On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:00:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:
"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:ba91ab2d642f695b106842d56a53af64@free. teranews.com... On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 16:56:49 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:954cf7d141d33ee1a1d8bca6c1907f6b@free. teranews.com...> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 04:15:16 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:>> >But they're working, and they're in a marked, on duty unit. They areexempt> >when working.>> Don't you think that they should follow the rules unless they have a> specific reason (ie an emergency call) not to?Personally? Yes, I do think they should. Well, that's a good start! ;) Now we get to the interesting part. Is their behaviour unreasonable because they're breaking the law by speeding, or is the law that they're breaking unreasonable?Neither, if in the context of it being necessary during work. Theirbehavior is not unreasonable because they're not breaking the law. And, thelaw is reasonable.

Ahh, but we aren't talking about it being in the context of being
necessary. Remember, you just told me that they *should* follow the
laws unless they need to break them.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
news:094e8fffaad35aecb4355a5fe2e3eaaa@free.teranew s.com... On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:00:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:ba91ab2d642f695b106842d56a53af64@free. teranews.com... On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 16:56:49 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote: > >"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message >news:954cf7d141d33ee1a1d8bca6c1907f6b@free.teranew s.com... >> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 04:15:16 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote: >> >> >But they're working, and they're in a marked, on duty unit. They
are >exempt >> >when working. >> >> Don't you think that they should follow the rules unless they have a >> specific reason (ie an emergency call) not to? > >Personally? Yes, I do think they should. Well, that's a good start! ;) Now we get to the interesting part. Is their behaviour unreasonable because they're breaking the law by speeding, or is the law that they're breaking unreasonable?Neither, if in the context of it being necessary during work. Theirbehavior is not unreasonable because they're not breaking the law. And,
thelaw is reasonable. Ahh, but we aren't talking about it being in the context of being necessary. Remember, you just told me that they *should* follow the laws unless they need to break them.

So you're trying to trip me up on something that only involves personal
opinion in the first place. I'll play along.... In my personal opinion,
their behavior would be unnecessary if they don't need to do it. How's
that? :o)

--

jaybird

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

---------

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:31:50 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:
"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:094e8fffaad35aecb4355a5fe2e3eaaa@free. teranews.com... On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:00:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
> Now we get to the interesting part. Is their behaviour unreasonable> because they're breaking the law by speeding, or is the law that> they're breaking unreasonable?Neither, if in the context of it being necessary during work. Theirbehavior is not unreasonable because they're not breaking the law. And, thelaw is reasonable. Ahh, but we aren't talking about it being in the context of being necessary. Remember, you just told me that they *should* follow the laws unless they need to break them.So you're trying to trip me up on something that only involves personalopinion in the first place. I'll play along.... In my personal opinion,their behavior would be unnecessary if they don't need to do it. How'sthat? :o)

There's no tripping involved, just trying to determine where you stand
on the issue.

Shouldn't all cops be like Wardle claims to be? Never exceeding the
speed limit unless duty requires it?

Please keep in mind that most of us don't live in areas like yours
that have reasonable speed limits. Around here, the limits are 62.5,
despite traffic flow of about 70 to 75.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
news:b242723c857f7ac488f5646ae7ea3751@free.teranew s.com... On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:31:50 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:094e8fffaad35aecb4355a5fe2e3eaaa@free. teranews.com... On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:00:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote: > >"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message >> Now we get to the interesting part. Is their behaviour unreasonable >> because they're breaking the law by speeding, or is the law that >> they're breaking unreasonable? > >Neither, if in the context of it being necessary during work. Their >behavior is not unreasonable because they're not breaking the law.
And, the >law is reasonable. Ahh, but we aren't talking about it being in the context of being necessary. Remember, you just told me that they *should* follow the laws unless they need to break them.So you're trying to trip me up on something that only involves personalopinion in the first place. I'll play along.... In my personal opinion,their behavior would be unnecessary if they don't need to do it. How'sthat? :o) There's no tripping involved, just trying to determine where you stand on the issue. Shouldn't all cops be like Wardle claims to be? Never exceeding the speed limit unless duty requires it?




In all fairness and for accuracy sake let's clarify. The only time I exceed
posted speeds is while on duty and when the need is there. While I may drive
over a posted 55mph, it is rarley if ever +3mph over and I immediatley drop
to posted speed again.

I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent veterens. The
simplest explaination for this was explained to me as such....

" You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from registering
and such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also means
'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guy
for driving like you......."


I could probably get the wife to post her thoughts on my driving if you
like. Drives her nuts all the time. She drives like most of you do and hears
about it from me daily......


Please keep in mind that most of us don't live in areas like yours that have reasonable speed limits. Around here, the limits are 62.5, despite traffic flow of about 70 to 75. -- Brandon Sommerville remove ".gov" to e-mail Definition of "Lottery": Millions of stupid people contributing to make one stupid person look smart.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:34:35 GMT, "john wardle" <you@spammers.suck>
wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:b242723c857f7ac488f5646ae7ea3751@free. teranews.com...
Shouldn't all cops be like Wardle claims to be? Never exceeding the speed limit unless duty requires it?In all fairness and for accuracy sake let's clarify. The only time I exceedposted speeds is while on duty and when the need is there. While I may driveover a posted 55mph, it is rarley if ever +3mph over and I immediatley dropto posted speed again.

I thought that's exactly what I posted.
I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent veterens. Thesimplest explaination for this was explained to me as such...." You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from registeringand such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also means'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guyfor driving like you......."

