Example: Traffic Speed. Everyone always exceed the speed limit on highways. Why do we still have the limit? Like, either enforce it, or remove it. This stuff doesn’t make sense at all.
You’re not expected to break them. For your example, you’re not supposed to go over the speed limit. And it is, in fact, extremely easy to do so. Most people are fine with it. And, no, it’s not impossible to do so. There is nothing forcing you to go faster for little to no gain and increased risk for you and other.
You expecting to go over tells something about you.
Practically no one actually drives at or below the speed limit in the US, especially on freeways. Whether or not you personally like this doesn’t matter – it’s just how it is.
You’re welcome to try it, but speeding is so pervasive in our culture that this will single you out and Ruggedly Individualistic Americans will get frothingly butthurt at you over it. Prepare to get tailgated, cut off, bullied out of your lane, stuff thrown at your car, etc.
It sounds like you’re proud of your culture of not giving a crap about rules set to improve safety for everyone. On that account, I agree that we’ll never see eye to eye about this.
What part of what I wrote expressed that I was “proud” of it?
I’m just telling you how people behave. I don’t have any control over anybody but myself. For what it’s worth, I’m probably one of the six people in this damn country who doesn’t drive like a nut.
I haven’t driven over the speed limit in a decade in the US and have anecdotally never experienced the behavior you’re describing.
It’s not just a matter of others getting butthurt. It’s actively dangerous to be driving at a different speed from the rest of traffic, regardless of whether you’re going faster or slower.
If that’s true, then it would be a good idea to have everybody converge on a particular speed. It doesn’t seem practical to negotiate that speed amongst a constantly-changing set of drivers, it probably needs to be chosen in advance. That seems like a natural function of government, to choose the consensus speed through a process designed to represent everybody in the community.
To communicate to drivers entering the roadway this consensus speed which everybody must travel at—for safety—the government could, say, post it on signs located along the roadside.
But that’s probably just a ridiculous fantasy. How then should all drivers negotiate the consensus speed to ensure safety?
No negotiation is needed. As long as everyone agrees to follow everyone else (i.e. no one tries to overtake and you keep a constant gap with the car in front of you), then everything will naturally fall into place.
Given those conditions, everybody drives the speed of the slowest driver.
Yes? I get the impression that you mean to disagree with me, but I can’t tell how.
I don’t know if my explanation of the phenomenon is correct or not. I don’t know much about the science of traffic dynamics. All I know is that when you’re on the road, pretty much everyone ends up at approximately the same speed. That speed can differ relative to the speed limit depending on time of day, road and weather conditions, which road you’re on, etc. and there’s no one to tell me what speed to aim for. I just look at the flow of traffic and follow it. That’s all.
I remember a young college aged guy got shot in the head for beeping his horn at someone. Happened a few years sgo.
You expecting to go over tells something about you.
I don’t drive, but every time I’m in my parent’s car, they drive the speed limit, then I see cars flying by on the highway, and I’m like wtf.
I double check the spedometer, it points at just below 60, the sign says speed limit is 60. How is everyone going so fast. They must be speeding.
Not just one or 2 cars. Like almost every car.
Edit: This is in the USA, the Interstate-95 / PA-NJ Turnpike btw.
Because you don’t see the cars going the same speed as you. If everyone on the interstate was going 60 you would only ever see the 10 cars near you. But 10 people going 70 could pass 100 cars. Each of those drivers would see 10 cars going 60 and 10 cars going 70. Despite the fact that less than 10% of the cars were speeding.
For what it’s worth, the I-95 corridor from about Richmond to Boston, particularly the DC-Balitmore-Philly-NYC part, is probably one of the worst stretches of highway in the country for generalized insanity and phenomenally poor driving skills on display from everyone involved. It is easily my most hated patch of asphalt in the universe.
A small but measurable improvement would be made to the world instantly if every person in DC and Baltimore had their licenses revoked. Although if experience is any judge, that still wouldn’t prevent any of them from still all being on 95, three inches from the car in front and raging over “only” being able to do 80 in a 55.
