Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/22 for details.
Options
Comments
Does this mean you are going to Indianapolis?
If so,
I believe you asked earlier about things to see: National Museum of the Air Force near Dayton Ohio.
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
Anyone chasing someone at speeds much over 115 MPH needs to have their heads examined quickly by a Psychiatrist. The CHP has no business creating ultra high speed chases because they are dangerous and are complete lunacy. The only reason the guy is going over that speed is because the CHP is chasing him!!! I've never seen anyone going much over 115 for any sustained period of time (maybe just for a mile or 2).
My brother's friend is a CHP officer, and he has said he has made the wise choice and let's a lot of people get away when and if they choose to go nuts and go well over 100 miles per hour to get away. He does not pursue in that situation and risk his life along with other innocent people.
Only the caveman CHP officer, with his EGO bigger than the STATE of CA, offers a chase in that situation. He let's his adrenaline and ego get the best of him, and makes some ultra poor decisions that make no sense. Sometimes such poor decisions lead to killing yourself, and it happens.
Sometimes it leads to killing others. CHP, please don't persue people going over 115 MPH! That is crazy!
We were in a traffic jam the other day, and the guy behind us HIT us going about 3 MPH because he was more interested in something apart from driving. Grr....
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
It's an epidemic here, too. Yesterday I had to get around a woman in an Exploder who was holding a phone and going about 5 under as traffic streamed by. I had to punch it a little to get by in the gap, and she honked. That scared me or something, because my foot slipped and tapped the brake. My bad
Oh yeah, another winner I remember yesterday...driver who I won't categorize in a white MDX who was running alongside a cop. The cop was going well under the limit (nowhere to go, all day to get there, I guess), and this lame soft roader wouldn't dare pass or even get neck and neck. There were several cars behind them and I suspect the cop was laughing his butt off.
How about the officer's just enforce all of the laws equally (I think there's 40,000 Vehicle Codes to choose from in CA), why such a strong concentration on speeding when speeding has been shown to NEVER be the main cause of any acccident, ever, in history, now, or in the future. Go ahead and review accident reports, speeding is never determined to be the main cause of an accident (unless it was with the caveat, going too fast for conditions, like when it's raining or snowing, or it's a 120 degree turn some idiot tries to do in a Camry at 90 MPH.). So why can't they enforce left lane camping. I've never seen anyone pulled over for impeding faster traffic. It is the law in CA, slower traffic must move over to the right. You must yield to faster traffic... Left lane camping and blocking and slowing is illegal; yet, you never see it enforced.
The reason is simple, it's easier to generate revenue with speeding tickets. It's also because most CHP officer's are good for nothing, lazy bums, that sit on their butts all day eating donuts and reading a newspaper or magazine while parked behind a hiding spot and when their RADAR beeps cause someone is going over a predetermined manually set speed, they look up and decide to "do something." They are just too darn lazy to actually do a good job enforcing ALL of the laws and vehicle codes.
The way the police enforce traffic hass nothing to do with safety when a ticket is issued.
Yes, people want to avoid getting tickets, but that only works when a cop is within visual range. In answer to your question of how many people, knowing the police would ignore their driving, would press the pedal to the metal is easy, less than .1%. That's less than 1/10th of 1 percent of people and drivers (virtually no one will do that).
The truth is most everyone drives at a speed they are comfortable and safe driving regardless of what the two numbers on the aluminum sign say. That is why the flow of traffic never corresponds to the speed limit (at least in CA).
Not everyone in Germany drives with the pedal to the metal just because they can. The same would apply here. I believe most people would cruise straight portions of freeways and highways in the 80-95 MPH range, and our roads would be safer for it and because of it. If everyone goes faster, everyone is less bored, less easily distracted, less likely to text or talk on the cell phone, or do makeup, or shave, or whatever else people get distracted by. Funny, when I see a car speed by me (and they must be really going fast if they do that to me usually), I never have seen them talking on the phone. When I see someone impeding traffic and driving too slow, it's common they are on the phone or eating or drinking or something else.
One small example: Anybody can do this, but when I look At 10/25/50/75/100 cars (yes, most driving IS boring), it would seem that upwards of 75% of them do NOT use turn signals when turning and or changing lanes. Needless to say that constitues the VAST majority. If President Obama got 75% of the popular vote (like the non signaling percentages) the pundits and folks would agree would be a literal LANDSLIDE. He would also have a "MANDATE". As you say, signalling is required by the law and think about it, logically it makes sense. If that person is changing lanes to YOUR lane, you really should know BEFORE. You can then take a series of actions. I HATE being forced into this one : Judas Priest, I hope I can make a 75 ft slow down in 50 ft. So at the very least, a failure to signal does generate revenue. It also is an ignored gold mine of revenue. But much more than that, it is first and foremost a SAFETY issue and secondarily a courtesy issue.
