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
True, but additionally, lower speeds and careful driving result in less claims for them to pay out. So they win both ways.
I would like to see some supporting documentation on this.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Insurance companies give gifts to police agencies, yes?
Police agencies go on ticket writing crusades which even they don't pretend are related to safety, yes?
Drivers with tickets pay higher rates, even if those tickets are not linked to legitimately unsafe driving, yes?
Done
The insurance cabal must have been beside itself in the 55mph days, bonuses everywhere I am sure.
Ah, those shady insurance companies!!
:P
But seriously, when speed enforcement can't be linked to safety, when LEOs aren't even pretending it is about safety, and insurance companies give LEOs gifts, one has to admit it doesn't look entirely kosher.
Guaranteed, the BMW will receive 100% of the blame for this.
Second place goes to a middle aged [non-permissible content removed] in a Saturn Sky with a dopey spoiler who was policing the left lane and pacing the car beside him...sometimes I wish I lived in LA or Miami so these types would be dealt with as they probably deserve.
When I see grossly underposted roads, speed traps at the bottom of hills with no development in the area, random speed changes, etc, it sure doesn't look like safety to me. Cash grab cash grab, it's a cash grab. The overpaid underworked irresponsible traffic engineers and LEOs have the same employer, too.
Not knowing how long it had been since the apparent LLC passed his last car, I'd say there's plenty of blame to go around.
Chalk it up to dueling [non-permissible content removed]... Gotta feel for the innocent bystander in the center lane that got wrecked in this road rage battle.
You said you were an out-of-towner. How do you know what goes on in that area on a daily basis? Just because you thought it was safe to ignore the speed limit by 33% doesn't mean that there's no safety consideration for that speed limit... which a patrol could be sent out to emphasize. The fact that you got off without a ticket after checking your SAFE driving record tells me this stop was more about safety than revenue.
After two months in Boot Camp where I was walking everywhere and was never in a car I went home. The next day I got in my car to go somewhere and got on the interstate, I got up to what i thought was a fast speed but everyone was flying past me. I looked at my speedometer and I was only doing 50 MPH. That pretty much stuck with me as we really don't recognize the speeds we are truly going.
In short I think that most peoples assumptions of "safe speeds" are exaggerated. So when someone states that they were speeding but driving a safe speed odds are that they really weren't.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
I have issues with a lot in your post but arguing them would do no good, but I will address this one. In what state is making a left turn on red from a two way street legal? In those cases you have to make that turn across oncoming traffic.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
But at the same time, who defines what is the optimum amount of safety? If safety was the true name of the game, no limits would be above 40 or so - where most modern cars can crash and the odds of serious injury aren't huge, if the driver is evolved enough to buckle up anyway. Speeding violations would also be more serious, rather than numbers that are easy to pay and walk away from (hence creating greater cash flow). Like in my recent example, I am not going to slow down, I am just going to be more alert. I'm embarrassed that I somehow didn't notice a hidden CV, not that I was going 10 over on an empty wide downhill road.
No offense but I will take those who have done some serious studies in this area and not someone on the internet claiming that those others are wrong.
If safety was the true name of the game, no limits would be above 40 or so
There is a tradeoff between safety and time considerations. But you also have to take into account the road you are on too.
Like in my recent example, I am not going to slow down, I am just going to be more alert.
Then when you are caught take you medicen and don't complain about it and claim you know better.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Indeed, a tradeoff between safety and time. But what is the optimum, who determines it, and what should happen to them when they play an unethical game in the name of dollars? A huge amount of speed limits were higher when my grandfather was about my age than now, in his big oversprung poorly braked zero safety equipment car. Why was that road I was on posted at 30, which is the same for the congested streets in the boomburb where I live, with 50x the vehicle and 100x the pedestrian traffic, not to mention markedly lower lines of sight. Arbitrary, just like local traffic light sequencing.
I've never been "caught" before, heading for 20 years of driving, there's a good chance it will be as long until it happens again. I do know better, or I should say, I know what is better, and I will complain as I please - you have no recourse :P
The underlying assumption: if anything ABOVE ZERO (accidents injuries and fatalites) is not acceptable, the authorities can simply ban all motorized travel.
Like you say, speed differentials are scary but they aren't a huge risk in that region anyway, as the driver in the slow vehicle has been taught to use his brain and not camp out in the left lane, and the driver of the fast vehicle has been taught to be alert.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Are you aware that prior to cars people got ticketed for riding horses to fast?