Textbook case of a cognitive bias. If you’re going the speed limit, every car that passes you is speeding. You don’t see all the other cars doing the speed limit.
Everyone always exceed the speed limit on highways
You’re projecting yourself
Nah, I don’t even have a license to drive.
Every time I’m in my parent’s car, they drive the speed limit, then I see cars flying by. I’m like wtf.
I double check the spedometer, it points at just below 60, the sign says 60. How is everyone going so fast. They must be speeding.
Edit: And it’s not just one or two cars, its almost every car on the highway.
This is in the USA, the Interstate-95 / PA-NJ Turnpike btw.
Lol,
everyone
Proceeds to disprove.
Apparently it’s not everyone that speeds.
I’m too German to understand what’s here.
How do you get your licence in Germany?
Driver’s license? Why?
Because it can be enforced selectively, and if everyone is guilty of something, anyone in particular can be harassed under the cover of a legal justification.
Yep. And in some places, one can see the enforcement is against minoritites and other scape goats at a disproportionate level. This also has the “bonus” of being able to make one group look like they break the law much more often and are dangerous
Yep. In Switzerland not having your ID on you is an arrest-able offence. Of course, the police never check the ID of anyone white or who blends in.
But if you look brown / disabled, then they will check you…
Counter question: do you think everyone is sensible?
On top of what others said there’s also just virtue signaling, like banning pornography or gambling.
It saves lives, literally, like seat belts. I don’t know what to say if you can’t understand that.
The question is why do laws that aren’t enforced exist. Gambling and porn bans are rarely enforced but exist mostly for virtue signaling. I wasn’t talking about speed limits.
So you can selectively punish.
They exist just in case they need to crack down on you.
I always think of dog leash laws this way. In many places they aren’t enforced and the majority of dog owners let their dogs off leash. However, if the owner loses control of their dog and it gets into trouble, like biting someone or another dog, then the law can always say, you’re liable because your dog was supposed to be on leash.
I think the same goes for speeding and other laws. It basically puts liability on the lawbreaker if they take a certain risk. If nothing bad happens, fine. But, if something does, then it’s your fault.
This has the unintended consequence of people not knowing about the law if it goes unenforced for a long time.
Not knowing the law isn’t an excuse before the law in most circumstances.
Name every law.
Which makes this an issue since no one will go read the whole list of laws
Tools in the toolbox. You’ll often hear about police saying they need more tools in the toolbox. What it means is they want to be able to enforce laws against somebody they don’t like selectively.
If you enforce the speed limit religiously, especially around State capitals, the speed limits would rapidly change.
https://archive.org/details/threefeloniesday0000silv
If this topic interests you, I recommend reading three felonies a day, by Harvey silverglate
People do enforce the law. Just occasionally, but that’s enough to scare 90% into submission
Traffic speed? If you know where all the speed cameras are, you could dodge them and hope there are no other police checking you.
Oh, about that: China also randomly flies drones that patrols the highways. Of couse, that’s getting into the Authoritarian territory, and people in Democracies don’t like it, but it is an option.
Ehh, for a bit Virginia tried enforcing them with aircraft.
It stopped because it was expensive, not because it was too authoritarian.
Manned Aircraft is much more expensive than drones, especially fuel cost. You can get like a DJI drone for like around $2000 (there are cheaper ones, but then you have to fly closer, since the cameras sucks on the cheaper ones) with good enough cameras to see the license plates by flying just hovering outside of the edge of the highway (so that, if it fails for some reason, it falls outside of the highway and doesn’t affect the traffic), and angle it towards the highway, and you’ll see all the license plates clearly, and with the help of the distance markers on the side of the road, determine their speed. As long as they don’t crash the drones, they are gonna last a long time, and if batteries are worn out, they can just get new ones. It’s not exactly “cheap”, but the government has a lot of budget. Getting like 20 of these can cover a lot of area. You don’t have to catch every one, just enough to make people think again before trying to speed. And randomly change the locations of patrol so there is no way to predict where they are being watched.