Actually the statistics do show the accidents and fatalities RATES are the lowest in the recorded history and most folks do go the 80-95 mph on the separated free ways !! They are the most cars there has ever been, the most drivers, the most trips, the average yearly mileage per driver is higher, yet the rates are at the LOWEST !!!
Oh, I dislike both, or all. I complain about the politicians that stand by and let 12th Century laws that have no place in current life still stand and still stay on the books. I complain to the police seargeants that instruct their officers to be lazy and generate revenue. I complain to the officer's on the street who should have a higher moral compass and do the right thing for a change.
From my experience, cops (CHP , city/sheriff) are all power -hungry power -crazed (since they've been given some power) ego-maniacs who go around enjoying the power of being able to generate revenue for their department.
Actually, studies, research, and facts indicate and show that the faster drivers are at decreased risk of an accident. It's the slower drivers that are getting in all the accidents (or most of them). Therefore speed is not correlated to increased risk of an accident in any manner or form. In fact, going faster makes you safer statistics show.
Therefore, the better solution to using technology to ignore the constitution and violate all kinds of constitutional laws in order to generate revenue enforcing traffic laws like speeding (since it isn't safety related) is to not enforce it at all. Why not just stop buying radar guns, wasting time waiting for speeders, wasting training time on the radar guns. By the way, the technology (video cameras, still cameras flash bulbs, ect) costs money too!
Bottomline I'd rather have LESS distracted drivers out there period. Having everyone drive at a non-drowsying faster rate would accomplish that EXTREMELY effectively. Raising speed limits will reduce distracted driving, which is the better course of action.
Actually, it's not the speed of the car or the fact it went out of control (which is an assumption, maybe they went straight into the pole with full control because they were texting and their eyes were down), but it's the fact they tried to occupy the same space at the same time with different matter (the wood of the pole and their own body and car), which is a physical impossibility).
I say better to avoid the pole, at any speed.
I could drive past that telephone pole 1,000 times and never hit it at 80 or 100 MPH. Therefore my chance of dying is 0%.
You could talk on your cell phone or text going 25 MPH, and you might hit that telephone pole 10 times out of 1,000 trips. Your chances of dying are higher at 25 MPH in this scenario.
And are we just talking about highways? So it's safer going 50mph in a residential neighborhood?
It's funny how some folks use the constitution "crutch" to justify breaking laws enacted by a democratically elected congress
Now if you were driving 25mph, you could drive by that pole a million times and never hit it, so now your chance of dying is 0.0001%, so you're safer by driving slower.
But you're right, driving with a cell phone is dangerous...more dangerous than speeding on a straight, flat road with no other cars around. So tell me how do you enforce cell phone usage while driving?
You just answered your own question: enforce all 40,000 traffic laws equally? Do you REALLY want them to do that? Really?? Think about what that would mean. And do you want to PAY to have enough officers to do that? No, I didn't think so.
Then you also contradicted your assertion that speeding has NEVER (caps yours) been the main cause of any accident. You provided several examples where it IS the main cause of accidents.
Speeding is enforced because it IS a main contributor to accidents, and because it's one of the traffic laws that's realistic to enforce with relatively small numbers of officers. If you want the police to enforce all traffic laws equally, I suggest you be the first to ante up for the numbers of officers needed to do that.
You are not me but I respect your right to your opinion. And unless you did my job please don't judge me.
(At least try to get a first hand opinion from a person that works in the field and not third hand info from a friend of yours.)
Good luck and stay safe.
jensad
Of course, don't film a cop, in some places, that alone will get you arrested.
Show me the money, the whole ideal boils down to that.
Then they become LEO's and are power hungry maniacs with a gun to boot. I thought about joining the CHP (since you can't beat them, join them) right! Good pay, but I don't like the part where I have to actually get my life in danger for the real bozo's and knuckle heads out there. However, I could do a real good job of traffic enforcement and show them how it SHOULD be done.
LMAOF :P
2014 Malibu 2LT, 2015 Cruze 2LT,
If I was a traffic cop, I'd be stopping people for obliviousness and idiocy, but I would probably get demoted to meter maid (butler?) once the revenue streams didn't add up.
