97 MPH in a 70 MPH...

[cepe10]

From 2001 to 2005 - about 27%.

On a related note, in 2005 some 22% of ALL traffic fatalities involved one or more DUI (drugs and/or alcohol) drivers, and about 8% of all injury collisions. Unsafe speed was the highest cause for injury collisions at 27%.

- Carl

So you are saying with a staight face to drive 10 mph or so below the speed of the vast majority of vehicles on the road and you yourself practice this and never ever exceed a posted speed limit?

How was "unsafe speed" determined? Is traveling 66 mph more unsafe that 65 mph when the design speed of the roadway is 80 MPH and the free flow speed is 74 mph? What was the basis for determining "unsafe speed" was the root cause rather than other factors?

 

[CdwJava]

Your highway capacity and level of service analysis is a little lacking... I don't know how you can say that decreased spacing caused by impeders (AKA left lane lurkers) does not cause higher risks.

I did NOT say anything of the sort. What I cited was from the record of actual primary collision factors as cited by the state of California. In other words, your hypothesis that impeding traffic increases the risk of traffic collisions does NOT seem to be borne out by the statistics - at least in California.

Also obvious is the source of the data LEO agencies have at this time no means of determining the root cause of accidents especially with slow distracted impeders who rarely volunteer info related as such to an accident (i.e. admit they were distracted) LOL

Yes, there are ways, and most the time the PCF is based upon factors other than the driver's statement. One should NOT be following another too closely or traveling to fast for conditions - that includes traveling over the speed limit when others in front of you are traveling AT the speed limit.

In any regard you certainly have your academy indocrination intact and do not have an open mind to reality - if your "analysis" was true (impeders do not casue any traffci problems) the autobahn would have a higher risk factor than the slowest US highway which is does not.

I provided NO (read "zero") "analysis". I provided the numbers as released by the state of California. You do not have to like them or agree with them. But, they are as they are.

I cannot recall ever taking a collision report where any impeding was alleged - and I have investigated more than 600. Speed, yes ... following too close, yes ... DUI, yes ... unsafe lane change, yes ... ad nauseum ... but none where impeding was even brought up. If you are zipping along, and pokey is in front of you, the law here requires you change lanes to the left, or slow down to the speed limit. If the driver is NOT traveling at the speed limit, why are you running into him if you are traveling at a safe speed? (Yes, I know there are circumstances such as blind corners or bad weather that can cause this to be a factor, but usually it is not.)

And what is this about "academy indoctrination"? That's rich! I was indoctrinated more in elementary school than in the academy, and years of mainly liberal college professors made a much greater attempt to "indoctrinate" me than 5 months of the academy. If my college profs. could not convert me to become a mindless liberal, the academy certainly could not convert me into an automaton ... not to mention I was already in my late 20s when I entered the academy and already had formed most my opinions about life and responsibility anyway.

- Carl

 

[CdwJava]

So you are saying with a staight face to drive 10 mph or so below the speed of the vast majority of vehicles on the road and you yourself practice this and never ever exceed a posted speed limit?

Yes. I do not drive more than 10 MPH over the limit, and rarely more than 5 MPH over.

How was "unsafe speed" determined? Is traveling 66 mph more unsafe that 65 mph when the design speed of the roadway is 80 MPH and the free flow speed is 74 mph? What was the basis for determining "unsafe speed" was the root cause rather than other factors?

There are a host of different ways to determine this. Generally it is cited as the PCF if the speed is in excess of the limit or unsafe for conditions. When approaching stopped traffic a "safe" speed would be zero. You are required to drive at a speed which allows you to safely maneuver to avoid collisions or other hazards. if you are traveling so fast that you ram into a vehicle that is traveling at 10 MPH BELOW your speed (say, 65 when you are at 75) God help you if a deer crosses the road or if you are suddenly faced with a collision up ahead that brings traffic to a near zero MPH.

You do no have to like the way the laws are enforced or tallied. They are as they are. Until or unless folks like you raise the limit or allow for loopholes and exceptions in the speed laws, they will remain as they are and will be enforced as they are.

- Carl

 

[Zigner]

I don't know how you can say that decreased spacing caused by impeders

Incredible.

The cause of "decreased spacing" is tailgaters.
Cepe - you are way outclassed and out of line on this one. Generally, I chalk this sort of thing up to a "difference of opinion". However, in this case, I have to say that your position is absolutely WRONG (and that's NOT an opinion)