When he was President General Grant was given a $20 ticket for riding a horse to fast through Washington.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D
Ah, Fintail the Mindreader at it again. Not only can you tell what people are thinking, but you know what they SHOULD have said instead of what they did say. And if they don't think what you think they should be thinking or say what you think they should have said, it doesn't matter... just means they are wrong. Or as in this case, you didn't actually detect any hint in the officer's voice wrt "emphasis patrol"... but you ALMOST did (as in, you really wish you had). That slams the door shut on the case right there, doesn't it... almost detecting something in someone's voice to back your feeling about what they were thinking, or should have said.
And of course, the fact you grew up in an area (how many years ago?) means the area could not have changed any in that time. We all know population density, traffic patterns, etc. haven't changed at all in the USA for, what, 40, maybe 50 years?
Why should a police officer be jerky towards a speeder? There's no cause for that... unless the speeder is "jerky" towards the officer.
Not all of us are oldsters. I lived in this place a mere 15 years ago, and it certainly hasn't grown since. It was a wide open road then and it is now.
You can't tell me that the law enforcement community, for many reasons both understandable and not, can sometimes come off arrogant and abusive to the people they "protect". You know as well as I do that this is a common occurrence. Had I actually been a danger, it wouldn't have been unreasonable for the officer to be stern and give a little lecture. But he didn't - as there was no safety issue at play.
End of story. Just keep the Sonata in the right lane and let the world go by :P
RCW 46.61.055 (3)(a):
(a) Vehicle operators facing a steady circular red signal alone shall stop at a clearly marked stop line, but if none, before entering the crosswalk on the near side of the intersection or, if none, then before entering the intersection control area and shall remain standing until an indication to proceed is shown. However, the vehicle operators facing a steady circular red signal may, after stopping proceed to make a right turn from a one-way or two-way street into a two-way street or into a one-way street carrying traffic in the direction of the right turn; or a left turn from a one-way or two-way street into a one-way street carrying traffic in the direction of the left turn; unless a sign posted by competent authority prohibits such movement. Vehicle operators planning to make such turns shall remain stopped to allow other vehicles lawfully within or approaching the intersection control area to complete their movements. Vehicle operators planning to make such turns shall also remain stopped for pedestrians who are lawfully within the intersection control area as required by RCW 46.61.235(1).
I expect there are cases where a LEO comes off arrogant and abusive. I haven't had personal experience with any LEO acting in that fashion. But I have had personal experience with DRIVERS acting in that fashion.
Speaking of the world going by... just today I made a 200 mile trip in my Sentra (Sonata is my wife's car, I don't drive it that much). Kept the cruise to the right side of the mark on the speedometer denoting the speed limit (70). Many cars passed me. I passed quite a few vehicles also. But there was a big traffic jam, about 5 miles long, later in my trip, and the signs said "use both lanes and merge at the end". So I did, and decided to use the left lane, since both were crawling along. But the left lane crawled along a little faster than the right lane, so I passed many of the cars that had whizzed by me earlier. At the merge point, I was impressed how it was done almost without exception in a courteous manner, despite folks being tied up for nearly an hour in very hot weather.
There were also a few drivers who passed me that I passed later, because their cars were on the shoulder... in front of a DPS cruiser. :shades:
Do you live in an area where people actually know how to zipper? They sure don't here. Second worst thing to merging in the PNW is driving where a lane ends.
I am sure those you saw pulled over were nabbed for safety issues and not for revenue generation.
Now the other interesting thing about going 40-45 in a 80-95 flow of traffic with 65 mph speed limits: there are literally THOUSANDS of cars pass you. So I guess how one feels about that is pretty individual. For me, it was a strange feeling of gee, I wish I had a TV, sound system, internet, cell phone AND microwaving my lunch: ALL going on at the same time and another strange feeling of being in a cocoon.
There are a number of variables involved. Driver's age and experience come to mind. Also, types of vehicles. Speed limits have to cover a broad range of vehicles on the road. Anything from a Porsche 911 to Impala sedans, big suvs such as Suburbans, pickups, etc.
A 30-year old who has autocross experience, a clean driving record and drives a recent BMW 3 Series no doubt is more alert, capable and has more vehicle capabilies then another person aged 70 driving a 10 year old Suburban. So, how do you set speed limits to safely accomodate such great variabilities? Unfortunately, it is the lowest common denominator.
Can't have speeds in US as on Autobahn. Speed differentials would be a huge problem on interstates. LeMans race France, which has varying classes of race cars with great differentials in max speeds, sometimes has huge crashes because of that. Happened last June.
We have huge crashes anyway, no matter the speed differentials. Autobahns are still less murderous than our decaying roads, but the drivers on them are better too.
