We all drive fast cars. It's why were here. We want it to be legal to go faster. You all appear to have convinced yourselves that if speed limits are increased, common sense will somehow prevail among the masses and that people will actually perceive and respect their limits. Based on my drive home tonight alone, it's just not reality. Most people truly are terrible drivers. While you all claim that even if the limits are increased, people will still keep to their safe speed, what has you so firmly convinced they will both travel at their safe speed AND stay out of your way? Few people pay attention to the "keep right unless to pass" rule, and they sure as hell don't give a damn if you (politely, in your opinion) flash your high beams at them. They also don't care about in what lane they pass you. I experienced this several times on my ride home tonight. I was not in the fast lane, and the fast lane was empty. I was passed on the right at least a half-dozen times, and for absolutely no good reason, and typically when there was more traffic ahead in the right lane.

You all keep hammering on this one study that has "proven" your point. Any study is going to have subjective factors that prevent it from being universally applicable. Like any reasonable person, my perceptions of the world around me as I experience it guide my opinions (and they're just opinions). That is obviously subjective as well. I'm not ignoring anything; I'd like to think I'm pretty open minded. But based on my lifetime driving experience, people are, for the most part, bad drivers.

I'm not saying people can't be taught to be better drivers; I've asked in several of my posts why no one says anything about my driver education program suggestions. Sure we all have the capability to be better drivers, and Ron, your learning to swim example is apt. But why on Earth, when the tools are readily available to educate people on how to be better drivers at any speed, should we not encourage, if not require, that ALL drivers take advanced driving courses? Why subject ourselves to trial and error when we caould save countless lives with a little (ok, a lot) more time in a classroom first? Before you can run, you must first learn to walk. Before you walk, you learn to crawl. Before you crawl, you learn to get off your @$$.

FYI: My drive home tonight (after rush hour, just got home, left at 8:30):

1. Short merge lane from South Capitol St onto 295 N; 50 mph speed limit; 2 cars in front of me come to a complete stop even though there's no cars in the far right lane and they have the merge area, albeit short, right in front of them.

2. About 2 minutes later: contrsuction area, left lane closed. I'm in the left lane and need to get out of it; I signal in plenty of time. Escalade jerko in the right lane decides it's time to floor it and prevent me from changing lanes. My 9-5 Aero is faster than his 6k lb behemoth so I beat him to the spot

3. About 3 minutes later: Hyundai POS crusing in the left lane (of 3) at 50 mph. 55 zone, but most folks are doing 65+. Nice line of cars queing up behind him. He won't get out of the left lane. People are forced to dangerously pass him on the right as merging traffic from the exit is pouring in and doing it's own zipper dance.

4. About 2 minutes later: cruising along at 69 mph (in a 55; with the general flow of traffic; passing cars every 10 seconds or so), Mr. 4Runner comes flying up behind me at 80+ (and I was watching my rear view, as I always do). I signal to get over and to try get out of his way once I complete my pass of the car in the middle lane; he can't wait and zags into the far right lane, nearly clipping a merging car from the exit ramp

5. About 3 minutes later: police activity; car accident or flat tire; nothing special. everyone slams on their brakes to rubberneck

6. About 2 minutes later: Merge onto 495 north; 3 cars ahead of me; front car (90s POS Toyota Tercel) is rolling at about 30 mph in the short merge lane; 495 traffic is flying by at 70+. We eventually merge, after Mr. Tercel cuts off 5 cars to get to the 3rd lane to his left

7. About 5 minutes later: merge onto 95 North; 65 mph zone; another POS Hyundai crusing in the left lane at 60 mph, with his brights on. Genius. Cars are passing him on the right at an incredible clip.

8. About 3 minutes later: another SUV comes flying up behind me, but this time I'm in the lane next to the fast lane, cruise control set at 74 mph. All lanes are open around me, but this jerko can't change lanes apparently. He realizes I'm not moving, so instead of passing to my left, he passes to the right, where there's an 18 wheeler in the lane 500 yards ahead of him doing about 70; he passes the 18 wheeler on his right.