If more cops followed this we'd have a lot less complaints. As it
stands, the general attitude seen by most people is "do as I say, not
as I do".
I could probably get the wife to post her thoughts on my driving if youlike. Drives her nuts all the time. She drives like most of you do and hearsabout it from me daily......

Sounds like a very patient woman. :)
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:34:35 GMT, "john wardle" <you@spammers.suck>
wrote:
In all fairness and for accuracy sake let's clarify. The only time I exceedposted speeds is while on duty and when the need is there. While I may driveover a posted 55mph, it is rarley if ever +3mph over and I immediatley dropto posted speed again.I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent veterens. Thesimplest explaination for this was explained to me as such...." You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from registeringand such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also means'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guyfor driving like you......."

Apologies for the second reply, but I came up with an interesting
couple of questions:

1) How did you drive prior to joining the force?
2) Do you drive the speed that you do because it feels the safest or
because that's what the law allows?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

In article <vakKa.20999$3o3.1635124@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, john wardle wrote:
I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent veterens. The simplest explaination for this was explained to me as such.... " You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from registering and such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also means 'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guy for driving like you......."

Could you have them re-train the ISP officers?

"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
news:480361a3df39a0101d3984a6e55b9785@free.teranew s.com... On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:34:35 GMT, "john wardle" <you@spammers.suck> wrote:In all fairness and for accuracy sake let's clarify. The only time I
exceedposted speeds is while on duty and when the need is there. While I may
driveover a posted 55mph, it is rarley if ever +3mph over and I immediatley
dropto posted speed again.I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent veterens.
Thesimplest explaination for this was explained to me as such...." You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from registeringand such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also
means'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guyfor driving like you......." Apologies for the second reply, but I came up with an interesting couple of questions: 1) How did you drive prior to joining the force? 2) Do you drive the speed that you do because it feels the safest or because that's what the law allows? -- Brandon Sommerville remove ".gov" to e-mail

Answer 1) I have my share of tickets....And yours...And his....Nothing for
years and years now though.

Answer 2) Because it's what the law allows. I used to drive what I
considered 'safe' for ME. I never took into account the oher drivers on the
road and what they think and do. I figured, F*&$ them, I drive fine. I
wasn't until I saw a fatality caused by speeding drivers (58 in a 45 posted
corner) that I realised my driving affects everyone on AND off the road.
Since then, I've cleaned up my act, learned from my mistakes, took
responsibility for my actions, and follow the rules established for
everyone; and I've not even come close to a traffic violation since.

jaybird wrote: "Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message news:094e8fffaad35aecb4355a5fe2e3eaaa@free.teranew s.com... On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:00:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:ba91ab2d642f695b106842d56a53af64@free. teranews.com...> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 16:56:49 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:>> >> >"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message> >news:954cf7d141d33ee1a1d8bca6c1907f6b@free.teranew s.com...> >> On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 04:15:16 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:> >>> >> >But they're working, and they're in a marked, on duty unit. They are> >exempt> >> >when working.> >>> >> Don't you think that they should follow the rules unless they have a> >> specific reason (ie an emergency call) not to?> >> >Personally? Yes, I do think they should.>> Well, that's a good start! ;)>> Now we get to the interesting part. Is their behaviour unreasonable> because they're breaking the law by speeding, or is the law that> they're breaking unreasonable?Neither, if in the context of it being necessary during work. Theirbehavior is not unreasonable because they're not breaking the law. And, thelaw is reasonable. Ahh, but we aren't talking about it being in the context of being necessary. Remember, you just told me that they *should* follow the laws unless they need to break them. So you're trying to trip me up on something that only involves personal opinion in the first place. I'll play along.... In my personal opinion, their behavior would be unnecessary if they don't need to do it. How's that? :o)

Makes perfect sense. Where we apparently disagree is when breaking
traffic laws is necessary.

nate

"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
news:b242723c857f7ac488f5646ae7ea3751@free.teranew s.com... On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 13:31:50 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:094e8fffaad35aecb4355a5fe2e3eaaa@free. teranews.com... On Tue, 24 Jun 2003 21:00:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote: > >"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message >> Now we get to the interesting part. Is their behaviour unreasonable >> because they're breaking the law by speeding, or is the law that >> they're breaking unreasonable? > >Neither, if in the context of it being necessary during work. Their >behavior is not unreasonable because they're not breaking the law.
And, the >law is reasonable. Ahh, but we aren't talking about it being in the context of being necessary. Remember, you just told me that they *should* follow the laws unless they need to break them.So you're trying to trip me up on something that only involves personalopinion in the first place. I'll play along.... In my personal opinion,their behavior would be unnecessary if they don't need to do it. How'sthat? :o) There's no tripping involved, just trying to determine where you stand on the issue. Shouldn't all cops be like Wardle claims to be? Never exceeding the speed limit unless duty requires it?

I'll agree with that. I always have, I think the confusion comes where the
people here read my defense as a blanket defense for anyone to do whatever
they want whenever they want. What I'm trying to show is the necessity when
it's needed.
Please keep in mind that most of us don't live in areas like yours that have reasonable speed limits. Around here, the limits are 62.5, despite traffic flow of about 70 to 75.

I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes. Even with our
70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you give
people an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to be
safe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away with
it. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the same
reason.

