Edmunds dealer partner, Bayway Leasing, is now offering transparent lease deals via these forums. Click here to see the latest vehicles!
Options
Popular New Cars
Popular Used Sedans
Popular Used SUVs
Popular Used Pickup Trucks
Popular Used Hatchbacks
Popular Used Minivans
Popular Used Coupes
Popular Used Wagons
Comments
You should go to Florida. It seems any kind of open arterial is posted at 50, and because it is a second world kind of place with perpetual property crime, mostly unpatrolled, so everyone goes 60+.
After court the prosecutor(who drove a ragged Malibu wagon and thought that your head exploded at over 70 mph) asked me if I had considered that the doctor's letter may have been forged. I told him that I really didn't care- if anyone put that much work into beating a ticket I thought that they deserved to be rewarded for their efforts.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive
Lots of dopes on the road here yesterday. It rained much of the day, so half the "drivers" decided 10 under was a good speed. It's fun going 20 in a 30 that everyone goes 40 on because it was probably a 30 in 1940. Then in my neighborhood there was a power outage, first one in years. I saw numerous "drivers" speed through non-operational stoplights. I guess they don't teach that one in newbie fresh off the boat driving school. Eventually, there were tons of cops on the road in the area, so complaints must have been called in. Didn't see anyone pulled over, though.
Another bad driver trait I noticed last night when I went to the movies in a large mall complex with many levels of underground parking - some "drivers" fly through those garages. I bet they have fender benders all the time in there.
Not in Kentucky. In fact, most of the prosecutors I had would do just about anything to keep from having to try a speeding case. The ones that went to trial usually involved defendants with an arrogant attitude who ticked off the cop, the prosecutor, or both. My usual prosecutor drove a Mustang GT- and she ran the living ^@%^ out of it all the time. During her tenure some people said that speeding wasn't a crime in our division of court...
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive
I was out for a short bit today - got behind a woman with a confused deathgrip on her CRV's steering wheel, going maybe 10 under, traffic zooming by. Then got behind an Odyssey that came to a stop on an arterial street with a posted speed of 30 (real world is higher), playing with a phone and looking lost.
Only once, AFAIK.
Mine: 1995 318ti Club Sport; 2020 C43; 2021 Sahara 4xe 1996 Speed Triple Challenge Cup Replica Wife's: 2015 X1 xDrive28i Son's: 2009 328i; 2018 330i xDrive
All those folk have get out of jail free cards. For a time my wife was friends with a well known policeman's wife. She joked about how the officers would laugh when she got stopped about how they were going to kid Erdenbeckham (not his real name ) about his wife speeding/making illegal left turn/usw when they saw him. She treated it as a joke.
The rest of us, the "little" people, have to be mistreated by the officers who stop us.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Around here there are a lot of trust fund jerks and investor visa criminals who speed around in high end cars - but I have yet to see one ever pulled over. Funny. Although to be fair, I do recall a few years ago, an 18 year old Russian kid in a late model M6 got nabbed for going 150+ on a bridge. But I am sure a lawyer solved the problem.
This state also has "Law Enforcement Memorial" special plates, which I think act like FOP stickers.
Driving today, got behind a white Suburban tapping the brakes at random times and going slow. Passed it on the right, and saw an ~80 year old woman driving it, with a white knuckled grip at 11 and 1. Insanity. Such a vehicle should require a license endorsement for any driver, and a driver of her demographic should require some kind of competency test, too.
Also saw quite a few phone yappers, one, a woman in an Accent going really slow and would pull up like a car length behind the stop line at a light. Also saw a guy in an G37 eating a cup of yogurt or something while "driving", and a big lack of turn signals from many "motorists".
The seasoned citizens I see drive slower, but generally do not have cell phones to their heads and DO NOT weave in their lanes or start to come towards the center line at me on two lane highways. No, when I observe an idiot driver starting to weave toward the center line, it is not a seasoned citizen. It is a younger driver. Dirty Harry once said in general that a man has got to know his limitations. Same is true of drivers using cell phones that, unfortunately, do not realize their limitations. These driver/cell phone users stupidly say that they can MULTI-TASK.
