I go 95 on a main road when I open at work on Saturdays. 5:45 AM... do not care.
enjoy your being turned into jelly when you crashPoseidon wrote:
I go 95 on a main road when I open at work on Saturdays. 5:45 AM... do not care.
Last edited by Hurricane2k9 (2010-05-17 20:21:28)
thanks dude <3Hurricane2k9 wrote:
enjoy your being turned into jelly when you crashPoseidon wrote:
I go 95 on a main road when I open at work on Saturdays. 5:45 AM... do not care.
the most i ever go over a speed limit is 15 (unless it's in a case like I posted). above that, i don't risk it
The highest speed limit in the US is 80MPH, fyi.JohnG@lt wrote:
Why do speed limits exist? Are they nothing more than revenue generators or do they serve some real purpose in protecting public safety? I ask this question because the highest speed limit in America is 70 MPH(112.65 KPH) but they sell cars with a top speed over 200 MPH for use on public roads.
Speed limits are a great idea because few people are able to make a habit of driving safely at 20mph, let alone 120.
Last edited by unnamednewbie13 (2010-05-17 20:25:26)
What I really wanna know are why we have seatbelt laws. What kind of dumb, ignant motherfucker do you have to be to not wear a seatbelt?
A dumb, ignorant motherfucker like the tens of millions of drivers who refused to buckle up even after it became law.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
What I really wanna know are why we have seatbelt laws. What kind of dumb, ignant motherfucker do you have to be to not wear a seatbelt?
Hurricane2k9 wrote:
What I really wanna know are why we have seatbelt laws. What kind of dumb, ignant motherfucker do you have to be to not wear a seatbelt?
KEN-JENNINGS wrote:
Speed limits exist because insurance companies exist. Same reason federal safety belt laws exist. Insurance companies lobby government to impose federal and statewide guidelines to limit the liability of the insurance companies in case of crashes.
I thought cars have governors in them that limits the top speed to ~ 125mph or so already?
Have fun travelling at boring speeds and taking forever to get anywhere. Me and Pos will get there in half the time. Backwards. In a fireball.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
enjoy your being turned into jelly when you crashPoseidon wrote:
I go 95 on a main road when I open at work on Saturdays. 5:45 AM... do not care.
You guys get all the fun stuff, but I guess it's balanced out by having a lot of pollies too.Spark wrote:
Not here... but then technically we aren't a state.Jaekus wrote:
Yeah each state is different here too but I believe (not 100%) this is pretty much across the board.
How is that a negative? It means that certain bits of the city have special breaksJaekus wrote:
You guys get all the fun stuff, but I guess it's balanced out by having a lot of pollies too.Spark wrote:
Not here... but then technically we aren't a state.Jaekus wrote:
Yeah each state is different here too but I believe (not 100%) this is pretty much across the board.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
Are you seriously asking why they exist? Seriously?
I don't know the equivalent US authority, but Austroads has a number of publications on road safety and design considerations. Try to obtain a copy of one of these publications and have a look at the sections on speed constraints.
Long story short, when doing my road design project in transport engineering last year, the maximum speed for each road segment was based on driver sight distance and its relation to the distance it would take a car to stop (eg. slower speed advisory signs for sharp and blind corners, as drivers are unable to see any obstructions around the corner, and thus would be unable to stop in time at higher speeds).
Outside sharp corners and the like, the speed of a road is determined by the radius of the curves and the super-elevation of the road. Also, all speeds seem slower than they should be as they are designed for worst-case wet conditions..
Edit: But yeah, then there are special rules for urban areas which dictate the speed despite the roads geometric qualities. For example, the default residential speed limit in the state is 50km/h, even if the road is niiice and straight and long (like the one leading into my area )
I don't know the equivalent US authority, but Austroads has a number of publications on road safety and design considerations. Try to obtain a copy of one of these publications and have a look at the sections on speed constraints.
Long story short, when doing my road design project in transport engineering last year, the maximum speed for each road segment was based on driver sight distance and its relation to the distance it would take a car to stop (eg. slower speed advisory signs for sharp and blind corners, as drivers are unable to see any obstructions around the corner, and thus would be unable to stop in time at higher speeds).