--

jaybird

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

---------

"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
news:297274b8d48fb7e54b03f5050052c9f6@free.teranew s.com... On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:34:35 GMT, "john wardle" <you@spammers.suck> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:b242723c857f7ac488f5646ae7ea3751@free. teranews.com... Shouldn't all cops be like Wardle claims to be? Never exceeding the speed limit unless duty requires it?In all fairness and for accuracy sake let's clarify. The only time I
exceedposted speeds is while on duty and when the need is there. While I may
driveover a posted 55mph, it is rarley if ever +3mph over and I immediatley
dropto posted speed again. I thought that's exactly what I posted.I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent veterens.
Thesimplest explaination for this was explained to me as such...." You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from registeringand such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also
means'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guyfor driving like you......." If more cops followed this we'd have a lot less complaints. As it stands, the general attitude seen by most people is "do as I say, not as I do".

That response is mostly presented out of frustration rather than as a taunt.
I keep trying to explain why it's necessary for cops to be exempt but it
usually falls on deaf ears.
I could probably get the wife to post her thoughts on my driving if youlike. Drives her nuts all the time. She drives like most of you do and
hearsabout it from me daily...... Sounds like a very patient woman. :) -- Brandon Sommerville remove ".gov" to e-mail

--

jaybird

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

---------

In article <1muKa.16343$XV.1213972@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote:
I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes. Even with our 70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you give people an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to be safe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away with it. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the same reason.

Wrong and proven wrong.
http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html

Federal Highway Administration. Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed
Limits. Report No. FHwA/RD-92/084. McLean, VA. June 1996.


In NE IL roads are signed at 55mph depending on traffic conditions
actual speeds may be anywhere from 0 to 85mph. The speed limit sign
is not even a factor.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 04:09:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:
Even with our70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you givepeople an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to besafe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away withit. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the samereason.

Of course they do. Faster is always better. People have learned over the
years that there is a near-zero chance of getting a ticket for <10 over the
limit. If cops start ticketing at less then 10 over, then they're busy along
the side of the road when the real speeders come smokin' thru at 30 over.

Get the speed limits set at the 85th percentile and by definition, _most_
people (85 percent, that is) will be at or less than the speed limit.

Dave Head

On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 04:10:55 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:
"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:297274b8d48fb7e54b03f5050052c9f6@free. teranews.com... On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:34:35 GMT, "john wardle" <you@spammers.suck> wrote:
I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent veterens. Thesimplest explaination for this was explained to me as such...." You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from registeringand such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also means'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guyfor driving like you......." If more cops followed this we'd have a lot less complaints. As it stands, the general attitude seen by most people is "do as I say, not as I do".That response is mostly presented out of frustration rather than as a taunt.I keep trying to explain why it's necessary for cops to be exempt but itusually falls on deaf ears.

We know that you need exemptions to accomplish your job. No one gets
upset at that. It's when you drive like everyone else when you
*aren't* on an emergency call or when you aren't on duty that pisses
everyone off. If you're ticketing people for a behaviour that is
officially listed as dangerous, you'd damn well better not engage in
that behaviour unless you have a good reason to.

I have a lot of respect for Wardle's following the speed law for that
simple fact.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 04:09:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:
"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:b242723c857f7ac488f5646ae7ea3751@free. teranews.com...
Shouldn't all cops be like Wardle claims to be? Never exceeding the speed limit unless duty requires it?I'll agree with that. I always have, I think the confusion comes where thepeople here read my defense as a blanket defense for anyone to do whateverthey want whenever they want. What I'm trying to show is the necessity whenit's needed.

Now if only you could get all cops to follow that example.
Please keep in mind that most of us don't live in areas like yours that have reasonable speed limits. Around here, the limits are 62.5, despite traffic flow of about 70 to 75.I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes. Even with our70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you givepeople an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to besafe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away withit. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the samereason.

I wonder what the 85th on those roads is.
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
news:4292c8f8b791fdd66badd6deef01c8af@free.teranew s.com... On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 04:09:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:b242723c857f7ac488f5646ae7ea3751@free. teranews.com... Shouldn't all cops be like Wardle claims to be? Never exceeding the speed limit unless duty requires it?I'll agree with that. I always have, I think the confusion comes where
thepeople here read my defense as a blanket defense for anyone to do
whateverthey want whenever they want. What I'm trying to show is the necessity
whenit's needed. Now if only you could get all cops to follow that example.

Much like if all the people would follow the law........it won't happen...
We are human too! Please keep in mind that most of us don't live in areas like yours that have reasonable speed limits. Around here, the limits are 62.5, despite traffic flow of about 70 to 75.I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes. Even with
our70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you givepeople an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to besafe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away
withit. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the samereason. I wonder what the 85th on those roads is. -- Brandon Sommerville remove ".gov" to e-mail Definition of "Lottery": Millions of stupid people contributing to make one stupid person look smart.

"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message
news:f8ce5a14cad1a497cc93a72f4d3c81ac@free.teranew s.com... On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 04:10:55 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:297274b8d48fb7e54b03f5050052c9f6@free. teranews.com... On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:34:35 GMT, "john wardle" <you@spammers.suck> wrote: >I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent
veterens. The >simplest explaination for this was explained to me as such.... > >" You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from
registering >and such and even some laws while working. But remember kid, it also
means >'example'. People are watching you and what you do. Don't EVER stop a
guy >for driving like you......." If more cops followed this we'd have a lot less complaints. As it stands, the general attitude seen by most people is "do as I say, not as I do".That response is mostly presented out of frustration rather than as a
taunt.I keep trying to explain why it's necessary for cops to be exempt but itusually falls on deaf ears. We know that you need exemptions to accomplish your job. No one gets upset at that. It's when you drive like everyone else when you *aren't* on an emergency call or when you aren't on duty that pisses everyone off. If you're ticketing people for a behaviour that is officially listed as dangerous, you'd damn well better not engage in that behaviour unless you have a good reason to.