I do see affluent looking 60 somethings in highline cars who hold phones to their ear, as they likely are too inept to sync the bluetooth. Not the most responsible demographic either.
I'd easily argue grandma, who was driving slow, tapping her brakes, and had a death grip on the wheel, also was outside of her limits, and shouldn't have been driving that 6000lb menace.
I was a little irritated by the slow unstable Suburban, until I saw the driver - then I was just kind of wowed. My near-90 year old grandmother just stopped driving - she scraped a fender a few months ago and started doubting her abilities (although she rarely goes more than a couple miles from home and always on roads posted 40 or under). She's keeping her car for my uncle to drive her in, which I find amusing.
In my own case, I've ratcheted it down a notch, in the way that I drive, especially at night.
My mother is well into her 60s now, and hates to drive at night or in any kind of bad weather. I think she will slow dow gracefully enough.
What stops the race driver is the loss of corporate sponsorship as the driver always thinks he's invincible.
Incredible recklessness by drivers in this cell phone age. They are actually young children in mentality in terms of NOT understanding responsibility for their actions.
Maybe SHE knows what a "necker knob" is.
I went through a left turn lane on red, well, it probably turned red after I hit the crosswalk lines, as the untouchable oversalaried overpensioned "engineers" who control the signals decided that 4 cars through a sequence were fine...to hell with it, the 5th car is coming too. I shudder to think how much fuel and time is wasted at negligently maintained traffic controls.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
No cops around, no cameras, a red delay, and lots of traffic (so the oncoming cars would be stopped) made me go for it. It beats sitting there idling away because someone dropped the ball again.
What is there to argue? Well, only the fact that no violation was committed. It is legal to drive up to 65 MPH in CA as long as it is safe reasonable, and prudent to do so, barring a few special exclusions (school zones for instance). No such exclusions applied to this road or in my particular case.
The officer cannot simply issue BASIC SPEED LAW tickets simply because his laser readout shows a number higher than that posted on an adjacent aluminum sign. The law is clear, there must (in addition to exceeding the speed limit; note not the MAXIMUM speed limit) be something unreasonable, imprudent, and unsafe or hazardous happening. Law enforcement turning a blind eye to this fact will lead to disputes that a court should set right.
There was no point to speeding in my case because I believe the terms of speeding weren't met (for instance, the sign might be posted too low). I was merely trying to get from point A to point B. If I was trying to get from point A to B as fast as possible, I'd of been going MUCH faster than 50 MPH.
San Diego should save their own time by ceasing and desisting from trying to generate revenue with false accusations.
In my opinion, I was driving slow, I was just going to go get a late lunch at a nearby place, and I was in no hurry. Had I been in a hurry he might of had a case (65.1 MPH and up faces the maximum speed law instead of basic speed law).
Basically, it's hard work to pull over someone going 90+ MPH, but it's easy pickings getting someone going 15 over.
Since most speed limits are set about 15 under the real limit, I refer to it as non-speeders.
Same reason I won't see a local in a high end car pulled over for the same infraction committed by the driver of a worn older car from several towns over. One is capable of more fight than the other.
Most Pushy Award: Massachusetts
Most Inconsistent Award: New York
Most Clueless Award: Seattle Area (that's right, it's not a Washington-wide phenomenon!)
The unmitigated gall of that officer, to be positioned perfectly to laser cars at their peak speed!
It appears you were driving too fast to notice important objects alongside the roadway... like the police cruiser. I wonder if that could be considered (by a judge) as driving in an imprudent or unsafe manner?
So, if you were in a hurry you might tend to drive 65+ in a 35 zone? Say, let me know the next time you're driving in SD, I'll make a point not to visit there then.
I'm going on an 8 day road trip next week, and much of it will be spent east of the mountains. I'm looking forward to it.
Either way he was purposely hiding; if he wasn't, I'd of seen him. I wasn't going so fast that if he pulled in front of me, I couldn't stop. I had the whole right lane to my right, in addition to the width of the parked cars alongside the right lane (and no, the parked cars do not invade the space of the right lane). It is a very wide road; hence the safeness of my speed.
As to pulling in front of me; there aren't any side roads/side driveways, so what are the chances of that happening without it being done on purpose as well.
