REVscene - Vancouver Automotive Forum


Welcome to the REVscene Automotive Forum forums.

Registration is Free!You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today! The banners on the left side and below do not show for registered users!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.


Go Back   REVscene Automotive Forum > Automotive Chat > Police Forum

Police Forum Police Head Mod: Skidmark
Questions & info about the Motor Vehicle Act. Mature discussion only.

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 09-15-2010, 05:36 PM   #51
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
I just thought of something while on my way home, watching the miles of barely crawling cars stuck in rush hour traffic:

The majority of collisions occur during the afternoon rush hours (ICBC stats), which is coincidentally when traffic is moving at it's slowest.
Advertisement
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 05:52 PM   #52
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
I just thought of something while on my way home, watching the miles of barely crawling cars stuck in rush hour traffic:

The majority of collisions occur during the afternoon rush hours (ICBC stats), which is coincidentally when traffic is moving at it's slowest.
That may be, but few of those result in deaths or even injury other than maybe a strained neck or a little airbag burn.

As an aside, in all the accidents I've ever had (not all my fault :P), I've never been going over 20km/h.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 05:54 PM   #53
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
I just thought of something while on my way home, watching the miles of barely crawling cars stuck in rush hour traffic:

The majority of collisions occur during the afternoon rush hours (ICBC stats), which is coincidentally when traffic is moving at it's slowest.
You're still deflecting. Yes the money to pass Bill-14 could have been better spent, et it is spent now. Besides money is already being put aside for transit, bike, highway and bridge improvements.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 06:02 PM   #54
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
You're still deflecting.
What can I say? I'm not an expert at convincing politicians that they need to think for themselves.

In fact, I have changed my mind. We need speed cameras every 500m set to catch anyone travelling 1km/hr or faster above the speed limit.

We'll still have crashes, many will end in deaths, but everyone would be much safer.

Seriously. And after my experience today on the highway they can drop the speed limits by 20km/hr too.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 06:10 PM   #55
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundy View Post
That may be, but few of those result in deaths or even injury other than maybe a strained neck or a little airbag burn.
Sorry, but according to the 2006 ICBC stats more deaths happened between 4 and 5pm than during any other hour of the day.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 08:08 PM   #56
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
of course it happens at 4-5pm, because that's during rush hour when most people drive. With a higher number of drivers, PLUS a higher concentration of drivers within certain areas, of course there are going to be more collisions, that's deductive reasoning.

the thing is, yes, most smart drivers will only speed when there is little to no traffic around, at late hours... but the chances of you causing an accident with higher injury and death rates are higher when you speed. Yes, the number of collisions caused solely by speed is smaller than drivers not paying attention. BUT, the fact of the matter is - if you slow down, you WILL reduce the number of collisions, and reduce the severity of injuries occured. That is a fact that you cannot dispute.

I remember an accident that happened a few years ago, on North West Marine drive in Vancouver. I can't quite remember the specifics - as to what car, and exactly how fast he was going - but I do remember that he was speeding excessively. Now - he hit a pedestrian that was either crossing the road illegally, or was just walking on the road, it was in the middle of the night. But this road was a 50 zone, I think the driver hit 120 or so.

Now on any normal night, I'm sure tons of people speed on this. I'm not going to lie, I'm sure I've sped down that road as well. Was the guy an idiot for either jaywalking or walking in the middle of the road, on a dark night? sure. But he's dead now, and you can say, speeding killed him. If the driver was only going 60 or 70, he might have either been able to avoid him, or braked and struck him at a lower speed, still sustaining injuries, but he might still be alive.

Everybody here might say, ya sure, it's in the middle of the night, and there is nobody around, what's a little speed going to hurt anybody. But there is always that chance that some idiot might be walking on the road. Does he deserve to be punished for being an idiot, sure. Does he deserve to die, no.
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 08:23 PM   #57
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
You're implying that I am saying it should be ok to do 120 in a 50 zone. I'm not. But I don't think people should be ticketed for 60 in a 50 zone should that be the average speed of traffic at that time.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 09:41 PM   #58
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
You're implying that I am saying it should be ok to do 120 in a 50 zone. I'm not. But I don't think people should be ticketed for 60 in a 50 zone should that be the average speed of traffic at that time.
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
People are trusted to make decisions as to what is safe all the time. Is it safe to merge? Is it safe to proceed through this intersection? etc...

People are even entrusted to make safe decisions regarding speed of travel within the confines of the posted speed limit. What is wrong with them making a similar decision if the speeds are above the limit?
The point I was trying to make is that people shouldn't be able to make decisions about going over the speed limit. 70 over the limit is quite extreme, but this is something that I'm sure has been done many times before, even by members of this board who might think it to be safe because it's in the middle of the night.
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 09:57 PM   #59
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gars View Post
The point I was trying to make is that people shouldn't be able to make decisions about going over the speed limit.