Apparently that's not the case. Everyone is getting upset about any mention
of cops driving outside the normal limits every time I post about it. I'm
not talking about the guys who aren't responding to something. I do,
however, point out that in many cases the people observing this behavior
don't know the circumstances.
I have a lot of respect for Wardle's following the speed law for that simple fact.

--

jaybird

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

---------

"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:iwuKa.21702$e26.15472@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.n et... In article <1muKa.16343$XV.1213972@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote: I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes. Even with
our 70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you give people an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to be safe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away
with it. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the
same reason. Wrong and proven wrong. http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html Federal Highway Administration. Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits. Report No. FHwA/RD-92/084. McLean, VA. June 1996. In NE IL roads are signed at 55mph depending on traffic conditions actual speeds may be anywhere from 0 to 85mph. The speed limit sign is not even a factor.

I appreciate the gesture, but I see two things wrong with that example:
First, that study was done back in 1992 (right around the time that the
speed limits were allowed to be raised up to 70 or 75 around the country.
People were used to trying to exceed 55 back then and hadn't had the chance
to acclimate to the 70's and 75's. Second, I see it firsthand everyday.
People do try and stretch the limit as much as possible, at least around
here. I don't know what it's like up where you are. The overwhelming
majority of people I see travel at about 5 to 8 MPH over the limit
consistently, no matter what it is. I see few outside of that range.

--

jaybird

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

---------

Dave Head <rally2xs@earthlink.net> wrote in message news:<l6ilfvghaputqu0uhnqu3a4ipa379jbtbh@4ax.com>... On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 04:09:33 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:Even with our70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you givepeople an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to besafe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away withit. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the samereason. Of course they do. Faster is always better. People have learned over the years that there is a near-zero chance of getting a ticket for <10 over the limit. If cops start ticketing at less then 10 over, then they're busy along the side of the road when the real speeders come smokin' thru at 30 over. Get the speed limits set at the 85th percentile and by definition, _most_ people (85 percent, that is) will be at or less than the speed limit.

Whoa! Logic! Gotta watch that Head guy.
--
C.R. Krieger
(Been there; stretched that)

On Thu, 26 Jun 2003 16:03:30 GMT, "jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:
"Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in messagenews:f8ce5a14cad1a497cc93a72f4d3c81ac@free. teranews.com...
We know that you need exemptions to accomplish your job. No one gets upset at that. It's when you drive like everyone else when you *aren't* on an emergency call or when you aren't on duty that pisses everyone off. If you're ticketing people for a behaviour that is officially listed as dangerous, you'd damn well better not engage in that behaviour unless you have a good reason to.Apparently that's not the case. Everyone is getting upset about any mentionof cops driving outside the normal limits every time I post about it. I'mnot talking about the guys who aren't responding to something. I do,however, point out that in many cases the people observing this behaviordon't know the circumstances.

The things I see being complained about are things like Cory's example
of cops driving in the wrong lane without lights or sirens at high
speed with limited visibility. There's no point in racing to the
scene of a crime and colliding with someone before you get there, is
there? I also see Brent commenting about being tailgated very
dangerously for a few minutes and seeing cops do this on a regular
basis. The defense of waiting to get a tag through on the radio is
bull**** since you should be able to read the plate from a couple car
lengths back. Close up when you get through if you have to be that
close to read it.

Every time a cop breaks the law while driving it should be with lights
on and possibly sirens flashing. If in fact laws are purely about
safety then you should be making those around you aware that you are
operating outside normal limits so that they can take proper
precautions.

I realize that as you approach the scene of the crime a more stealthy
approach is required, but at that point you aren't driving like a
maniac either, are you?
--
Brandon Sommerville
remove ".gov" to e-mail

Definition of "Lottery":
Millions of stupid people contributing
to make one stupid person look smart.

In article <1572dac869d1bcedd97f982b0ac399e7@free.teranews.com>, Brandon Sommerville wrote:
The things I see being complained about are things like Cory's example of cops driving in the wrong lane without lights or sirens at high speed with limited visibility. There's no point in racing to the scene of a crime and colliding with someone before you get there, is there? I also see Brent commenting about being tailgated very dangerously for a few minutes and seeing cops do this on a regular basis. The defense of waiting to get a tag through on the radio is bull**** since you should be able to read the plate from a couple car lengths back. Close up when you get through if you have to be that close to read it.

It's been some time since I was tailgated by an officer, most of the
recent events have been about them just driving like everyone else and
faster than they ticket for. There have been a couple of out-and-out
endangerment situations and just total disregard for the vehicle code
though.

My complaints are mostly with the ISP with regards to speed, because
franky most of the time their speeds are perfectly fine IMO, but it is
not right for them to enforce 55mph on people when they themselves know
there is no problem at 85mph on sections of I294 in light weekend
traffic. (when they seem to be out in force to ticket people)

