[arretium]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('mos6507', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FloridaGirl', '
')Is driving 55 too much of a sacrifice to make to save the soldiers from their sacrifices?

[FloridaGirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') disagree. Logically, your argument that we should reduce consumption by lowering speed limits applies to the sort of cars people drive. I assume then that you are also for mandating smaller cars, eliminating SUVs, and eliminating all recreational vehicles? If you are, then your position is consistent.

[BigTex]

I think that some of you who are advocating a 55 mph speed limit weren't around in the 1970s to see how it actually worked.

Very few people drove 55 mph. About 65 mph is the right speed limit, to me, because that is about the speed that people are going to drive based upon their own ideas of comfort, efficiency, time to destination, etc. That's about the speed I like to drive.

Part of what gave rise to the radar detector and the CB radio in the 1970s was the art form that evading speed traps became when the speed limit was 55 mph.

55 mph is a bit like Prohibition. It will reduce the undesired behavior a little, but it will also usher in a lot of corruption.

Exhibit #1 regarding the unanticipated effects of 55 mph is police departments all over the country that immediately begin to turn traffic enforcement into a new revenue stream. At 55 mph, a traffic officer can literally write tickets all day, every day, and the practice becomes a great revenue stream for the local municipalities, which turns a safety and efficiency rule into a pretext for basically committing state-sanctioned highway robbery on travellers.

In a 55 mph speed limit regime, actually going 55 mph is dangerous, because no one else is driving 55 mph; it's just that everyone is a little more nervous about getting stopped.

I think anything over 65 mph is crazy, but I think anything under 65 mph on rural interstates will invite a lot of unanticipated trouble.

I just don't buy the argument that today's cars are going to get significantly better mileage going 55 mph than 65 mph. I have tested both speed in my car and the difference in mileage is negligible, if there is any difference at all.

If you haven't lived through it, be careful what you ask for. 55 mph was actually quite scary because if you followed the law people would be blowing by you all day long and then everyone would slam on their brakes when they saw a cop. If you went with the flow of traffic, you spent your whole trip nervous about getting stopped and constantly looking around, checking the radar detector, listening to the CB. It was really kind of silly.

When I travel today, I set my cruise on about 65 mph or a little below and that is about the speed of traffic. The cops are there and I hope they stop the idiots going 75 mph or over, but I'm glad I don't have to decide whether to slow down the flow of traffic and have people passing me all day in order to follow the law.

I haven't gotten a speeding ticket in almost 20 years.

In the 1970s EVERYONE got speeding tickets. Lots of places would write tickets for ANYTHING over 55 mph; others wouldn't stop anyone unless they were going over 65 mph. It was really stupid.

[Plantagenet]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote(' ', ' ')Not being in a war usually limits military casualties.

[arretium]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FloridaGirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'I') disagree. Logically, your argument that we should reduce consumption by lowering speed limits applies to the sort of cars people drive. I assume then that you are also for mandating smaller cars, eliminating SUVs, and eliminating all recreational vehicles? If you are, then your position is consistent.

[perdition79]

Do I think that the speed limit should be limited to 55 mph? No way. I like saving fuel, but other people seem to think that their time is actually worth something, even when they're just racing in their air-conditioned land barges to the McDonald's drive-thru. I say let them stay in their fantasy world, the last thing we need on the road is more frustrated drivers.

[FloridaGirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')loridaGirl wrote:
Quote:
I disagree. Logically, your argument that we should reduce consumption by lowering speed limits applies to the sort of cars people drive. I assume then that you are also for mandating smaller cars, eliminating SUVs, and eliminating all recreational vehicles? If you are, then your position is consistent.



I would take the capitilistic approach and impose gradually increasing carbon taxes and use the proceeds for mass transit. Higher gas prices are already driving people to smaller cars and higher taxes in Europe for a much longer term have driven them to be much more fuel efficient.


You didn't answer my question. Do you or do you not support the mandatory elimination of SUVs, RVs, and other recreational vehicles?

[arretium]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FloridaGirl', '')$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'F')loridaGirl wrote:
You didn't answer my question. Do you or do you not support the mandatory elimination of SUVs, RVs, and other recreational vehicles?

[FloridaGirl]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('', 'A')h, so you don't support eliminating SUVs and RVs. Your position is inconsistent and illogical. You wish to impose your will that we reduce gas consumption on people who choose to drive fuel efficient cars by forcing them to drive slowly, but you do not wish to reduce gas consumption by forcing people to abandon gas guzzling SUVs and RVs. When I consider that you also oppose CAFE standards, your position is even more inconsistent. It sounds to me like you essentially want me to drive slow so you can keep driving your gas guzzling SUV. How is that fair?

[mos6507]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FloridaGirl', '
')I figured everyone at this site knew that's why we are there. Why else would we be there? There are plenty of other countries that have weapons of mass destruction, and have oppressive dictators and have terrorists, but we're only going after the ones with oil.

[dinopello]

With all energy use - electricity, natural gas at home, and fuel in your car - it would be beneficial if the 'gauge' used to monitor useage showed the rate of useage and even better the price you were paying.

[Kingcoal]

The best medicine is high gas prices. I've read studies that found doing 55 on some congested highways actually lowered mpg because the lowered speed produced more gridlock. When you are sitting in traffic with your engine running, your mpg is negative.

[arretium]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('FloridaGirl', '
')So I take it that you want to impose your will on people and outlaw SUVs and RVs. I think my idea is much less imposing although I'm sure it would still be unpopular. I'm not sure how you propose getting rid of them. They don't require much gas sitting in people's driveways and the way things are going now, people will need them for their friends and family to sleep in after their homes have been foreclosed.

Check out this thread: Gas crunch takes toll on RV sales

[emersonbiggins]

Apparently, the 55 mph limit had little effect on fuel consumption, because of lax enforcement - note the lack of large gains until 2-3 years after limits were imposed.



$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('Stuart Staniford (The Oil Drum)', 'O')ne thing that struck me as very surprising is the lack of impact of the 55mph speed limit. This was adopted in 1973, and one might have expected it to make an abrupt and significant contribution to the solution. However, fuel economy increases between 1974 and 1977 were only very slightly higher than those of earlier years and it is rather hard to discern a major effect (eg a big spike up in the fuel economy growth rate in 1974 is not evident at all - there is not even a modest response until 1975). Nor is there any sign of a decline in fuel economy when the policy ended in 1995. Overall, I find very little evidence that the 55mph speed limit had much effect at all - presumably compliance was too poor for the theoretical benefits to emerge in practice.

[Roy]

I don't think it should be legislated. The minimum speed limit on most interstates I've seen is 45 mph.

It is completely legal for me to drive 55 on most interstates if I wish.

Without going into discussions of speed differentials and safety (most research indicates 80th percentile speed is the safest), suffice it to say that people who are gung ho about 55mph should just drive 55 (provided they stay in the 'slow' lane).

Speed LIMIT doesn't mean everyone MUST drive that speed, it means that you must NOT exceed that speed by law under penalty of random taxation/wallet rape. Speeders, and I used to be one, know the risk and act accordingly.

Let the market decide who drives what and how fast.

No to a national 55 limit. It won't do a damn bit of good. Unless you 're an agency that will gain revenue from the mass of citations that will be issued if this policy goes into effect.

It is becoming clearer now that solutions to this problem are not going to come from the top down.

They are going to come from the bottom up.

[cowuvula]

No they wont. They aren't going to come at all.

[Plantagenet]

"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce." --Karl Marx

[arretium]

$this->bbcode_second_pass_quote('cowuvula', 'N')o they wont. They aren't going to come at all.