Should they be able to make decisions about going under the speed limit?
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 10:26 PM   #60
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
i don't get it, are you trying to say that as a joke to deflect the argument? or are you actually asking seriously...?
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 10:34 PM   #61
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gars View Post
i don't get it, are you trying to say that as a joke to deflect the argument? or are you actually asking seriously...?
I'm asking a serious question.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 10:34 PM   #62
Pull Out Towing. Women rescued for free.
 
SumAznGuy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Hongcouver
Posts: 7,486
Thanked 1,879 Times in 994 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gars View Post
of course it happens at 4-5pm, because that's during rush hour when most people drive. With a higher number of drivers, PLUS a higher concentration of drivers within certain areas, of course there are going to be more collisions, that's deductive reasoning.
You missed his point. Between 4 and 5, the average speed on city roads and highways is normally less than the speed limit due to the number of cars on the road.

That being said, there doesn't seem to be a resonable argument to why we shouldn't be heavily punished for going 40 km/h over the speed limit, especially in a 50 zone or a work/playground/school zone.
I think his argument is to raise the low speed limits, and improve driver training.

Perhaps make city speed limits 60 km/h but going 1 km/h over the limit is grounds for a speeding ticket.

I still don't like the rule only because you are guilty until proven innocent, but how can you justify going 35+ km/h over the speed limit?
__________________
Originally posted by Iceman_19 you should have tried to touch his penis. that really throws them off.
Originally posted by The7even SumAznGuy > Billboa
Originally posted by 1990TSI SumAznGuy> Internet > tinytrix
(11-0-0) Buy/Sell rating
Christine
Shitvic
Pull Out Towing
SumAznGuy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-15-2010, 11:00 PM   #63
I am grateful grapefruit
 
gars's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 4,094
Thanked 831 Times in 392 Posts
I understood completely the point he was trying to make. Accidents aren't just caused by speeding - there are many factors, including inattentiveness, running red lights or stop signs, drinking, failure to yield. Nobody is saying that speeding is the only factor, and just by going slowly, nobody will get in accidents.

During rush hour, if you take out the speed, all the other factors are still compounded by the extra number of drivers on the street.

With the number of traffic lights on our city streets, there is no reason to change the speed limit to 60. Fuel consumption will just go up, but people would not get to their destination that much quicker, because they will still be stopped by traffic lights and/or other traffic.
gars is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 07:19 AM   #64
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
Sorry, but according to the 2006 ICBC stats more deaths happened between 4 and 5pm than during any other hour of the day.
That may be as well, but how many of those are in that traffic that's barely crawling along, stop-and-go and never going over 20km/h?

All this assumes I believe that you're not just pulling numbers out of your ass.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 08:05 AM   #65
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by gars View Post
i don't get it, are you trying to say that as a joke to deflect the argument? or are you actually asking seriously...?
He's being dramatic and trying to say if we cannot be trusted to make decisions like when to turn/yield/... below the limit cause that's when the most accidents are, why should we be trusted to make any decisions at all (aka don't drive at all).

He still doesn't understand that most people think there is something wrong with speeding 40 over, yet nothing wrong with turning left at an intersection, despite more accidents occurring at intersections. We have to turn left, we don't have to speed (and no-one post the Mythbusters only-right-turns myth, yet it works, yet only cause no-one does it. If everyone did it wouldn't work due to congestion)
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 07:10 PM   #66
RS Peace Officer
 
zulutango's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Vancouver Islan
Posts: 3,850
Thanked 1,623 Times in 678 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundy View Post
That may be as well, but how many of those are in that traffic that's barely crawling along, stop-and-go and never going over 20km/h?

All this assumes I believe that you're not just pulling numbers out of your ass.
You do know that 84% of people make up 77% of statistics approximately 24% of the time? Sort of....
zulutango is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 10:23 PM   #67
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
He's being dramatic and trying to say if we cannot be trusted to make decisions like when to turn/yield/... below the limit cause that's when the most accidents are, why should we be trusted to make any decisions at all (aka don't drive at all).

He still doesn't understand that most people think there is something wrong with speeding 40 over, yet nothing wrong with turning left at an intersection, despite more accidents occurring at intersections. We have to turn left, we don't have to speed (and no-one post the Mythbusters only-right-turns myth, yet it works, yet only cause no-one does it. If everyone did it wouldn't work due to congestion)
Did I say that there was nothing wrong with driving 40 over the limit? I am simply saying we don't need more laws to deal with what is already illegal.

What I sam saying is people are encouraged to use their best judgement at speeds up to the maximum posted limit, but cannot under any circumstances use any judgement when it comes to speed limit +1km/hr or greater.

