IMSHAKN

Actually, the fees that were repealed were only for criminal violations that have a mandatory court appearance and are not pre-payable.

So you don't believe that higher fines would be a good way to discourage bad driving? As it stands, people that have bad driving records laugh about the fact that they have 15 moving violations but complain about their insurance being so high. To me, that means the fines are too low because these people can afford to keep getting tickets. As long as the behavior is affordable, they will keep doing it. Besides, the additional fines and fees could be used to pay for additional officers for more enforcement.

Why does the state invest money in new technology? Maybe because radar detectors keep becoming more sophisticated and people from outside the state keep bringing them in the state and they have to keep up. It's a constant game of catch-up between the two markets, with the winner being the manufacturers who make both equipment. Just a thought though...would you rather get a ticket by a cop who judged your speed by eye (as in the recent post about OH) or by an newer electronic measuring device?

What kind of bikes do you think are more appropriate? Lots of equipment on those bikes so they need heavier bikes and there aren't many manufacturers building police-spec bikes. HD has dominated that market for years. Kawasaki just re-entered the market this year at a lower price and are supposed to be cheaper to maintain so maybe we'll start seeing them. But regardless, bikes are cheaper to operate and are more effective in many situations such as traffic duty.

Still, the fact is that as traffic volumes have increased the number of officers on the roads have not increased in the same proportions. The existing officers are often stretched handling crashes and other incidents and don't have the time to perform traffic duty. It's been a few years since I have really seen any kind of traffic enforcement unless it's a concentrated effort that is advertised.

I have to disagree with you about our roads currently being able to support 80mph. They are in such a state of disrepair that 65mph can cause problems. Only if they were to repair our roads and keep up with repair would I agree that 80mph is appropriate.

So you want to raise rates on light trucks who already pay more fees and taxes than a car? Why don't we just raise fees and taxes on every vehicle? Seems to be a more fair proposal. I really like the idea of the bad drivers paying for the additional traffic enforcement though.

Halfrican

Please, I saw this on a local news ticker and then searched a google, and made a thread, get off your high horse.

Second, people would speed no matter where we in America you are.

Lastly, I would be fine with a higher speed limit in areas where saw fit if there weren't pot holes the side of your mom on 288, along with the fact that there are FUCKING RETARDS on the road. I've lived in a few places and have a lot of international friends, America, from what I have seen personally, is the EASIEST place to get a license. No you don't even have to be 18 to get your drivers license as in most countries, and the test is a literally the BARE minimum of driving requirements. 40 hours is BULLSHIT. I would LOVE for america to be like Germany and have an Autobahn system where, those who can, can go as fast as they want. Difference being, they know how to drive over there. Its harder to get a license over there, and the cops don't slap your wrist with a ruler when they pull you over. Different example, you know in Finland it takes 3 YEARS to get a license for new teen drivers? And they spend hours upon hours an on OFF-ROAD, out of real traffic environment learning driving techniquies, spinning out, and all kinds of crazy crap I'm sure I would NOT pass the first time because I learned how to drive here.

Point being, no, I do not want a bunch of bloody morons to legally be allowed to go 5 miles faster, because then it turns into "oh, the speed limit is 70, I can do 15 over and not get caught"

marlinspike

But see, you shouldn't still have your license after 15 moving violations. I don't fine-based justice, especially heavy handed find-based justice, because even in a single fine it'll take food out of the mouth of the poor, and even multiple fines will be nothing but a toll to the wealthy. Make people come to court, make take their license after a few violations in the same year, put them in jail for driving while suspended.

Investing in new technology? How about blowing money because you don't have enough left in the budget to get anything substantial, but heaven forbid you should leave your budget with some money left in it (this is the first thing I'd change about government budgets if I could). You don't need LIDAR to beat a radar detector btw, you just need a judicious use of your radar gun (rather than tipping back your chair and using your cell phone while leaving the vehicle mounted radar on).

Honestly, I rather have a cop eyeball my speed than use only LIDAR or only RADAR, especially if that eyeballing is to be used properly (under a general speeding statute or a general reckless statute). Why? 1 - it means he had some reason to look at me, rather than pulling me over simply because a magic box gave him a magic number 2 - everybody knows the limitations of eyeballing. Judges and people are convinced that LIDAR and RADAR are magical infallible devices, and they aren't. This is why the proper way, the way you're supposed to do it but you rarely see done, is you're supposed to make a visually estimate the speed to verify the speed measuring device.