"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3CGKa.25543$XG4.19053@rwcrnsc53... In article <0XEKa.18359$XV.1279968@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote: "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message In article <1muKa.16343$XV.1213972@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird
wrote: > I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes. Even
with our > 70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you
give > people an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to
be > safe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away
with > it. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the
same > reason. Wrong and proven wrong. http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html Federal Highway Administration. Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits. Report No. FHwA/RD-92/084. McLean, VA. June 1996. In NE IL roads are signed at 55mph depending on traffic conditions actual speeds may be anywhere from 0 to 85mph. The speed limit sign is not even a factor. I appreciate the gesture, but I see two things wrong with that example: First, that study was done back in 1992 (right around the time that the speed limits were allowed to be raised up to 70 or 75 around the
country. No, that was soundly in the NMSL era. People were used to trying to exceed 55 back then and hadn't had the
chance to acclimate to the 70's and 75's. People were already driving in the 70mph range in IL at that time on the interstates. Second, I see it firsthand everyday. People do try and stretch the limit as much as possible, at least around here. I don't know what it's like up where you are. The overwhelming majority of people I see travel at about 5 to 8 MPH over the limit consistently, no matter what it is. I see few outside of that range. If you set the speed limit to 100 mph do you think everyone would go a 108mph? Of course not. People drive the speeds they are comfortable at. Speed limits are still set below the 85th percentile, so you are going to keep seeing people trying to make the balance between speed and ticket risk until speed limits are set properly. (For the last year I have data on, the 85th percentile speed of US interstates is 78mph overall. Thusly speed limits should be at least 80mph like in many other countries.) The idea that people drive speed limit +X is simply been proven false time and time again. If the road was unrestricted, what speed would drive jaybird? The top speed of your vehicle, or what you felt comfortable at? I don't need elected officals to tell me what is safe. I would hope you don't either. Anyone who does should not be operating a motor vehicle.

And therein lies the problem. With as little driver training as there is in
this country and with the multiple distractions people create inside their
vehicle, I don't want them driving as they please. My family and yours are
out there right next to these people. I know that many of us, cops, and
r.a.d. people who understand vehicles and driving and safety (as divided as
our opinions are on how that safety is achieved) know how to drive. It's
the other 90% of people out there with no clue that I'm concerned about.
Until this country adds more driver training, stiffens penalties, and makes
a license harder to get, I'll keep enforcing and agreeing with the fact that
people need to drive within the current law.

--

jaybird

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

---------

In article <2HHKa.38945$TJ.1485008@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote:
Second, I see it firsthand everyday. People do try and stretch the limit as much as possible, at least around here. I don't know what it's like up where you are. The overwhelming majority of people I see travel at about 5 to 8 MPH over the limit consistently, no matter what it is. I see few outside of that range.
If you set the speed limit to 100 mph do you think everyone would go a 108mph? Of course not. People drive the speeds they are comfortable at. Speed limits are still set below the 85th percentile, so you are going to keep seeing people trying to make the balance between speed and ticket risk until speed limits are set properly. (For the last year I have data on, the 85th percentile speed of US interstates is 78mph overall. Thusly speed limits should be at least 80mph like in many other countries.)
The idea that people drive speed limit +X is simply been proven false time and time again. If the road was unrestricted, what speed would drive jaybird? The top speed of your vehicle, or what you felt comfortable at? I don't need elected officals to tell me what is safe. I would hope you don't either. Anyone who does should not be operating a motor vehicle. And therein lies the problem. With as little driver training as there is in this country and with the multiple distractions people create inside their vehicle,

Considering your complaint regarding the DRLs of your GM vehicle you
don't like being held to lowest common demonator limits any more than
I do.
I don't want them driving as they please.

As far speed is concerned, they already are.
My family and yours are out there right next to these people.

Already am, they are already going the speed they are going to go. But
thanks to lowest common demonator limitations I have to risk a ticket.
This does not punish them, or stop them, it however has a very negative
effect on road conditions in general and allows the safest drivers to
be fined.

I know that many of us, cops, and r.a.d. people who understand vehicles and driving and safety (as divided as our opinions are on how that safety is achieved) know how to drive. It's the other 90% of people out there with no clue that I'm concerned about. Until this country adds more driver training, stiffens penalties, and makes a license harder to get, I'll keep enforcing and agreeing with the fact that people need to drive within the current law.

They are already driving 20-30 over around here. Keeping 55mph signs
doesn't make me one bit safer. In fact it makes things more dangerous
with the judy's and the rest doing their god-given-right to the left hand
lane bit. Underposted speed limits do not make me or anyone else one
bit safer. You are selling a feel-good illusion jaybird, and I know better
than to buy it.

"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:IaIKa.24772$Bg.13711@rwcrnsc54... In article <2HHKa.38945$TJ.1485008@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote: > Second, I see it firsthand everyday. > People do try and stretch the limit as much as possible, at least
around > here. I don't know what it's like up where you are. The
overwhelming > majority of people I see travel at about 5 to 8 MPH over the limit > consistently, no matter what it is. I see few outside of that range. If you set the speed limit to 100 mph do you think everyone would go a 108mph? Of course not. People drive the speeds they are comfortable
at. Speed limits are still set below the 85th percentile, so you are going to keep seeing people trying to make the balance between speed and
ticket risk until speed limits are set properly. (For the last year I have
data on, the 85th percentile speed of US interstates is 78mph overall.
Thusly speed limits should be at least 80mph like in many other countries.) The idea that people drive speed limit +X is simply been proven false time and time again. If the road was unrestricted, what speed would
drive jaybird? The top speed of your vehicle, or what you felt comfortable
at? I don't need elected officals to tell me what is safe. I would hope you don't either. Anyone who does should not be operating a motor
vehicle. And therein lies the problem. With as little driver training as there
is in this country and with the multiple distractions people create inside
their vehicle, Considering your complaint regarding the DRLs of your GM vehicle you don't like being held to lowest common demonator limits any more than I do.

I love how you keep bringing that up as some kind of trump card or
something. I can give a **** less about the DRL's now that I found an
answer to my question.
I don't want them driving as they please. As far speed is concerned, they already are.