They don't hide out well though, so I have yet to be nabbed. If they are just going to cherry pick the inattentive, it could be worse.
You reminded me of something. One day I was patroling a freeway and I stopped this car for 80 in a 65 zone. He gave me a Illinois license and on the back was a $ 20 bill. (this was when $ 20 was one week's food money.)
I gave him back his $ 20 and had him sign the ticket for 80 and he told me that it was common practice to have a bill in order to avoid a citation.
And I know this may irritate a reader who is in law enforcement but folks there are some people in law enforcement that should be in jail and there are some drivers that need to be there too.
I am not holding myself out to be an angel with wings. But I was a middle of the group CHP officer and there were "bad" cops and "good cops" in every state just as there are viloators too. I guess bribery is still common (and I hate to say it, even in our Government).
Good luck to all and I hope all have had an excellent day.
jensad
I would like to see that research and studies. The ones I have seen show that increasing speeds increase the risk of an accident.
As speed increases the distance traveled in your reaction time increases, the force the car exerts increases (a car going 80 MPH takes 4 times as far to stop than a car going 40 MPH), the less manuvarability the car has and the greater the likely hood of losing control.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I would seriously question that. A distracted driver at 50 MPH will still be a distracted driver at 70.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
The cop would hand you back your license sans the 20 dollar bill and let you go.
A guy I knew moved form NY to CA and after a time got pulled over.
The CHP guy asked him " What is the 20 dollar bill for!!"
" Well, you know...it's for you".
Realizing he was from NY and being aware that these things were common there he let him go with a stern warning.
Maybe that was you?
I would think the number of violators would generate enough revenue that our taxes wouldn't be increased to cover the payroll. More than enough inattentive drivers to foot the bill.
And even if there were, it would create such a gridlock in the courts that the entire system would come to a complete stop.
You really want to ticket anybody and everybody for every time they go speed limit +1 mph? You really want to risk a ticket for every time you didn't come to a complete stop? Didn't signal that lane change? Took the wrong lane after that free right turn?
None of our driving is that good.
It's all about driving in such a way that is perhaps not to the letter of the law, is nevertheless safe, but doesn't draw undue attention to your driving.
There is a suburb of Chicago that is doing their best to do just that.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
LEO's pick out the obvious, the glaring violators. Hopefully, seeing them roadside with a patrol vehicle behind them serves as at least some sort of reminder or deterrent. Imperfect, it is.
Yesterday I was heading on a 4/5 lane freeway in the number4 lane (slow lane for the left lane camper buffs) I notice (in the rear view mirrors) coming up very fast in the #1 lane, were a ZOUPED up motorbike followed by a CHP (California Highway Patrol) car. What was of course odd was they seemed literally GLUED to each other. As they both went by me (others also) the CHP lit up some array of its Xmas tree lighting. BOTH pulled over to the LEFT side emergency lane of the #1 lane, aka CHP lights a blazing.
Now if you talk to ANY motorbike rider, they will talk about the fact the riders are almost factorially more aware of their surroundings than ANY car driver. To quote a country western comic on cable TV, you can't fix stupid !!??
Reminds me of a joke a friend of mine wanted to pull at the Canadian border...when asked if there was anything to declare, reply: "there's a suitcase in the trunk full of small unmarked bills...or maybe there isn't, if you know what I mean"
I am sure you were one of the good guys. The bad guys are a minority, and are probably not literate enough to read or type. For better or worse, I believe a greater percentage of criminal civilians are put in prison than criminal cops.
When speed laws can be proven to be optimal and not arbitrary, then they can be enforced strictly. Until then, it's a cash grab.
How they ever passed their driving test is beyond me.
Not that it is particularly difficult, at least in NJ. I think if I taught my daughter to parallel park, and never took her on a road, she could still probably pass first try.
2020 Acura RDX tech SH-AWD, 2023 Maverick hybrid Lariat luxury package.
To think they wouldn't still have to take a drivers exam is beyond frightening.
My stepdad was a Driver's License Examiner in California for 30 years and for the life of me I don't know how he did it.
You couldn't pay me enough to do that job. Especially around here wioth all of the "new arrivals" who are seriously dangerous behind the wheel.
Except we all know you will accept no "proof" from anyone other than yourself, so that's an impossible situation.
How about this? Instead of fines, all speeding violations (if proven guilty) result in revocation of license (on escalating scale, e.g. first offense gets probation, 2nd gets 1 year revocation, 3rd gets 5 years, 4th is permanent). Then there's no "cash grab".
I bet that would be REAL popular. (not)