Did you hear about the motorcyclist that brake checked the SUV in Manhattan and got charged with reckless driving. Video camera's are swinging the tide against brake checkers and left lane campers. Soon they will all be facing reckless driving charges. No longer will insurance companies be able to say 100% of rear-end collisions are so black and white. That alone will probably scare the brake-checkers out there.
Speed increases the risk of a collision. Doubling speed quadruples stopping distance.
Where was the police bike parked and where did it come from if there aren't any side roads/driveways? Parked on someone's lawn? You really don't know because you didn't see it until it was behind you.
I have no idea what the brake checking incident in Manhattan has to do with your situation. Enjoy your court battle. You seem to revel in them.
Your comment about speed increasing the risk of a collision is falling on deaf ears. That statement makes no sense whatsoever. Have any studies or statistics to back that up? More collisions per vehicle mile at 60 MPH vs. 30 MPH for instance? I think you'll find the opposite is true (I know... streets more dangerous than freeways so unfair comparison, blah blah blah).
Say speed increases the risk of a collision is like saying 10 light years is a long time. Someone mentioned light-years are a distance measurement, not a time measurement. Speed is a velocity measurement, not a collision measurement. Do fast moving asteroids hit the Earth more often than slow moving asteroids, for instance?
Part of the problem is in the change of computers and flash drives over the years I think some of my Word Document files may have been lost in the shuffle, and I'm dreading having to re-write and redo things.
Yes, lane changes can avoid accidents sometime also. But sometimes that isn't possible, and braking is the way out.
It has nothing to do with asteroids. It has to do with basic physics. Which apparently you don't believe apply to you in your own little universe where you should be able to drive as fast as YOU want to drive.
Of course you are right that as speed increases it takes longer to stop a car (by the square of the increase of speed) and it increases the force of an impact if the accident cannot be avoided. And while you can steer around an object the faster you are going the harder it is to move a vehicle out of a straight line and increases the likelihood that such an action could cause an accident.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
You know, I can actually see some logic in that. Taken in isolation, no other factors considered, the shorter a time you are on the road, the less chance you have to be in an accident. Similar to, the less you fly, the less chance you have of being in an airplane accident.
Unfortunately, there ARE other factors to be considered. Otherwise we'd all drive at 100+ mph to spend as little time on the road as possible.
Right spot on. Great post.
>as speed increases
May I add that the distance covered during the reaction time also increases in addition to the stopping distance for the vehicle once the braking is invoked.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Also, you are less likely to have someone camping in your blind spot at 100 MPH than you are at 55 MPH; so therefore if you make a smooth lane change even if someone was in your blind spot by the time you complete the lane change your a safe distance in front of them.
The fact is, most accidents are not from objects suddenly darting out in front of you (especially in controlled access freeways where high speeds are more likely).
Also, an emergency avoidance maneuver could never be the cause of an accident, unless it was performed in a negligent manner. The person or object forcing the emergency maneuver in the first place is the cause of the accident, the speed is irrelevant. I don't cut off vehicles as a pedestrian going 10 MPH, nor 100 MPH. In either case, the pedestrian is the one flinging themselves in front of the car.
If I throw my body in front of a car going 10 MPH; I'll probably live.
If I throw my body in front of a car going 100 MPH I'll likely die.
Neither result changes the cause of the accident. I don't understand why this simple logic escapes some of you.
Then you can make that argument and we call all watch it on youtube.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
And you are less likely to rear-end someone going 55 MPH than you are at 100 MPH.
Also, an emergency avoidance maneuver could never be the cause of an accident, unless it was performed in a negligent manner.
You go right ahead and go on believing that but the fact of the matter is that the faster you are going the harder and more dangerous avoidance maneuvers are.
If I throw my body in front of a car going 10 MPH; I'll probably live.
That's because that at 10 MPH the driver can better stop or avoid you. Say you jump out 25 feet in front of the car the 10 MPH car has 1.7 seconds to react and can stop the car or turn in that distance. The 100 MPH drive has only 0.17 seconds before hitting you. That means that as soon as he realizes you are there he hit you. Even if his reactions were instantaneous he wouldn't be able to stop or avoid you.
I don't understand why this simple logic escapes you.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D