Not around here. We have a good amount of enforcement.
My family and yours are out there right next to these people. Already am, they are already going the speed they are going to go. But thanks to lowest common demonator limitations I have to risk a ticket. This does not punish them, or stop them, it however has a very negative effect on road conditions in general and allows the safest drivers to be fined.

You'll never learn.
I know that many of us, cops, and r.a.d. people who understand vehicles and driving and safety (as divided
as our opinions are on how that safety is achieved) know how to drive.
It's the other 90% of people out there with no clue that I'm concerned about. Until this country adds more driver training, stiffens penalties, and
makes a license harder to get, I'll keep enforcing and agreeing with the fact
that people need to drive within the current law. They are already driving 20-30 over around here. Keeping 55mph signs doesn't make me one bit safer. In fact it makes things more dangerous with the judy's and the rest doing their god-given-right to the left hand lane bit. Underposted speed limits do not make me or anyone else one bit safer. You are selling a feel-good illusion jaybird, and I know better than to buy it.

It's a fact, Brent. We've been through this argument over and over again
and neither of us are wavering. I'm content to let it lie and wait till the
next one comes around.

--

jaybird

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

---------

In article <sgIKa.19469$XV.1291912@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote:
Considering your complaint regarding the DRLs of your GM vehicle you don't like being held to lowest common demonator limits any more than I do.
I love how you keep bringing that up as some kind of trump card or something. I can give a **** less about the DRL's now that I found an answer to my question.

I bring it up because it shows your disatification with being treated
like a blithering moron by general motors. It shows you don't like being
restricted to the abilities of the least-able.
I don't want them driving as they please.
As far speed is concerned, they already are.
Not around here. We have a good amount of enforcement.

No, your speed limit is significantly higher. I was recently ticketed
for a speed that is perfectly legal in your state. You wouldn't have
pulled me over for it. But because IL has speed limits set for a rusted
out, V-shaoped pickup with no two tires alike driven by a nearly blind
80 year old man, one working caliper and loaded with scrap metal, we
get taxed.

My family and yours are out there right next to these people.
Already am, they are already going the speed they are going to go. But thanks to lowest common demonator limitations I have to risk a ticket. This does not punish them, or stop them, it however has a very negative effect on road conditions in general and allows the safest drivers to be fined.
You'll never learn.

In other words, you lack a reasoned logical response to the fact that
everyone is *ALREADY* exceeding the posted limit on many of this nation's
roads and the sign doesn't impart one bit of safety.

I know that many of us, cops, and r.a.d. people who understand vehicles and driving and safety (as divided as our opinions are on how that safety is achieved) know how to drive. It's the other 90% of people out there with no clue that I'm concerned about. Until this country adds more driver training, stiffens penalties, and makes a license harder to get, I'll keep enforcing and agreeing with the fact that people need to drive within the current law.
They are already driving 20-30 over around here. Keeping 55mph signs doesn't make me one bit safer. In fact it makes things more dangerous with the judy's and the rest doing their god-given-right to the left hand lane bit. Underposted speed limits do not make me or anyone else one bit safer. You are selling a feel-good illusion jaybird, and I know better than to buy it.
It's a fact, Brent. We've been through this argument over and over again and neither of us are wavering. I'm content to let it lie and wait till the next one comes around.

I'd like you to come for a drive with me at 55mph, then you can see the
ISP cruisers go by at 85mph, you can see the traffic hazard it is,
especially when I try to make a left hand exit or ramp at that speed.

"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:6uIKa.24881$Bg.13797@rwcrnsc54... In article <sgIKa.19469$XV.1291912@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote: Considering your complaint regarding the DRLs of your GM vehicle you don't like being held to lowest common demonator limits any more than I do. I love how you keep bringing that up as some kind of trump card or something. I can give a **** less about the DRL's now that I found an answer to my question. I bring it up because it shows your disatification with being treated like a blithering moron by general motors. It shows you don't like being restricted to the abilities of the least-able. > I don't want them driving as they please. As far speed is concerned, they already are. Not around here. We have a good amount of enforcement. No, your speed limit is significantly higher. I was recently ticketed for a speed that is perfectly legal in your state. You wouldn't have pulled me over for it. But because IL has speed limits set for a rusted out, V-shaoped pickup with no two tires alike driven by a nearly blind 80 year old man, one working caliper and loaded with scrap metal, we get taxed. > My family and yours are out there right next to these people. Already am, they are already going the speed they are going to go. But thanks to lowest common demonator limitations I have to risk a ticket. This does not punish them, or stop them, it however has a very negative effect on road conditions in general and allows the safest drivers to be fined. You'll never learn. In other words, you lack a reasoned logical response to the fact that everyone is *ALREADY* exceeding the posted limit on many of this nation's roads and the sign doesn't impart one bit of safety. > I know that many of us, cops, and > r.a.d. people who understand vehicles and driving and safety (as
divided as > our opinions are on how that safety is achieved) know how to drive.
It's > the other 90% of people out there with no clue that I'm concerned
about. > Until this country adds more driver training, stiffens penalties, and
makes > a license harder to get, I'll keep enforcing and agreeing with the
fact that > people need to drive within the current law. They are already driving 20-30 over around here. Keeping 55mph signs doesn't make me one bit safer. In fact it makes things more dangerous with the judy's and the rest doing their god-given-right to the left
hand lane bit. Underposted speed limits do not make me or anyone else one bit safer. You are selling a feel-good illusion jaybird, and I know
better than to buy it. It's a fact, Brent. We've been through this argument over and over
again and neither of us are wavering. I'm content to let it lie and wait till
the next one comes around. I'd like you to come for a drive with me at 55mph, then you can see the ISP cruisers go by at 85mph, you can see the traffic hazard it is, especially when I try to make a left hand exit or ramp at that speed.
Sounds like 16 year old with a chip on his shoulder.........they just never
grow up

