJ
cops were doing?

jaybird, > was motivated to say this in rec.autos.driving
on Sun, 20 Nov 2005 22:02:50 GMT:
> It's because there has to be some middle ground between slow speed and
> getting to your destination.

You can still get to your destination at 35 as well as 55. Just takes a
little longer.

> Outlawing vehicle ownership is not an option
> because the point isn't to get rid of cars,

Why not? AFAIK, there is no Constitutional right to own or operate a
car.

> it's to operate them safely.

If that's the case, then why are speeders (and most other "dangerous,"
driving actions) given monetary fines? Pardon me if I sound a bit like
"Laura Bush murdered her boyfriend," but why don't you arrest them if
they are so dangerous?

Old Wolf wrote: <brevity snip>
>
> Near my house is a narrow winding street, with trees both sides,
> and many cars parked on both sides too, and often there are
> poor kids playing on the footpath or in the road. In my opinion
> a safe speed there is 35km/h, and traffic regularly does this speed.
>
> Near my old house, is a long stretch of road that's at least 3 car
> lengths wide, with no roadside hazards. One side of the road is
> a unused grassy expanse and the other is industrial. Visibility
> is excellent. In my opinion the safe speed is at least 70 km/h
> and in fact traffic regularly does this speed once it sees there
> is no speed enforcement equipment present.
>
> However both zones have a posted limit of 50km/h.
> Care to explain?
-----

Anomolies exist...?

But I think your assessments might be extrapolated from brief
observations of both locations and probably not as accurate as you
might feel. Personally, I rarely see drivers operating below the speed
limit. I base that on always (the last 22 years and 0.75 million miles
anyway) driving pretty close to the limit and not often overtaking
another vehicle... and almost always having a vehicle approaching from
the rear at an easily discernable higher velocity.

I don't know *where* you live with your "footpaths" and "km/h's" but
here in the US the pedestrian is generally considered the lowest form
of life. Driving a little slower just to add a margin of safety to
poor children's play areas might add 2-3 seconds to a person's arrival
at the next traffic control device! Are you daft, man? It's not
tolerated here and the concept couldn't be held more in contempt by the
loudest mouths in this NG.

Speed, man, is all that matters here and if you should have a different
opinion or driving style you're merely a Sloth, a danger to all those
to whom the right-of-way must be yielded.
-----

- gpsman