Is every speed limit too low

One thing that wasn't mentioned in the story was how much better our equipment is today than when these laws were set up over 50 years ago. Our cars have been greatly improved and are much more capable of traveling faster and stopping faster than ever before.


Doesn't it seem prudent that our traffic laws should be updated along with the vehicles that travel on the roads? Even though 285 has been widened to 4 lanes up to Richmond hill we still have the same speed limits when the road was much narrower and only 2 lanes. There are sections on 285 road where the vast majority of drivers are cruising along at 65 or 70 which is well above the posted limit.

Ashley wrote: Thanks PS for your comments. It is hardly necessary to keep your eye on the speedometer all the time rather than traverse the road as you have suggested.

I can pretty much tell from someone's driving who is law abiding and who thinks they are above the law or flaunts when they feel justified. Using the excuse of going with the flow of traffic is hardly justification for exceeding the speed limit. It also indicates who are likely to go with the crowd (in their views too) rather than use a slower speed and avoid the crowd, a tactic used in defensive driving.

The slower driver is what causes a crowd to begin with because everyone bunches up around them before passing them.

There is a reason that the State Patrol gets out in front of high volume traffic on I-70, turns the bubble gum machine on and drives down the road - to give traffic a homogenous speed. That homogenous speed makes it safer for everyone on the road. By intentionally creating disparity you are also making it more dangerous for everyone else on the road with you. That is not opinion, it is proven fact. Whether the disparity is higher or lower is not relevant as it is the disparity in speed which increases the risk for everyone on the road.

Tell me Ashley, what speed would you dirve in the absence of any directions from others as to what your speed is supposed to be? Would it be safe to say a speed at which you feel comfortable traveling? A speed at which you felt safe and in control of your vehicle? One that you believed to be reasonable and prudent given road conditions? Well, the vast majority of us drive that way all the time too. With our feet (the ones on the accelerator pedal that is) we cast a vote as to the reasonableness of the law every time we get behind the wheel. And you know what the consistent, overwhelming, results of that vote are? Reasonable and prudent speed on any given road is higher than the posted limit. That is why, time after time, when a speed limit is raised by 10 mph on a road the speed at which traffic flows remains basically the same and the amount of accidents on the road decrease, not increase.

If the speed limit sign on 285 said 100 mph, is that the speed you would travel it at simply because the sign told you to go that speed? Of course not, you would drive at a speed you felt reasonable and prudent. Guess what Ashley, that's precisely what the rest of us do all the time. Individually we have arrived at the same logical conclusion based on years of observations and personal experience - the safe and prudent speed is not a static figure, but a dynamic one. I suppose that some feel the need to have even the smallests aspects of their daily lives governed by others and some feel capable of governing themselves to a much greater degree.

So from your statement, those who follow the speed limits obviously can't be reasonable and prudent. Wrong. Amazing how you can justify when to follow the law and when not to.

PrintSmith wrote:

Ashley wrote: Thanks PS for your comments. It is hardly necessary to keep your eye on the speedometer all the time rather than traverse the road as you have suggested.

I can pretty much tell from someone's driving who is law abiding and who thinks they are above the law or flaunts when they feel justified. Using the excuse of going with the flow of traffic is hardly justification for exceeding the speed limit. It also indicates who are likely to go with the crowd (in their views too) rather than use a slower speed and avoid the crowd, a tactic used in defensive driving.

The slower driver is what causes a crowd to begin with because everyone bunches up around them before passing them.

There is a reason that the State Patrol gets out in front of high volume traffic on I-70, turns the bubble gum machine on and drives down the road - to give traffic a homogenous speed. That homogenous speed makes it safer for everyone on the road. By intentionally creating disparity you are also making it more dangerous for everyone else on the road with you. That is not opinion, it is proven fact. Whether the disparity is higher or lower is not relevant as it is the disparity in speed which increases the risk for everyone on the road.

Tell me Ashley, what speed would you dirve in the absence of any directions from others as to what your speed is supposed to be? Would it be safe to say a speed at which you feel comfortable traveling? A speed at which you felt safe and in control of your vehicle? One that you believed to be reasonable and prudent given road conditions? Well, the vast majority of us drive that way all the time too. With our feet (the ones on the accelerator pedal that is) we cast a vote as to the reasonableness of the law every time we get behind the wheel. And you know what the consistent, overwhelming, results of that vote are? Reasonable and prudent speed on any given road is higher than the posted limit. That is why, time after time, when a speed limit is raised by 10 mph on a road the speed at which traffic flows remains basically the same and the amount of accidents on the road decrease, not increase.