9. About 4 minutes later: I haven't touched my cruise control or brakes, yet I somehow have to pass that same SUV that just passed me on my right. He's doing 70 in the fast lane.

10. About 5 minutes later; still haven't touched my cruise control. 2 ricers go flying by in the far right lane (fast lane is empty, though) at 100+; and then have to slam on their brakes as they approach an exit.

11. About 6 minutes later: more police activity; everyone slows to about 50 (still in a 65) to gawk.

12. About 10 minutes later: merging onto 395, into downtown Baltimore. It's a fun exit that I like to take at about 60+ if possible. I'm doing about that when a Honda Accord decides, despite his lane being wide open in front of him, that he'd like to be in my, the inside and "fast" lane.

13. About 5 minutes later: driving through downtown Baltimore. 30 mph zone, and most folks go about that, maybe a little more. I'm going 30-35 with no one in front of me when a Toyota Corolla decides he likes my lane better. He's not turning or parking; just liked my lane; too bad he's going 20 mph.

Thirteen seperate examples of stupid driving in a drive that lasted a little over an hour.

I'm going to stop beating this dead horse now. You all can have your pipe dreams of 100+ mph freeways, but it's never going to happen, if only because of the harm it does to the environment. And I still want to know where and when you all are driving that you don't experience even 1/10th of my drive home on a regular basis.

 

And I repeat:

 

I have no pipe dream that things will change in my lifetime, but that doesn't mean I have to dumb myself down to believing what exists is right, or safer. So, I will still argue the point.

The speed limit laws in effect have resulted in the diminished driving skills by the current generation of drivers.

I drive in Western Mass, and can run up to NH or VT as well as upper NY without running into what you describe. This is a relatively densely populated area, nothing like DC of course. Under good conditions 80-100mph would be very safe to manage, with some sections allowing much higher speeds. These are all limited access highways of course.

 

\

I don't know if you are just being purposly negative, or what.... I drove home on the 15 freeway at 85-95mph with a whole bunch of others, both in SUVs and little cars, and in between. We all stayed in our lanes, even though there is construction issue that requires us to sway back and forth - a kind of sweeping curve at 85 staying in our lanes.

Everybody's assertion is that if people can't prove solid talent in driving, they not be given the privilege

 

I appreciate your comments. I appreciate your assessment of the idiots you encounter in your personal driving world. I encounter them in mine. I could fuel a rocket with the language that comes out of my mouth while driving on California freeways. But one comment by you stands out in my mind: [I]"Based on my drive home tonight alone, it's just not reality. Most people truly are [/I]terrible drivers." Based on your drive home in your environment. How much more of a "one study that has proven your point" do you want?(your words) The studies I know are done daily by professional traffic engineers who have told me personally that if there were engineering studys performed on California freeways the limits would be raised to at least 85 mph. They supervise engineering studies all over this county. Others have mirrored this thinking according to traffic activists I know. Tnis is not one study that proves my point. It is the experience of the German autobahns. And it is well that of many engineers in this country whose hands are tied by political idiocy and vested interests, or the limits on the roads (which I'm sure would be drastically improved) would be increased. That is in addition to the experience of the Montana engineers. Many studies in more than this country have confirmed this. This argument is sounding more and more like the anti-gunners all over the world who would, and have, prohibited firearms from responsible citizens who are then deprived the right of self protection all in the name of "protecting them". And then the death and robbery rate increase drastically and the prohibitors keep saying the citizens are "safer" while the criminals roam the streets terrorizing them. ****. More pure ****. As a scholar you know your "based on my drive home tonight " is not a measure of all drivers in all areas. It may be a measure of your frustration level in one micro environment, but that happens to all of us, particularly in urban areas. Have you driven in Nevada? Utah? Germany? Austria? Japan? Florida?

But assuming you are correct again, don't you think the blame for all the poor drivers you encounter lies with the attitude of the over protective authorities who have created citizens who don't think they need to be capable or responsible? Back to my earlier argument that if people are treated like children who are not allowed nor expected to perform in a responsible manner they won't? They rely on authority to "punish" them if they are caught and "the law" to guage their performance and safety level.?

