Is Speeding Ever Appropriate?
By Eric Peters, Automotive Columnist
On any given road, at any given time, the posted speed limit might be too fast for current conditions — or unrealistically low.
An interstate highway built in the 1950s for safe travel at speeds of 70-75 mph but with a posted maximum of 65 mph today is arguably underposted.
And the same road could be treacherous at 55 mph in January, after a heavy snow.
Most of us adjust our speed to match conditions — irrespective of the posted limit. We notch it down when it’s necessary — and often ignore the posted maximum when it’s below what strikes us as a reasonable, safe speed. But whether we get a ticket depends on how our speed stacks up to that number posted on a sign — whether it’s reasonable or not.
This is arguably the single biggest flaw with speed enforcement in this country. It is both random and arbitrary — with posted limits often bearing little, if any, relationship to safe rates of travel.
The proof of this is the way highway limits were knocked down from 70-75 to 55 from 1974 through 1995, when Congress repealed the “Drive 55″ law. For 20 years, it was “speeding” to drive 70 on a highway that had previously been posted 70 mph. Then, at the stroke of a politician’s pen, it was legal to drive 70 again. Clearly, it did not suddenly become safer to drive 70 on the same highway that, literally, the day before the passage of the law, was posted 55. It just became legal where previously it had been illegal.
It had nothing to do with safe, reasonable rates of travel.
Our entire system of traffic enforcement amounts to a cynical dragnet fixated on enforcing what I call “technical fouls” (illegal perhaps but not necessarily unsafe) for the purpose of maximizing the flow of cash into state and county coffers — rather than dealing with genuinely dangerous driving, which includes drivers who drive too slowly — impeding the safe flow of traffic — as much as those who drive excessively fast for the road/conditions.
This system has created an unhealthy adversarial relationship between the motoring public and law enforcement — which has come to be viewed by great swaths of the public as little better than armed tax collectors whose main object is to “harass and collect” rather than to serve and protect.
Clearly, there is something wrong with the way speed limits are enforced when almost all of us — from soccer Moms to businessman Bobs — are routinely in violation of them. If you disagree, then you pretty much have to take the position that almost every driver on the road is willfully reckless, because almost every driver on the road “speeds” nearly every time he or she gets behind the wheel of their car.
The old saw, “speed kills” should be re-stated: It is inappropriate speed that kills.
If, for instance, a driver has the bad judgment to drive at 50 or 60 mph in whiteout conditions during a heavy snowstorm on a highway with a 65 mph maximum, he can’t be charged with speeding — as such. On the flip side, on the very same road in summer, on a bright July day with excellent visibility, another driver can and likely will get nailed for speeding if he has the bad luck to roll past a lurking cop doing 70 — even though he’s not driving dangerously and isn’t likely to be the cause of an accident.
As a result of stuff like this, many of us (me included) have developed a sense of contempt for traffic enforcement. Handing out tickets to people who are just going with the (perfectly reasonable) flow of traffic; setting up “radar traps” to nab the unwary by dropping the posted maximum to silly-low levels (25 or 30-mph on broad, two-lane secondary roads where the flow of traffic is naturally at 40-45) and so on. This may fatten the coffers of state and local government, but it does little to enhance the safety of our roads. And it undermines public respect for police – a dangerous thing.
What’s needed is less focus on arbitrary maximums – and enforcing “technical fouls” — and more emphasis on teaching (and expecting) motorists to use common sense and drive at speeds appropriate (and therefore safe) for conditions. That might mean more work for police than sitting by the side of the road with a radar gun while drinking a cup of coffee and chowing down a Krispy Kreme — but it would make the driving environment a lot safer.
And it would restore the natural balance of mutual respect between police and ordinary citizens.
Comments?
www.ericpetersautos.com
You deserve every speeding ticket you get. You can complain all you want after the fact, but it's true. Find out why.
It's one of the "great" American past times: complaining about unfair speeding tickets. There are two types of people when it comes to complaining about this particular type of traffic ticket. Which group are you in?
7 Stories of Speed Trap Revenge: These drivers didn't let the authorities get away with their corrupt traffic enforcement practices. See how the little guys fought back.
This collection of stories will definitely entertain you, but make sure you don't buy into the underlying message. Find out the dangerous myth that these stories perpetuate.
It has been known for at least 70 years with many unbiased research reports that you achieve the smoothest traffic flow and the greatest safety when posted speed limits are set at the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions. THIS is the number you paint on the signs, if safety and smooth traffic flow are the true goals. It is NOT always the safest speed of travel, as Eric Peters points out clearly. He is one of the most knowledgeable journalists on this subject. Other traffic, weather conditions, road conditions and other influences often dictate that a prudent driver will go slower for various reasons. EVERY state has what most call their Basic Speed Law, that is you are legally required to drive at an appropriate speed for the conditions involved, regardless of what the signs say. That might be 30 mph on a road posted at 55 mph, if that is what it takes to have your car fully under control in bad conditions.