Essentially what the government is saying is that people can only sort of make judgement calls on their own, and said judgement calls must be based on what is legal, not what is actually occuring in the immediate vicinity of the driver.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 10:25 PM   #68
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by zulutango View Post
You do know that 84% of people make up 77% of statistics approximately 24% of the time? Sort of....
Come on, you know better.. you report these stats to ICBC.

http://www.icbc.com/road-safety/safe...sions-2006.pdf
Jump to page 23 (acrobat page numbering). Table 2.03
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 10:38 PM   #69
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
I was in two close calls the other dey because of my refusal to "go with the flow", which was a mere 15km/hr over the limit on the highway.

I keep right except to pass. My lane was about to become an exit lane so I signaled to move over well in advance, however this put me in the middle lane doing the speed limit while other cars to my left, right and behind were exceeding it. I was about 6' from being clipped by an SUV to my rear left as I made the lane change (signal flashed at least 6 times before I made the lane change) and I had cars boxing me in on the right and left.

6' away from other cars who were now braking heavily to avoid hitting me at 90km/hr. Perfectly safe.. er.. legal.

Now, if I simply had the ability to adjust my driving according to the prevailing traffic and not some arbitrary speed limit, I could have made the move with much more room around my vehicle.

Now before you say I could have simply slowed down and waited for a wider gap in traffic, I would have had to slow to 60 in a 90 zone to line up with a break or risk being forced into the exit lane.

That's why it is important to give drivers the ability to make decisions for themselves. Nowhere did I say I need to be able to do 40 over the limit, but speeding up to make a safe lane change will now be punishable by an immediate 7 day impoundment and a possible street racing conviction.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-16-2010, 11:19 PM   #70
Banned (ABWS)
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Kits/Richmond
Posts: 4,409
Thanked 1,104 Times in 539 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
I was in two close calls the other dey because of my refusal to "go with the flow", which was a mere 15km/hr over the limit on the highway.

I keep right except to pass. My lane was about to become an exit lane so I signaled to move over well in advance, however this put me in the middle lane doing the speed limit while other cars to my left, right and behind were exceeding it. I was about 6' from being clipped by an SUV to my rear left as I made the lane change (signal flashed at least 6 times before I made the lane change) and I had cars boxing me in on the right and left.

6' away from other cars who were now braking heavily to avoid hitting me at 90km/hr. Perfectly safe.. er.. legal.

Now, if I simply had the ability to adjust my driving according to the prevailing traffic and not some arbitrary speed limit, I could have made the move with much more room around my vehicle.

Now before you say I could have simply slowed down and waited for a wider gap in traffic, I would have had to slow to 60 in a 90 zone to line up with a break or risk being forced into the exit lane.

That's why it is important to give drivers the ability to make decisions for themselves. Nowhere did I say I need to be able to do 40 over the limit, but speeding up to make a safe lane change will now be punishable by an immediate 7 day impoundment and a possible street racing conviction.
Or you can decide to take the bus. Not every decision has to end with "I needed to excessively speed officer".

Actually your account is a particular pet peeve of mine. A driver is traveling in the wrong lane and needs to change lanes to exit, turn, merge or otherwise and hasn't left enough room or planned far enough ahead. The driver feels entitled to still complete their intended action and ends up cutting someone off, holding someone up, speeding recklessly to find a hole in traffic, ... when really it comes down to poor driving and decision making in the first place.

Do myself and others a favour, if you're ever caught in the wrong lane and unable to complete whatever action you wish to take in time, just keep going and then turn around and backtrack. Don't punish us with some stupid driving move cause you were not paying attention and did not make a good decision.
taylor192 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 12:00 AM   #71
I *heart* Revscene.net very Muchie
 
jlenko's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Burnaby, BC
Posts: 3,562
Thanked 330 Times in 163 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
We have to turn left, we don't have to speed (and no-one post the Mythbusters only-right-turns myth, yet it works, yet only cause no-one does it. If everyone did it wouldn't work due to congestion)
Funny you should mention that... when I'm in my work truck.. I can't be bothered to make an unsafe left turn.. so unless there's an advance green, I DO make the effort to go around the block and make three rights instead. What can I say? It's a big freakin' truck... turns are difficult as it is... lefts are even worse.


Quote:
Originally Posted by sebberry View Post
I was in two close calls the other dey because of my refusal to "go with the flow", which was a mere 15km/hr over the limit on the highway.

I keep right except to pass.
I always do the speed limit (if not less.. trust me.. this truck doesn't 'get up to speed' quickly... nor does it stop on a dime... so... it's in your best interests to keep me at the speed limit..)in the right lane, in that work truck... mostly because they GPS'ed it... so I speed, they know. So follow the rules, don't get caught, etc... blah blah blah. I digress.