What kind of bike? Well it doesn't have to be the most expensive high-volume-production bike there is. Heck, one bike cop I was talking to said the BMW isn't even well-suited to police work and wishes he never got put on one. I've seen a cash strapped dept (not in VA) use a Honda Shadow for crying out loud. There are cheaper bikes than a 110hp BMW R1200RT. The HD police bike comes out to what ~$6,000 cheaper per bike?

As far as road condition goes, I think the parts you're talking about are currently 60mph, not 65mph. Those southside roads suck, I'll agree. The stuff north of Hampton is pretty good (probably why this is where all the speed enforcement happens, though, I have to hand it to the VSP, even they keep that down in the part where it switches over to 60mph, I would presume because of the lack of volume we have up here on the two-land portion)

Yes, I want to raise rates on light trucks. A light truck (pickup, SUV) being used for non-business purposes quite frankly has little business being on the road, hence my exemption for business purposes. People want to roll around in a pickup or SUV with no load, let them pay for it. If you are actually hauling stuff regularly (because if it's the "what about when I need to movie a large piece of furniture once every 6 years, just rent the pickup), it's probably for recreation, and recreation is something you pay for, get over it.
Bad drivers won't pay for the additional enforcement. Some will, some will just not pay because they simply cannot afford it and let their license get suspended. They will then either continue to drive, or given the state or our public transportation they'll lose their jobs. That helps nobody.
They could just raise the gas tax 1 cent per gallon....

marlinspike

But they won't. First, people have a natural comfort level, and it appears that is in the 75-80 zone. Why do I say this? Up in the DC Beltway, where traffic volume creates its own speed enforcement, ~75 is the speed traffic travels at when volume allows it, despite the speed limit being 55. 2 - NC has a variety of speed limits, going as high as 75 in one rural part. People there do 75-80 in a 75, 75-80 in a 70, 75-80 in a 65. I predict anybody who thinks they will be able to go 85 in the new 70 zones without getting a ticket will fine themselves sorely mistaken when they get charged with reckless.

Did you read any of my other posts? Did you read http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa346.pdf ?

Halfrican

Nah I only read the one with the sarcastic comment in it and replied to it. A lot of predicting can get you no where though man. The vast volumes of DC traffic is a little bit different from Chesterfield county where I live. I don't want to get on the highway on a ninja 250, only to be passed by a van load of (people) doing 85. Which, no matter what angle you look at it from, is GOING to happen. And cops are not everywhere. Personally, I should probably have a few speeding tickets myself because I average 70-75 (depending on slope of the highway). But I have yet to be pulled over on my bike, knock on wood, and don't see allowing a higher speed limite is NOT going to encourage the dipshits that shouldn't have license to go just a little faster.

IMSHAKN

If you don't make the punishment for bad driving undesirable then it will simply be accepted just as it is today. Americans are too slack in their driving and enforcement is a joke and simply considered just another revenue stream for the government. Until we have serious punishments for poor driving, American driving habits will not change. And it will not take food out of anybody's mouth...that's just an excuse. Driving is privilege, not a right. If you cannot obey the laws then you have no business driving. Losing a job because you lost your license is just another excuse that people use. If you really want to work, then you'll find a way to work.

I-64 and 288 are horrible roads with 65mph speed limits. The concrete is literally crumbling on 288 in Chesterfield, causing drivers lots of problems yet I bet that it will be a candidate for increased speed limit without repairing the roadway. I-64 is a little better in places but the road still needs a lot of work. Those are the roads that I frequently drive with 65mph speed limits.

So what about those of us who use pickups for personal use and actually use them often? You want to punish us instead of the bad drivers? Why not just use your same logic and go after sports cars...they have no practical use, at least with my truck it is truly a multi-purpose vehicle and is very practical for my needs. Maybe we need to use that logic for commuter vehicles...make people pay extra for living so far from work.

I have NEVER been able to drive 75mph around DC except late night/early morning. Rush hour is a parking lot and most other times there is still too much traffic to SAFELY travel at 75mph because the traffic is flowing at 65mph. And I'm not counting the HOV lane.

On any highway with a 65mph speed limit that I have driven on in VA, traffic moves along at 65-70. Most of the time in order to do 70 on I-64, you have to be in the left lane. If you are driving 75, then you are passing 95% of the cars on the road and are a safety hazard just as the study that you quoted mentioned. Most drivers will drive 5 over the speed limit and that's it. Increasing the speed limit to 70 will move the average speed up to 75mph. So what does that do? If you actually read that study, it creates a more dangerous situation because people in cars will try to travel at the faster speed limits with traffic that cannot travel the faster speeds. That difference in speed is what causes the dangerous situations.