Outside sharp corners and the like, the speed of a road is determined by the radius of the curves and the super-elevation of the road. Also, all speeds seem slower than they should be as they are designed for worst-case wet conditions..
Edit: But yeah, then there are special rules for urban areas which dictate the speed despite the roads geometric qualities. For example, the default residential speed limit in the state is 50km/h, even if the road is niiice and straight and long (like the one leading into my area )
The book Armchair Economist has an interesting essay that considers the risk/benefit of seatbelts. Here is an excerpt from the essay - http://www.scribd.com/doc/6496515/The-A … -EconomistHurricane2k9 wrote:
What kind of dumb, ignant motherfucker do you have to be to not wear a seatbelt?
I have a had mate who had 4 vertebrate shattered in car accident. He was later told if he wasn't wearing his seatbelt his injuries were likely to be not nearly as severe.
Thankfully his spinal cord was intact and after losing 9 litres of blood in the operation (yes, I know we only have 6, but they gave him 18 transfusions before stemming the flow from the artery leading to his heart that was severed by a broken rib, and plugged till they got him on the table) he spent 9 weeks in hospital whilst his injuries healed from having 2 titanium rods in to hold his spine together, then a further 12 months rehabilitation learning to walk again.
Today he's doing well as far as I know (haven't seen him since I moved interstate 3 years ago), though he said that in 10 years or so he'll start to deteriorate.
I guess that's one story against seatbelts. And yes, I know there are many for them.
Thankfully his spinal cord was intact and after losing 9 litres of blood in the operation (yes, I know we only have 6, but they gave him 18 transfusions before stemming the flow from the artery leading to his heart that was severed by a broken rib, and plugged till they got him on the table) he spent 9 weeks in hospital whilst his injuries healed from having 2 titanium rods in to hold his spine together, then a further 12 months rehabilitation learning to walk again.
Today he's doing well as far as I know (haven't seen him since I moved interstate 3 years ago), though he said that in 10 years or so he'll start to deteriorate.
I guess that's one story against seatbelts. And yes, I know there are many for them.
Nothing will be perfect and unfortunately sometimes circumstances really, really conspire against you.Jaekus wrote:
I have a had mate who had 4 vertebrate shattered in car accident. He was later told if he wasn't wearing his seatbelt his injuries were likely to be not nearly as severe.
Thankfully his spinal cord was intact and after losing 9 litres of blood in the operation (yes, I know we only have 6, but they gave him 18 transfusions before stemming the flow from the artery leading to his heart that was severed by a broken rib, and plugged till they got him on the table) he spent 9 weeks in hospital whilst his injuries healed from having 2 titanium rods in to hold his spine together, then a further 12 months rehabilitation learning to walk again.
Today he's doing well as far as I know (haven't seen him since I moved interstate 3 years ago), though he said that in 10 years or so he'll start to deteriorate.
I guess that's one story against seatbelts. And yes, I know there are many for them.
The paradox is only a conflict between reality and your feeling what reality ought to be.
~ Richard Feynman
~ Richard Feynman
You mistake lack of care for lack of intelligence.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
What I really wanna know are why we have seatbelt laws. What kind of dumb, ignant motherfucker do you have to be to not wear a seatbelt?
[x] Dumbest thread by G@lt ever
[ ] Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Goddamn G@lt, common sence etc.
[ ] Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Goddamn G@lt, common sence etc.
Your thoughts, insights, and musings on this matter intrigue me
Lemme guess... Crashed into a guard and the ski poles in the back seat speared him in the back? If he went flying through the windshield he would not have gotten speared?Spark wrote:
Nothing will be perfect and unfortunately sometimes circumstances really, really conspire against you.Jaekus wrote:
I have a had mate who had 4 vertebrate shattered in car accident. He was later told if he wasn't wearing his seatbelt his injuries were likely to be not nearly as severe.
Thankfully his spinal cord was intact and after losing 9 litres of blood in the operation (yes, I know we only have 6, but they gave him 18 transfusions before stemming the flow from the artery leading to his heart that was severed by a broken rib, and plugged till they got him on the table) he spent 9 weeks in hospital whilst his injuries healed from having 2 titanium rods in to hold his spine together, then a further 12 months rehabilitation learning to walk again.