Now if you want truly "terrible drivers", as you call them, I would say to try Italy. By our standards, they should lock up most them. But I would take my chances in Italy any day over some of our drivers. At least they are alert, even if they do drive on the sidewalk or anywhere else they desire. The only ones who aren't good are dead. Or moved to Hawaii where you would pray to find a geenie in a bottle who could get you off the island before you lose your mind with the drivers over there. Thankfully, there is an ocean around the place to keep them from driving over here. FWIW, the limit in Hawaii was 55 period, (but last time I drove there, I saw a sign for 60; wonders may never cease).

If I had only to drive the Baltimore-DC corridor, I too might judge "all" drivers terrible. But I don't and I haven't and I con't agree with you or your method of data collection. I do agree that we need extremely intensified driver education, but only if it is an honest effort to make the drivers better and more skillful, not put more bullsh*t in their heads that results in their ineptitude, as it does now. Telling them "speed kills" is not my idea of driver education. Teaching them how to handle a machine at speeds they might likely encounter under various conditions, is driver education. Demanding better vehicle maintenance is also driver education in a sense, and also sorely needed. The only way our drivers , or at least those in your corridor, are going to improve is to make it necessary for them to improve. To date, they have had no need to improve. How many are cited for impeding the flow of traffic? How many need to cope with closing speeds more than 20 mph? How many can spell "closing speeds"? What do we expect with an over protective attitude so pervasive?

If you feel as you do about the drivers you describe in such graphic detail, have you bothered to express your outrage to your representatives? Just a thought. Or the traffic reporter for you newspaper? Politicians are responsive to squeaky wheels from their constituents; newspaper reporters aren't usually. It is our country, Express yourself to them. (yes, I have and do.) And an attorney is at a huge advantage if he chooses to institute reform judicially: an appeals court verdict against these idiot authorities based on sound engineering reasoning might surprise you when it becomes case law. It is the method by which the National Maximum Speed Law was eliminated. Why not put your experience and skills to work for real change? Come to work with us.

Have a nice day, Mike.

 

Mike,

Nobody is asking for +100MPH highways. We find it a fraud on the public that safety is achieved by revenue schemes and lies to the public. I now have to ask, about your handle "CourtShark", are you part of the traffic control scam?

Only Doctors and Judges think they are GODS and politicians are just evil and want to be GODS.

We use common sense here, and BrendenC points out that people adjusted for speed handle it well. I would even be willing to pay and go to classes to become "certified" to drive at higher rates of speed. This could even include an annual fee for the responsibility to drive at a higher speed.

Nothing personal here, just bored with the argument that people are not trustworthy in cars, and that artificial speed limits provide safety.

 

Interesting thread. I've read most of the posts and skimmed those that were pages in length.

Rather than adding to the debate any further I will propose a mechanism for promoting safer driving habits (freely stolen from Walt K of e-mail list fame from the PorscheFans days...)

Outlaw steering wheel airbags retroactively. In place of the bag itself wire-in a 20-gauge shotgun shell.



P.S. A professional driver once said: "Getting struck by lightning is an accident. Anything else is driver error."

 

Sorry been struck by lighting TWICE!

 

Well, that explains a lot.

 

Have you considering applying for the position of "Official HWFM Racing Lighting Rod?"

 

That explains Andre's hair ... in his avatar ... and the expression ... permanent I presume

 

Is there an opening?

I have one of them documented in an EKG medical report I can show for material evidence. The second time, it did not kill me so I did not go to the ER.