The best solution would be to increase taxes and fees on cars. With those funds, we could build a highway system dedicated to cars with higher speeds...no trucks allowed.

marlinspike

I realize that's the slogan of the everyday statist, but it doesn't hold water. In the absence of government, everything other than murder, theft, and confinement, are rights. This is simply a right that we have given government a significant power to regulate.

But when you consider how our traffic cases start in District Court, and how many prosecutors won't analyze cases independent of a District Court ruling to avoid stepping on the judge's toes, a single violation should not carry draconian punishment.

I can't say that I have any idea where 288 even is. I can say that I-64 from I-295 east through Yorktown is a fine road, and after Yorktown the speed limit drops to 60.

Because unlike light trucks, sports cars don't block the visibility of other drivers, don't have poor braking, don't have a heightened possibility of rollover following a blowout, don't have bumpers at dangerous heights, and don't cause increased road-surface wear through a high gross weight.

This is my point though. That the people there go 20 over the limit when the traffic is light enough to do so suggests that it's not the speed limit keeping them in check (because 20 over is basically a big F You to the speed limit), but their own comfort level.

We don't need no trucks allowed, we just need no trucks in the left lane, no passing on the right, and enforcement of yielding the left lane to faster moving vehicles after they signal to move over using their lights (which is a law in VA).

IMSHAKN

In the absence of government, even murder, theft and confinement are rights. Without government, there is no civilization which is a defining characteristic of humans. The fact remains, driving is a privilege and not a right.

What are you calling "draconian punishment"? I'm not talking about a $15,000 fine, I'm simply suggesting that instead of fining someone $50 + court costs for failing to yield and causing a crash that they should be fined more...say $250. If you have 3 moving violations in an 18 month period, fines should increase. Get 5 in a 3 year period and your license should be suspended. Quit dicking around with these people who can't drive and get them straight.

Of course none of this is possible without improving drivers training and more frequent and difficult testing.
[/QUOTE]
I wouldn't call any part of I-64 a fine road unless it has been repaved (currently being done in Henrico).
Guess you've never driven a truck. I have never owned a truck with poor braking or rolled one over following a blowout. I have a CDL and have over a million accident free miles in trucks. Yes, trucks do wear roads more however they also already pay higher taxes and fees specifically to offset those impacts.

Unfortunately, you are also making a pretty good case for additional taxes and fees for sports cars. They are very dangerous vehicles...they have poor visibility, are capable of unnecessary high speeds, accelerate much too quickly, are dangerously low, and are a menace to other drivers.

The point is that if you start targeting one segment of the population due to their choice in vehicles, then other segments will be targeted. It's just as easy to start naming reasons for increased fees for other vehicles.

Your point is to raise the speed limit to meet the desires of a few drivers? Why don't we aim for the 1% of drivers who want to do 150? Apparently you didn't even read the study that you keep posting about. It mentions using 85% and using that figure seems to support leaving speed limits alone in VA.

Why no trucks in the left lane? As long as he is passing traffic then what's the problem?

We keep coming back to the enforcement issue that you don't want to pay for. I still don't understand why it's so bad charging someone an extra $100-$200 for any of the numerous violations that occur every hour. Think about how many additional cops can be hired just to enforce traffic laws. Then once the Nazi cops are strictly enforcing the laws of our roadways, think about how many fewer crashes there would be and how much more time we would save by not sitting in traffic because everyone would be scared to violate the law. Driving would be so fun...unless you got caught having fun.

marlinspike

Not true. Even if you don't believe the writings of the enlightenment thinkers, common sense would suggest that if someone has the right to forcibly resist your doing something, you can't have had the right to do it in the first place.


$250 isn't so draconian. Giving you a misdemeanor criminal record plus a 4 figure fine like they tried to do, that's draconian.

Come out to Williamsburg

Never something you need a class A for, but I have driven pickup trucks and in college I made money on the side driving a bus that was based on a Ford E-450. You may have your CDL, but most of there's no special licensing to buy an F-350 or a Suburban, and these people don't know what the heck they're doing, and the statistics show it.. Shoot, I'd give an exemption on my tax for CDL holders, it would make things more simple/honest than the business purposes thing anyways.

True, they make entire courtrooms on this premise

No, my point is that raising the speed limit won't alter behavior.


You start letting 18 wheelers use the left lane and you find yourself with a clogged left lane and a bunch of cars side-by-side.

mkhoid

need more fuel + air = more power = faster.