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.
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.
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.
I’m too German to understand what’s here.
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
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.
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.
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
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?
The point was that at some places speed limits ARE enforced.
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.
On the highways here, the original speed limit of 55 was to save our nation’s resources, not just “55 to stay alive” but also it was an efficient speed to maintain and still pretty fast.
Inside the city it works much better to make drivers feel unsafe going fast. Narrower lanes, speed bumps, roundabouts, etc.
In answer to your actual question - some laws are just old and haven’t been unwound yet and others are used as pretext for profiling, police (or,n more properly whoever is running them) like to be able to stop people for no reason but that can be seen as illegitimate, so they keep laws that everyone breaks, jaywalking, etc to have an excuse.
I don’t think there is any one law everybody breaks really but also no person who has lived perfectly law abiding life.
This sounds like a distinctly cultural problem where the word ‘limit’ clearly doesn’t mean very much to the population in question.
It’s a limit, not a target, and certainly not a floor as some USAsians seem to treat it.
Here in Australia you can be fined for exceeding the limit by less than 10km/h. Yes, even if you are 1km/h over, and whilst this would probably get thrown out in court you’d still have to take time off to attend court.
Here we have a blanket 3km/h tolerance so they measure you, take 3km/h off and then use that to see which bracket of speeding you fall into (10, 20, etc).
It honestly frustrates me so much with the speed limit thing. On a societal level, speed (and differences in speed) tend to be one of the biggest factors in car crashes, so ignoring speeding is just accepting more dangerous roads.
On a peronal level, i try to do the limit or maybe 5-10 over (20 over is the norm in my area, even in school zones). The really frustrating part is as soon as i act like everyone else a try to do 20 over i get a ticket and my insurance goes up. This is frustrating becauae it just feels as if I’m being punished for doing what most people consider to be “safe” and normal. If it was drastically obvious that 20 over is faster than the flow of the traffic, it would feel a lot less frustrating if i get a ticket.
It can actually feel dangerous doing the limit on roads notoriois for 20-30 over. People agressively pass, tailgate and cut you off. Its fucked up but you get more dirty looks for doing the limit than you do for doing 40 over the limit. I think part of this is the north american attitude of cars being an extension of yourself. Someone doing 40 over is both couragous enough to go that fast, and also wealthy enough to own something faster and wealthy enough to afford the ticket, or at least that seems like the trend.
Take jaywalking for example. Most people aren’t going to be bothered by some woman crossing the street when no cars are around.
Is it worth a cops time who’s within eyeshot to do anything about it? Waste of resources, she’s not endangering anyone.
Same situation but cars are all over, some swerving to avoid or slam on their breaks because she blindly runs out. She gets hit or cars pile into each other.
Cops in eyeshot. Well the drivers certainly are not the ultimate cause of this accident.
That’s my guess anyways.
All laws exist because someone is expected to break them. They’re created when someone does something unexpected. They’re (sometimes) removed when nobody is expected to break them anymore.
Like how racism doesn’t exist anymore, so we can get rid of DEI!
If only that were the claim.
How do you expect constant enforcement? I’ll go over the speed limit on the motorway when it’s quiet and the lane is empty. Police generally don’t care if you’re doing 75 or 80 in a 70, as long as you’re not driving like an ass. The most important thing is keeping pace with traffic.
How do you expect constant enforcement?
China did it.
They put cameras all over the highways, just mail them the fines and use the video recording as evidence.
I mean, you don’t even need China’s authoritarianism to acheive this, traffic cameras already exist in many democratic countries, just add more along the highway.
Not sure how cost effective this would be :/
Certainly cheaper than paying for a police cruiser and all their equipment and wages. Its also less likely for the camera to be racist, be bribed, or shoot someone.
Cars are so common and speeding ignored for long we’d probably need at least double the amount of cops to enfroce traffic if we got rid of red light and speeding cameras.
In China, they made up the costs from the fines they received… so its actually quite profitable, because people just can’t resist the urge to speed.
I think the bigger problem isn’t the costs, it’s that there might be backlash and protests in a democracy.
Do you think traffic speeds aren’t enforced? Just because they can’t do it effectively because they don’t have the resources or man power doesn’t mean they don’t try.
Ummm… nah
Cop car just goes speeding along with everyone else on the highway. Speeding is de facto legal.
its more of a suggestion of what speed you should go, and as long as everyone is going the same, its no problem
for example:
speed limit is 55, but it’s open road, everyone goes 65
or on the highway, left lane is always going 90+, even though the speed limit is 70
as long as everyone is doing the same and behaving themselves, no one has a problem with anyone
that’s my opinion on the matter at least
It’s only de facto legal until something goes wrong. If a crash occurred and someone was speeding that’d be considered a contributing factor to the crash.
Even if speeding itself wasn’t illegal, there would need to be a definition of what reckless driving is, and speed in comparison to the road is a good measure of that, because it’s directly proportional to the lack of control of the vehicle.