BUT, the principle of posting most main roads at or near the 85th percentile speed of free flowing traffic under good conditions to maximize safety died in most states in 1974 with the inappropriate and counter-productive National Maximum Speed Limit. The NMSL was VERY BRIEFLY effective to save gas during the first Arab Oil Embargo, but speeds soon returned to normal as gas became available again. However, cities and states found the under posted limits to be outrageously profitable and the insurance companies did as well with surcharges to ticket recipients that often are higher than the court fines.
So, today we have a system in many or most venues where the posted limit bears almost no relationship to the normal travel speeds and many or most tickets given are given to some of the safest drivers on the road — the ones going along with the normal flow of traffic in the safest possible way. When safe drivers receive tickets in this terrible system, it undermines their respect for the officers involved and for traffic laws in general. They get cynical about it, and their cynicism is justified. It is NOT the fault of the officers, they are forced to enforce improper limits that actually degrade safety. The fault lies with the politicians who set, or force their engineers to set, arbitrarily low posted limits that define 70% or 80% or 90% of the drivers as violators or criminals.
Regards, Jim Walker, NMA, Ann Arbor, MI
A few weeks back I told a story of an experience I had in south eastern Illinois on an empty I-24 during Nov in the early morning hours . The just of it was an I HP officer was sitting in the dark clocking traffic just over a ridge . An unwitting soul was traveling above 80-85 mph safely by himself in the left lane . The officer sprung to life exceeding ~125 mph chasing down the dangerous driver …………….LOL . the officer flying by me 60 mph faster than I was traveling to catch the other driver was the real danger not the unfortunate soul that was ticketed .
Preach it brother!
Quite right. Speed far in excess of that appropriate for conditions kills. In and of itself, those little numbers on white signs are utterly meaningless.
I deeply resent the fact that I as a citizen – not a subject – must undertake travel from A to B endlessly looking over my shoulder or concentrating on a threat outside of traffic in order to avoid a penalty that if ignored will land me in prison, when I have not harmed nor threatened the life, liberty, or property of another and have not wished or attempted to. The chief point of speed limits on signs is to raise revenue by creating an "offense" out of thin air and making a numerical definition of it so as to make it readily sighted by police officers at the side of the road.
I do not trust any police officer, as he is paid not to have my best interests in mind, and because he is paid to condescend to me and treat me as a naughty child.
Such limits are set by people who are driven about in limousines and enforced by those who, in driving Crown Vic Interceptors, have no worthwhile experience in dealing with traffic as it actually is.
If driving quickly is actually dangerous, and some sort of enforcement remains vitally necessary, I would suggest that guidelines such as these be adopted for enforcement:
*The officer issuing a citation may not do so after observing offending behaviour from a stationary car; the officer must have been in motion observing a pattern of reckless behaviour or disregard over a period of miles – i.e. traveling slow in the left lane, repeated lane changes without advancing in traffic, etc.
*The officer wishing to cite a driver for a speed violation may cite only for actions such as extreme variations in speed (+/- 35 mph or so, perhaps), traveling at speeds exceeding 1.5 x the rough average (if everyone is doing 80, 120 would be rude – or 60 where others are around 40), or perhaps a smaller margin in bad conditions.
/dismounts soapbox …but this really is my pet annoyance…
Driving [non commercial] is a right. Why do we even need this 'license'?
I am not against getting certified by passing a comprehensive test, and after I get this certification I no longer want to pay a 'speeding tax'-ever.
United States v. Guest, 383 U.S. 745, 757, 86 S.Ct. 1170, 1178 (1966) which held that “The right to travel is a part of the ‘liberty’ of which the citizen cannot be deprived without the due process of law under the Fifth Amendment …The constitutional right to travel from one State to another, and necessarily to use the highways and other instrumentalities of interstate commerce in doing so, occupies a position fundamental to the concept of our Federal Union.”
There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of this exercise of constitutional rights. Sherer v. Cullen, 481 F 946
The claim and exercise of a constitutional right cannot be converted into a crime. Miller v. US, 230 F 486, 489
No state shall convert a liberty into a privilege, license it,and attach a fee to it. Murdock v. Pennsylvania 319 US 262
If a State converts a liberty into a privilege the citizen can engage in the right with impunity. Shuttlesworth v.Birmingham , 373 US 262
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Assn of Brit Drivers. Assn of Brit Drivers said: RT @motorists: Is Speeding Ever Appropriate? http://ow.ly/3zozZ [...]