Today he's doing well as far as I know (haven't seen him since I moved interstate 3 years ago), though he said that in 10 years or so he'll start to deteriorate.
I guess that's one story against seatbelts. And yes, I know there are many for them.
Just guessing, would suck to be that guy. However, it's not too much to say that seat belts save more lifes than they ruin.
How is that not just a veiled attempt at saying "I drive at the speed at which I want to drive, but I have no problem adhering to the speed limit if it allows me to go as fast as I'm going."?rdx-fx wrote:
Personally, I set my cruise control to something between 75-77mph. If the speed limit is a reasonable speed, I've no problem sticking to the posted speed limits.
He was in the back left passenger seat, driver drunk, he swerved left to miss a barrier across the road, saw a rock face and tried swerving right, car hit on an angle and spun, causing his body to twist really wrongly due to his seatbelt holding him in place. Where he was sitting he was unlikely to go through the windscreen and most likely wouldn't have sustained such a severe back injury. But it's only in hindsight you notice these things, and wearing a seatbelt is safer more often than not.Trotskygrad wrote:
Lemme guess... Crashed into a guard and the ski poles in the back seat speared him in the back? If he went flying through the windshield he would not have gotten speared?Spark wrote:
Nothing will be perfect and unfortunately sometimes circumstances really, really conspire against you.Jaekus wrote:
I have a had mate who had 4 vertebrate shattered in car accident. He was later told if he wasn't wearing his seatbelt his injuries were likely to be not nearly as severe.
Thankfully his spinal cord was intact and after losing 9 litres of blood in the operation (yes, I know we only have 6, but they gave him 18 transfusions before stemming the flow from the artery leading to his heart that was severed by a broken rib, and plugged till they got him on the table) he spent 9 weeks in hospital whilst his injuries healed from having 2 titanium rods in to hold his spine together, then a further 12 months rehabilitation learning to walk again.
Today he's doing well as far as I know (haven't seen him since I moved interstate 3 years ago), though he said that in 10 years or so he'll start to deteriorate.
I guess that's one story against seatbelts. And yes, I know there are many for them.
Just guessing, would suck to be that guy. However, it's not too much to say that seat belts save more lifes than they ruin.
The seat belt thing is really a 50/50 thing. It's just there to prevent you from being thrown from the car, but in some cases being thrown from the car is better for you(like the guy in the corvette who wrecked into a truck doing 125 mph and was tossed and fine). I've had friends who flipped and almost got killed by being choked from the belt.
Long story short is instead of being such sticklers for the speed limit, cops really should start issuing tickets out for Tail Gating.. Way more dangerous then going fast.
Long story short is instead of being such sticklers for the speed limit, cops really should start issuing tickets out for Tail Gating.. Way more dangerous then going fast.
Someone from New Jersey is pushing for this? Really?cpt.fass1 wrote:
The seat belt thing is really a 50/50 thing. It's just there to prevent you from being thrown from the car, but in some cases being thrown from the car is better for you(like the guy in the corvette who wrecked into a truck doing 125 mph and was tossed and fine). I've had friends who flipped and almost got killed by being choked from the belt.
Long story short is instead of being such sticklers for the speed limit, cops really should start issuing tickets out for Tail Gating.. Way more dangerous then going fast.
What about cutting people off?
Nothing brings out my rage more on the road than seeing New Jersey license plates. Rudest drivers on the planet.
"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat
-Frederick Bastiat
Don't you live in Long Island?? People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones. LI drivers are the WORST drivers ever. I constantly compare our less traffic riddled roads to yours. 30 miles takes 4 hours in that god forsaken island(Nice beaches there)JohnG@lt wrote:
Someone from New Jersey is pushing for this? Really?cpt.fass1 wrote:
The seat belt thing is really a 50/50 thing. It's just there to prevent you from being thrown from the car, but in some cases being thrown from the car is better for you(like the guy in the corvette who wrecked into a truck doing 125 mph and was tossed and fine). I've had friends who flipped and almost got killed by being choked from the belt.
Long story short is instead of being such sticklers for the speed limit, cops really should start issuing tickets out for Tail Gating.. Way more dangerous then going fast.
What about cutting people off?