Also, they can get like some expensive ones, some cheap ones, mix and match. The cheaper ones will have trouble getting a clear license plate if it also have to keep a safe distance, but the people don’t know which drones are the expensive ones, get like 20 DJI Mavics, 40 DJI Mini 2 SE, mix them up. Think of like having real cameras mixed in with fake cameras.
I know it looks expensive, but just look at the police budget and it’s barely a dent. Cut out all of those “riot suppression” (aka: protest suppression) stuff from the budget and you got a lot of budget to work with.
As for manpower, redirect those writing tickets in the city, and teach them how to fly these drones. Parking violations have basically zero harm, fuck that shit, speeding has more potential to cause harm than parking violations.
IMHO it’s not authoritarian. Your speed in public space should be public. I struggle every day with fucking idiots in BMW or VW who almost hit my car because they can’t drive properly. I wouldn’t mind seeing them in jail if it meant some kind of control on my own speed.
That’s the whole fucking point. Speed traps are only there to decrease the number of people killed, and we still have idiots complaining about it.
Speed traps don’t stop or prevent crime/accidents, they generate money. In fact, one could argue a police speed traps causes accidents when a group of cars in the front suddenly slam on their brakes.
a group of cars in the front suddenly slam on their brakes.
A group of speeding cars in the front suddenly slam on their brakes.
You are the problem. That’s why I would enjoy if all those fucking morons had their license removed for life and they had to take the bus. I have to avoid accidents every fucking day because of them and I don’t see why I have to suffer for that.
People exceed the speed limit on highways, but usually not by a lot. If they exceed it by a lot, it is usually enforced, e.g. by speed cameras; but of course some people still sometimes get away with it, no enforcement of any law is perfect.
Well, tell that to my local traffic authorities. My wife basically has a subscription with them, we get home a monthly invoice for 30€ because she was driving 55-60 km/h in a 50 zone… Complete with a picture of her face and the car’s license plate :)
Maybe she should stop speeding?
Or learn where the cameras are?
If it only was that easy. I don’t know if 5km/h over the limit is “speeding”, she just doesn’t pay attention, and we’ve been having this discussion for years… I am trying to convince/teach her how to use the speed limiter, but she always forgets to enable that. And the cameras are not static around here. There are a couple static ones, but the vast majority are mobile. They look like small black boxes on wheels, like a power distribution point. Until you see the flash light :)
Should she be driving if she’s that bad at it?
Removed by mod
Okay buddy, simmer down.
The point was that at some places speed limits ARE enforced.
The point is that his wife should not be a potential killer.
55 in a 50? Killer?
I got caught once by a speed camera doing 65 in a 50 zone. The camera was in an unmarked van parked on the motorway lay-by (conveniently just after some temporary road works). A few days later the postman delivers a fine in the mail, so I ignored it as it wasn’t sent by recorded delivery (so no proof of receipt). Now, by law in the UK, the police have 21 days to inform you of the offence and three weeks later I get another letter from the cops informing me that I have an unpaid fine. So I write to them and tell them that I never received it and that I have no recollection of being on that road. They then send me photographic evidence of my car being caught at 65 mph in a 50 zone and that I am obliged, by law, to declare who was driving. I write back and inform them that it was so long ago I have no memory of who might have been the designated driver, let alone even being on that road, and that because more than 21 days have passed they have failed to inform me of the offence. They write back with some nonsense about having proof that the letter was sent, but I argue that this isn’t proof of receipt and that I’d be guessing if I declared who I think might have been driving that day. Result being that I never heard from them again.
Removed by mod
It’s so the police always have something they can stop you for.
Bureaucracy is a nightmare. There’s national laws, local laws, technical laws, practical laws, petty laws, incompetent laws, minority laws, old laws nobody bothered to get rid of, potential laws for possible situations that might happen at some point in an imaginary future… and so on.
Basically, it depends on who writes the law and why. All laws are subjective to humans, by humans and against anything that annoys the specific humans in charge at any given point in time.