jaybird wrote: "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:iwuKa.21702$e26.15472@rwcrnsc52.ops.asp.att.n et... In article <1muKa.16343$XV.1213972@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote: I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes. Even with our 70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think that when you give people an inch, they take a mile regardless of what is determined to be safe. At 55 people will stretch that to 62 or 63 to try and get away with it. Similarly, most people here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the same reason. Wrong and proven wrong. http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html Federal Highway Administration. Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits. Report No. FHwA/RD-92/084. McLean, VA. June 1996. In NE IL roads are signed at 55mph depending on traffic conditions actual speeds may be anywhere from 0 to 85mph. The speed limit sign is not even a factor. I appreciate the gesture, but I see two things wrong with that example: First, that study was done back in 1992 (right around the time that the speed limits were allowed to be raised up to 70 or 75 around the country. People were used to trying to exceed 55 back then and hadn't had the chance to acclimate to the 70's and 75's. Second, I see it firsthand everyday. People do try and stretch the limit as much as possible, at least around here. I don't know what it's like up where you are. The overwhelming majority of people I see travel at about 5 to 8 MPH over the limit consistently, no matter what it is. I see few outside of that range.

People "stretch" the limit, as you say, because it is still too low.
Set the limit at 90 MPH and compliance will increase dramatically - not
too many people are comfortable driving over 85ish anyway, at least not
in ordinary passenger cars, even on flat, straight interstates.
However, it's pretty obvious that quite a few people don't like driving
much *under* 80 MPH under the same conditions, either, even if the
highway is posted 55 or 65.

Links have been posted on studies debunking this phenomenon already...
basically in the absence of an enforcement blitz that would require far
more officers per mile of road than any jurisdiction actually has,
people will drive whatever speed they feel comfortable with, and changes
in the speed limit make only very minor changes in the speed of
traffic. Here's the most frequently seen study:

http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html

In light of this, what should be done is to try to minimize the speed
differential between drivers and smooth traffic flow as much as
possible. This is best done by setting speed limits according to the
85th percentile rule, enforcing the keep right except to pass rule, and
also enforcing proper merging technique on limited access freeways.
This will also have the benefit of no longer labeling the statistically
safest drivers on the road as criminals.

nate

"Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:%1NKa.28784$XG4.20181@rwcrnsc53... In article <vfn28sma33j749@corp.supernews.com>, Just a Cyclist wrote: Sounds like 16 year old with a chip on his shoulder.........they just
never grow up Once again you show you have no counterpoint what-so-ever and left with nothing more than personal attack. \
Wasn't a personal attack.........it was an evaluation!

In article <vfnb1gsql3a3c0@corp.supernews.com>, Just a Cyclist wrote: "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:%1NKa.28784$XG4.20181@rwcrnsc53... In article <vfn28sma33j749@corp.supernews.com>, Just a Cyclist wrote: Sounds like 16 year old with a chip on his shoulder.........they just never grow up
Once again you show you have no counterpoint what-so-ever and left with nothing more than personal attack.
Wasn't a personal attack.........it was an evaluation!

Showing once again that you cannot put together a reasoned arguement.

jaybird wrote: "Cory Dunkle" <cadnews@comcast.net> wrote in message news:6-acnVslAuw2aWejXTWJgQ@comcast.com... jaybird wrote: "Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message news:297274b8d48fb7e54b03f5050052c9f6@free.teranew s.com...> On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 16:34:35 GMT, "john wardle" <you@spammers.suck>> wrote:>>>> "Brandon Sommerville" <grimrod@mindless.com.gov> wrote in message>> news:b242723c857f7ac488f5646ae7ea3751@free.teranew s.com...>>> I'm still fairly new to the job, and was trained by excellent>> veterens. The simplest explaination for this was explained to me>> as such....>>>> " You have the E plates now, That means 'exempt'. Exempt from>> registering and such and even some laws while working. But>> remember kid, it also means 'example'. People are watching you>> and what you do. Don't EVER stop a guy for driving like>> you.......">> If more cops followed this we'd have a lot less complaints. As it> stands, the general attitude seen by most people is "do as I say,> not as I do". That response is mostly presented out of frustration rather than as a taunt. I keep trying to explain why it's necessary for cops to be exempt but it usually falls on deaf ears. I understand why cops need to be exempt. They should be obeying all laws except when on call, and when on call and breaking laws their lights should be on and sirens used when appropriate. If stealth is desired, the lights can be turned off as the officer approaches his destination. That's the whole point. But, people aren't privy to what's going on inside that police car and they don't know why the cop's driving the way he is.