I've never been in any close calls. Traffic goes whizzing past me all day every day... I don't have an issue with it. No one honks at me. No one flashes their lights at me. I've never caused an accident (though, some idiots who insist on weaving lanes, while going 120+ in the 80 km/h construction zone that is currently most of Hwy 1 in Metro Vancouver... they've caused accidents...)

I would rather have everyone slow down to the limit... and have to sit in 'regular traffic' than have to sit through dead-stopped traffic because some jerk smoked someone else.

I'm all for these new speeding laws... and I can't FREAKIN WAIT!! til some loser from RS, who was speeding in mommy's BMW, comes crying on this forum about how he lost his car and licence...
__________________
Don't be the next RS.net statistic - If you drink, don't drive. You'll lose your licence, and the rest of us will laugh at you.
jlenko is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 08:23 AM   #72
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by taylor192 View Post
Or you can decide to take the bus. Not every decision has to end with "I needed to excessively speed officer".

Actually your account is a particular pet peeve of mine. A driver is traveling in the wrong lane and needs to change lanes to exit, turn, merge or otherwise and hasn't left enough room or planned far enough ahead. The driver feels entitled to still complete their intended action and ends up cutting someone off, holding someone up, speeding recklessly to find a hole in traffic, ... when really it comes down to poor driving and decision making in the first place.

Do myself and others a favour, if you're ever caught in the wrong lane and unable to complete whatever action you wish to take in time, just keep going and then turn around and backtrack. Don't punish us with some stupid driving move cause you were not paying attention and did not make a good decision.
I made the lane change well enough ahead. If I made it any sooner, I would be in the middle lane doing the speed limit, clearly not "keeping right except to pass". Last I checked, Transit doesn't go to Mill Bay.

Thanks for the suggestion to take the exit and backtrack. I'm sure several turns, lane changes and intersections are much safer than simply keeping pace with traffic.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 08:30 AM   #73
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlenko View Post
I've never been in any close calls. Traffic goes whizzing past me all day every day... I don't have an issue with it. No one honks at me. No one flashes their lights at me. I've never caused an accident (though, some idiots who insist on weaving lanes, while going 120+ in the 80 km/h construction zone that is currently most of Hwy 1 in Metro Vancouver... they've caused accidents...)
Well you ARE in a work truck, and I assume it looks like a work truck. From what I have observed, people tend to not get as bothered by those doing the speed limit than they do regular passenger cars.

About 15 minutes after my first close call, I was doing the posted speed limit on the Malahat (a ridiculous 70km/hr) and then later 80km/hr.

Here I am, doing the speed limit just like you do in your work truck.

Not only am I being passed by dump trucks, A Ford F350 is so close to the back of my car that I can't see his licence plate OR the driver. Here I am not keeping pace with traffic and what happens? Exactly what you say never does.

For the record, I don't speed in construction zones like it appears you are trying to imply.

In fact, I think you're trying to group me in with the hot headed, tailgating, weaving speeders that I too can't stand and think should be removed from the road.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 09:21 AM   #74
I WANT MY 10 YEARS BACK FROM RS.net!
 
Soundy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Abbotstan
Posts: 20,730
Thanked 12,144 Times in 3,366 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlenko View Post
I would rather have everyone slow down to the limit... and have to sit in 'regular traffic' than have to sit through dead-stopped traffic because some jerk smoked someone else.


Quote:
I'm all for these new speeding laws... and I can't FREAKIN WAIT!! til some loser from RS, who was speeding in mommy's BMW, comes crying on this forum about how he lost his car and licence...
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Godzira View Post
Does anyone know how many to a signature?
..
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brianrietta View Post
Not a sebberry post goes by where I don't frown and think to myself "so..?"
Soundy is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-17-2010, 09:53 AM   #75
I subscribe to Revscene
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Victoria
Posts: 1,977
Thanked 185 Times in 129 Posts
Quote:
Originally Posted by jlenko View Post
I would rather have everyone slow down to the limit... and have to sit in 'regular traffic' than have to sit through dead-stopped traffic because some jerk smoked someone else.
What makes you think that having EVERYONE slow down to the limit is an attainable goal? Alberta safety squad wrote 3,300 speeding tickets on the labour day long weekend, even with all those speed cameras working hard at slowing people down.


Some jerk isn't going to smoke someone else if he is going with the flow of traffic, but he will smoke someone else if he is weaving in and out of traffic.
__________________
Consider reading the research before commenting on photo enforcement: http://thenewspaper.com/

Support Road safety through education, not speed enforcement.
sebberry is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools

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

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:11 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO ©2011, Crawlability, Inc.
Revscene.net cannot be held accountable for the actions of its members nor does the opinions of the members represent that of Revscene.net