If the speed limit sign on 285 said 100 mph, is that the speed you would travel it at simply because the sign told you to go that speed? Of course not, you would drive at a speed you felt reasonable and prudent. Guess what Ashley, that's precisely what the rest of us do all the time. Individually we have arrived at the same logical conclusion based on years of observations and personal experience - the safe and prudent speed is not a static figure, but a dynamic one. I suppose that some feel the need to have even the smallests aspects of their daily lives governed by others and some feel capable of governing themselves to a much greater degree.

gmule wrote: One thing that wasn't mentioned in the story was how much better our equipment is today than when these laws were set up over 50 years ago. Our cars have been greatly improved and are much more capable of traveling faster and stopping faster than ever before.


Doesn't it seem prudent that our traffic laws should be updated along with the vehicles that travel on the roads? Even though 285 has been widened to 4 lanes up to Richmond hill we still have the same speed limits when the road was much narrower and only 2 lanes. There are sections on 285 road where the vast majority of drivers are cruising along at 65 or 70 which is well above the posted limit.

An excellent point gmule. 30+ years ago I was driving a 1966 Rambler American convertible in Turkey Creek Canyon (more affectionately known as "The Luge" in these parts) and the speed limit then was the same 45 mph that it is today. The differences between my Rambler and my ''03 Jetta TDI, however, are striking. The short list includes such things as independent suspension on all 4 wheels vs 2 wheels, 4 wheel power assisted anti-lock disc brakes vs 4 wheel unassisted drum brakes, power assisted rack and pinion steering vs unassisted recirculating ball steering, carbureted engine vs electronic direct injection and the presence of anti-sway bars that the Rambler lacked. Heck, even my 1988 Fiero was strikingly more advanced in these critical areas than the Rambler was though it lacked the anti-lock braking feature. Any person capable of reason and logic would quickly and easily recognize that either of these vehicles, which contain what today is pretty much standard equipment on all vehicles sold, are capable of traveling the same roads safely at higher speeds than the Rambler could manage.

So, rather than approach this from an emotional standpoint, let's have a traffic study done on 285 from Bailey to the C-470 interchange and see what the 85% speed is. Better yet, let's do the study with speedometers inoperable on the vehicles so that we can rest assured that the resulting figures are purely what the drivers consider to be a reasonable and prudent speed. We could even put the same drivers in different vehicles (compact, mid-sized, SUV) and see how much the average speed varied. I'd be willing to bet my last bright shiny new fiat Roosevelt dime that the results would show that for the majority of the highway the speed limit could be raised at least 10 mph to better reflect the actual speed at which the road is traveled. The increase would probably be a bit less than that in the most curvaceous parts of The Luge, and a bit more than that in the improved area between N Turkey Creek and Richmond Hill Road based on the speeds I see vehicles being driven at as I commute to the city and back home.

NEVER been on the Autobahn,but have a neighbor from Germany. THERE you are required to pay attention
driving..(even the young teenagers think the speeds in USA are too slow....BUT,as I understand it,driving
skills are part of the equation over there.do they TEXT when driving the Autobahn? (asking question in
EARNEST)

Cars may be capable of greater speeds, however many drivers I see aren't. If you can't stay in your lane; slow down, pay attention or accept that you can not drive and stay home.

Has anyone considered that those who exceed the speed limit are causing issues for those who choose to go the speed limit? If you would maintain the same posted speed limit taking into account existing conditions which might require less speed, you would stay the same distance apart and not encounter any slower cars going the speed limit. Hmmmm what a concept.

Everyone faster than me is a maniac and everyone slower than me is a freaking jerk.

Freezeman wrote: Everyone faster than me is a maniac and everyone slower than me is a freaking jerk.

Especially when it snows! The people in front of me all want to go 5 Mph and the people behind me all want to go 500 Mph when 45 or 50 Mph would be reasonable. When that happens on a multi-lane highway I just stay to the right until I can safely get around the slower cars. On a two lane road with opposing traffic all you can do is hope the slow poke finally notices the parade of cars behind him/her and takes pity on them by pulling over to let the rest pass.

I can't help but wonder if the issue with the speed limits is some smaller part of a reflection on our society. We demand instant gratification today and we are so accustomed to getting it that when something takes a little longer than usual or isn't available when we want it the situation becomes a pseudo-crisis.

Could you imagine living without your smartphone, microwave oven, cable TV, Internet access, or the variety of restaurants and shops we have up here today? I'll be the first to admit it makes me a hypocrite to say it but I think everyone can benefit from being a little more patient, a little more humble, and having some gratitude for the good things we have in our lives.

Good point Otis. We could all use more patience.

As for living without some of the electronics, could and do without a lot of them but would miss internet access and microwave. I would have to learn how to cook over coals.