It happens too often around here for that to be the case all the time. When
cops are doing _blatantly reckless_ things like driving on the wrong side of
the road (even more so when visibility is poor) at the very least their
lights should be on and sirens when appropriate (i.e. approaching a red
light at high speed on the wrong side of the road when visibility is blocked
by an 18-wheeler).

jaybird wrote: "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:3CGKa.25543$XG4.19053@rwcrnsc53... In article <0XEKa.18359$XV.1279968@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote: "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message> In article <1muKa.16343$XV.1213972@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird> wrote:>> I do keep that in mind, although I tend to forget sometimes.>> Even with our 70 MPH speed limit on the interstates I still think>> that when you give people an inch, they take a mile regardless of>> what is determined to be safe. At 55 people will stretch that to>> 62 or 63 to try and get away with it. Similarly, most people>> here stretch the 70 to 76 and 77 for the same reason.> Wrong and proven wrong.> http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html>> Federal Highway Administration. Effects of Raising and Lowering> Speed Limits. Report No. FHwA/RD-92/084. McLean, VA. June 1996.> In NE IL roads are signed at 55mph depending on traffic conditions> actual speeds may be anywhere from 0 to 85mph. The speed limit sign> is not even a factor. I appreciate the gesture, but I see two things wrong with that example: First, that study was done back in 1992 (right around the time that the speed limits were allowed to be raised up to 70 or 75 around the country. No, that was soundly in the NMSL era. People were used to trying to exceed 55 back then and hadn't had the chance to acclimate to the 70's and 75's. People were already driving in the 70mph range in IL at that time on the interstates. Second, I see it firsthand everyday. People do try and stretch the limit as much as possible, at least around here. I don't know what it's like up where you are. The overwhelming majority of people I see travel at about 5 to 8 MPH over the limit consistently, no matter what it is. I see few outside of that range. If you set the speed limit to 100 mph do you think everyone would go a 108mph? Of course not. People drive the speeds they are comfortable at. Speed limits are still set below the 85th percentile, so you are going to keep seeing people trying to make the balance between speed and ticket risk until speed limits are set properly. (For the last year I have data on, the 85th percentile speed of US interstates is 78mph overall. Thusly speed limits should be at least 80mph like in many other countries.) The idea that people drive speed limit +X is simply been proven false time and time again. If the road was unrestricted, what speed would drive jaybird? The top speed of your vehicle, or what you felt comfortable at? I don't need elected officals to tell me what is safe. I would hope you don't either. Anyone who does should not be operating a motor vehicle. And therein lies the problem. With as little driver training as there is in this country and with the multiple distractions people create inside their vehicle, I don't want them driving as they please. My family and yours are out there right next to these people. I know that many of us, cops, and r.a.d. people who understand vehicles and driving and safety (as divided as our opinions are on how that safety is achieved) know how to drive. It's the other 90% of people out there with no clue that I'm concerned about. Until this country adds more driver training, stiffens penalties, and makes a license harder to get, I'll keep enforcing and agreeing with the fact that people need to drive within the current law.

So to sum up your whole post... You feel we should have all traffic law set
at the dumbest common denominator?

jaybird wrote: "Brent P" <tetraethyllead@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:IaIKa.24772$Bg.13711@rwcrnsc54... In article <2HHKa.38945$TJ.1485008@twister.austin.rr.com>, jaybird wrote:>> Second, I see it firsthand everyday.>> People do try and stretch the limit as much as possible, at least>> around here. I don't know what it's like up where you are. The>> overwhelming majority of people I see travel at about 5 to 8 MPH>> over the limit consistently, no matter what it is. I see few>> outside of that range.> If you set the speed limit to 100 mph do you think everyone would> go a 108mph? Of course not. People drive the speeds they are> comfortable at. Speed limits are still set below the 85th> percentile, so you are going to keep seeing people trying to make> the balance between speed and ticket risk until speed limits are> set properly. (For the last year I have data on, the 85th> percentile speed of US interstates is 78mph overall. Thusly speed> limits should be at least 80mph like in many other countries.)> The idea that people drive speed limit +X is simply been proven> false time and time again. If the road was unrestricted, what> speed would drive jaybird? The top speed of your vehicle, or what> you felt comfortable at? I don't need elected officals to tell me> what is safe. I would hope you don't either. Anyone who does> should not be operating a motor vehicle. And therein lies the problem. With as little driver training as there is in this country and with the multiple distractions people create inside their vehicle, Considering your complaint regarding the DRLs of your GM vehicle you don't like being held to lowest common demonator limits any more than I do. I love how you keep bringing that up as some kind of trump card or something. I can give a **** less about the DRL's now that I found an answer to my question.

What was your answer to your DRL 'problem'? Did you disable them? That's
sorta like ignoring the speed limit and doing what you see as the most
reasonable and prudent thing, eh?

"jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:"Cory Dunkle" <cadnews@comcast.net> wrote in message news:6-acnVslAuw2aWejXTWJgQ@comcast.com...
I understand why cops need to be exempt. They should be obeying all laws except when on call, and when on call and breaking laws their lights should be on and sirens used when appropriate. If stealth is desired, the lights can be turned off as the officer approaches his destination.That's the whole point. But, people aren't privy to what's going on insidethat police car and they don't know why the cop's driving the way he is.

Cops are either on call 100% of the time, or they speed when not on call.
The last time I saw a cop traveling the limit or less when there wasn't a
car directly in front of them was more than 10 years ago.

Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"

"jaybird" <nospam@me.com> wrote:
And therein lies the problem. With as little driver training as there is inthis country and with the multiple distractions people create inside theirvehicle, I don't want them driving as they please.

The driving tests are the same or harder now than when an 80 year old got
their license. The cars are better. The roads are better. The limits are
lower.

Why are limits the same or lower than the 50s and 60s with much better and
the same or better driving tests (not that the tests are any good, but that
they aren't worse)?

I see the distractions today being natural from restricting people from
driving at a level equal to their skill. When people are required to drive
at a level so slow and restricted, they will get bored and look for other
ways to occupy their time. It see cops like you as a cause of the poor
driving skill, not a cure.

Marc
For email, remove the first "y" of "whineryy"