Nothing brings out my rage more on the road than seeing New Jersey license plates. Rudest drivers on the planet.
If they actually enforced the tail gating law, people really wouldn't be cutting people off.
Statistically speaking, getting into a crash with a seat belt is better than without one. Yes there are rare instances where that isn't the case. There are also rare instances where a plane's vertical stabilizer detaches in-flight and it crashes into fiery oblivion... that doesn't make airplanes any less safe statistically speaking.cpt.fass1 wrote:
The seat belt thing is really a 50/50 thing. It's just there to prevent you from being thrown from the car, but in some cases being thrown from the car is better for you(like the guy in the corvette who wrecked into a truck doing 125 mph and was tossed and fine). I've had friends who flipped and almost got killed by being choked from the belt.
Long story short is instead of being such sticklers for the speed limit, cops really should start issuing tickets out for Tail Gating.. Way more dangerous then going fast.
edit: That car crash I was in almost a year ago? I probably would have gotten a couple injuries if I hadn't been wearing my seatbelt. Anecdotal evidence sure, but it backs up countless other pieces of evidence that show seat belts save lives.
Last edited by Hurricane2k9 (2010-05-18 08:16:01)
Well cars can also be made with 5 point harnesses and roll cages which would make cars way safer.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Statistically speaking, getting into a crash with a seat belt is better than without one. Yes there are rare instances where that isn't the case. There are also rare instances where a plane's vertical stabilizer detaches in-flight and it crashes into fiery oblivion... that doesn't make airplanes any less safe statistically speaking.cpt.fass1 wrote:
The seat belt thing is really a 50/50 thing. It's just there to prevent you from being thrown from the car, but in some cases being thrown from the car is better for you(like the guy in the corvette who wrecked into a truck doing 125 mph and was tossed and fine). I've had friends who flipped and almost got killed by being choked from the belt.
Long story short is instead of being such sticklers for the speed limit, cops really should start issuing tickets out for Tail Gating.. Way more dangerous then going fast.
edit: That car crash I was in almost a year ago? I probably would have gotten a couple injuries if I hadn't been wearing my seatbelt. Anecdotal evidence sure, but it backs up countless other pieces of evidence that show seat belts save lives.
If it's economically viable (as in it improves safety enough to justify the cost) then it'll happen.cpt.fass1 wrote:
Well cars can also be made with 5 point harnesses and roll cages which would make cars way safer.Hurricane2k9 wrote:
Statistically speaking, getting into a crash with a seat belt is better than without one. Yes there are rare instances where that isn't the case. There are also rare instances where a plane's vertical stabilizer detaches in-flight and it crashes into fiery oblivion... that doesn't make airplanes any less safe statistically speaking.cpt.fass1 wrote:
The seat belt thing is really a 50/50 thing. It's just there to prevent you from being thrown from the car, but in some cases being thrown from the car is better for you(like the guy in the corvette who wrecked into a truck doing 125 mph and was tossed and fine). I've had friends who flipped and almost got killed by being choked from the belt.
Long story short is instead of being such sticklers for the speed limit, cops really should start issuing tickets out for Tail Gating.. Way more dangerous then going fast.
edit: That car crash I was in almost a year ago? I probably would have gotten a couple injuries if I hadn't been wearing my seatbelt. Anecdotal evidence sure, but it backs up countless other pieces of evidence that show seat belts save lives.
ouch, that sucks. Makes DUI laws make sense, no one has a problem with those, right?Jaekus wrote:
He was in the back left passenger seat, driver drunk, he swerved left to miss a barrier across the road, saw a rock face and tried swerving right, car hit on an angle and spun, causing his body to twist really wrongly due to his seatbelt holding him in place. Where he was sitting he was unlikely to go through the windscreen and most likely wouldn't have sustained such a severe back injury. But it's only in hindsight you notice these things, and wearing a seatbelt is safer more often than not.Trotskygrad wrote:
Lemme guess... Crashed into a guard and the ski poles in the back seat speared him in the back? If he went flying through the windshield he would not have gotten speared?Spark wrote:
Nothing will be perfect and unfortunately sometimes circumstances really, really conspire against you.
Just guessing, would suck to be that guy. However, it's not too much to say that seat belts save more lifes than they ruin.