Edit: Bet Randy V now makes me the official rennlist lightening rod EEK

 

Well said. Graded licenses is a concept that has been around for years. A placard either on the car window or license plate would alert those that need to know of your demonstrated skill level. But remember, this system is not only about "safety", but also about "uniformity". Anything and anyone perceived to be acting in a non-uniform manner is automatically suspect and subject to suppression immediately. Certain tribes have been known to detest those that are non-uniform, either because of jealously (we can't so why can you?), or because of fear and insecurity ( you can't be any different/better than us.). A true demonstration of extreme lack of sophistication and security. Occasionally movie stars and professional atheletes are persecuted for displays of non-uniform behaviour or costume or performance. You think driving a Porsche doesn't trigger extreme resentment among certain members of a well known tribe? Of course it does. Regularly. Money is not the issue. It is about the personal shortcomings of those tribesmen. So be careful when you drive your red Porsche with a graded certification placard around a remote rural area full of rednecks. Ask me how I know. For those reasons I don't have an RMB or bright stimulating paint and I don't have tinted glass.


Any program to improve the driver guality in this country must also be accompanied by one to improve the quality of the bear population as well. The priorities of some bears are lacking in substance and justification. They can only be based on subjective and unsubstantiated emotions. Not all bears of course, but some bears are threats to our safety and sanity and also contribute to the problem. Knowing it is unlikely that you will be cited for passing on the right would prompt someone to do so rather than remain behind a left lane hog and flash him to ask him to move over, which would be regarded as
"aggressive driving" by some bears. Of course passing on the right is immensely more dangerous, but is not punished. Absurd. The cops need to go back to school too, not just the drivers.

 

Quote: Of course passing on the right is immensely more dangerous

Why do you say that? I just can't see it.

Same closing speed; very similar approach aspect (from the rear), so visibility is similar; one driver is between bulk of two cars (it just happens to be "the other one"). Where is the immensely greater danger?

 

It is universally regarded as more dangerous and that is why we have pass on the left, slower traffic keep right laws. The slower driver in the left lane cannot see you as easily if you approach from the right as he can if you approach from the left. He is likely also thinking he is traveling in the faster lane and anyone on the right is therefore not faster and won't be coming up to him. As he is thinking this he is watching his rear view windshield and driver door mirrors and paying much less attention to his passenger side door mirror. He may not even detect you until you are beside him, particularly if he is in an SUV and you are in a P car or a Lotus. If he changes lanes, he will move to the right and you might be there or almost there and moving faster than he is expecting you to close. You have nowhere to go in many cases but particularly on a two lane highway, unless you take the shoulder. There is less chance of another vehicle or an obstruction being in the inside (center) shoulder than in the right side shoulder.

But primarily he doesn't expect you to be passing him on the right or going faster than him.....until it is too late. In Germany on the autobahn, you may lose your license immediately and your car will be towed if you are caught passing on the right. For good reason. That's one reason your P car has flashing ability: to politely signal your wish to pass and for the other driver to yeild the fast lane which is the left most lane. At least that's the way it is in the
US and other places that drive on the same side of the road as we do.

Check out all the signs that direct you to "keep right except to pass" or "slower traffic keep right". It is a convention and an expectation like slower boats versus faster boats at sea, and other conventions on which we expect to universally agree. Obviously, as you enter a highway, usually you enter from the right and are traveling more slowly than the traffic with which you are attempting to merge. As you gain speed, you move to the left and end up ideally in the left lane if you are passing cars or are travelling faster than most or all traffic. Other drivers expect this and look for it. If you are traveling along a two lane road, one lane in either direction, you pass on the left; if you pass on the right, and the other driver turns into you, guess who is responsible for the shunt? And in the situation of a two lane, one lane in each direction road, there is usually only pavement for two lanes and none on the shoulder; if you pass on the right, you will be on the shoulder. Do you think that is as safe as being on the pavement at speed?

Think about it.

Evver notice how people walk on the right along a sidewalk and the people going in the other direction walk to the left? And as you walk past slower people in your same direction you tend to walk to the left of them? Same thing.

Slower cars also tend to stay right because as they leave the roadway, they leave on the right so they slow and move to the right lanes. The differential is less if you are traveling faster in the left lane and passing other cars, because those other cars to the farthest right lanes are traveling slower then the left lane cars.

Keep thinking about it.

Did anyone mention driver ed in this thread???

Oops !! I notice you drive in Australia on the "other side" of the road. That explains your question. The above applies to our roads.