Ind. trooper lauded as 'hero' for citing 'slowpoke' driver

valhalla360 wrote:

pnichols wrote:


The above is baloney thinking.

How about more enforcement of speed limits and way stiffer fines for the caught speed law violators? Maybe more (expensive) law enforcement officers and their vehicles is not required. Maybe it's instead way cheaper and better to use license plate reading radar detectors installed all over the country to slow drivers down.

Enforcement doesn't work. Drivers (as a group) are very good at determining an appropriate speed and short of permanent ongoing enforcement, you won't have any impact on the long term average speed. It will go down while heavy enforcement is in place but as soon as you stop, it will go right back up.

Worse, those familiar with the heavy enforcement may slow down but those not familiar will try to continue at reasonable speeds.

The old slogan "speed kills" is flat out wrong. It's "differential speed kills". Heavy enforcement tends to increase differential speeds.

There were no speed limits in Tn until 1955 except in towns. it was changed because Porch Sitters complained cars were faster than a horse or a model T and too fast.I know of one sign that is still up that simply says resume safe speed.
And Montana, Wyoming Nevada etc no speed limits until Fords idiotic 55. Even after it was no sped limit in Montana until California flake and a cop decided he would designate his own safe peed and Montana lost to the California flake for no speed limit.
I know one Veyron driver in Utah or use to that had a pile of speed tickets but never an accident.