The general rule of thumb is one can proceed through the intersection if it is not necessary to cross a lane of traffic. In this regard, when at an intersection with multiple right turn lanes, making a right turn on red from any lane other than the right-most lane is not permitted.
Conversely, when at a T intersection, traffic in the right most lane crossing the "top of the T" can proceed through after stopping on red the same as if it were a right turn.
Then this morning in town, had 2 people take free turns and pull out directly in front of me as I was going ~35. Pissed off some idiot woman in a Focus wagon who didn't like me coming up so fast as she went 30 in a 35 after pulling in front of me, and she actually waved her hands and honked. Really, this should be grounds to send someone to a public whipping.
This really is a lowest common denominator society, based on oblivious action and no thought. I really need a nice German driving vacation.
that is laughable, but with the way law enforcement runs traffic enforcement, it is certainly more collusion and less communication. I challenge the notion that a black record will cost the insurance company more than a clean record. I think that is ILLOGICAL. I would like some data that supports your logic, and the insurance industries.
Law enforcement employees enjoy lower insurance rates, but is that because they get in less accidents, or because they get less tickets? It is the latter, thanks to "professsional courtesy" when a fireman/probation/police officer is pulled over, they get off with warnings.
Therefore, I submit that citations have little if anything to do with "driver" record. They have more to do with "bad" luck, and being "picked on."
Dirtier! Insurance is the dirtiest of them all. I have more respect for low lifes, thieves, criminals, drug dealers and the like then I do for "law abiding" insurance companies.
Many point to the banks as the symbol of greed that caused the current recession/depression. I would like to point out that pretty much every bank out there is in the "insurance" business in one way or another.
A blatantly false statement.
1) Lower speeds have nothing to do with careful drivng, they are unrelated and irrelevant.
2) Lower speeds do not reduce claims/accidents.
3) The only way the insurance company wins is by raising rates, which false tickets allow them to do.
the motivation of the insurance companies wasn't to keep people alive so that they could continue to pay premiums, the motivation was to keep people alive so they wouldn't have to pay out death liability claims!
The fact that if he had looked up my record he'd of wrote the ticket despite my near pristine driving record tells me it was about revenue, because he'd of found something like this (depending how far it goes back):
1999 - case dismissed
2002 - case dismissed
2005 - found NOT guilty
2008 - found not guilty count 2, guilty count 1
2011 - traffic school (supposedly not on record)
I think he'd of wrote me the ticket simply for having "fought" so many tickets in court! :P :sick:
Most engineers/scientists have some code of ethics and morals. Unlike our politicians who don't.
Most undefendable speed limits set too low are set that way by government councils and politicians, not by traffic engineers or studies! In fact, there are reports of governmental bodies looking to get the authority to disobey "traffic engineering reports" and set speed limits EVEN Lower in special cases (they say for safeties sake, but I believe it to be special cases of generating extra revenue only).
there's all kinds of problems with your logic, where to start? First, if someone is USED to a certain speed then that means they have been driving it regularly, comfortably, for an extended period of time without incident. Seems like a pretty good definition of a SAFE speed to me!
Why would that speed suddenly be unsafe just because they spend 2 weeks or 2 months walking around at 3 to 5 MPH?
If I drive everywhere on the freeway for 2 months at 100MPH, and get away with it, will 100 MPH suddenly seem slow to me? If your argument holds true in the reverse, then this must be true. Shoot, after 2 months of that, I should be able to drive comfortably at 120 MPH then! I'll have to go 130 to seem fast!
think about it, it makes perfect safety sense!
Oncoming traffic is the traffic you state that you have to worry about or yield to. But wait a minute, if the light is red, you don't have to worry about oncoming traffic at all (other than a red light runner)! The only traffic you have to worry about and yield to is the traffic coming from the right onto the same one way street you are turning into with your left turn.
This is why the CA law is flawed, you should be allowed to make a left onto a one-way street regardless of whether the street you are on is one way or two-way.
That's nonsense! Speed limits should be exactly that, the LIMIT (upper limit) of safe speeds, the HIGHEST common denominator. The 70 year old in the Suburban should be smart enough to know that the limit is too high for his 10 year old SUV with bald tires in the rain.
Speed differentials are not a problem if drivers exhibit driving knowledge and lane courtesy fundamentals.
will 100 MPH suddenly seem slow to me?....Shoot, after 2 months of that, I should be able to drive comfortably at 120 MPH then! I'll have to go 130 to seem fast!
I doubt 100 will seem "slow," but it will not give the sensation of speed that it did during the first few forays into the triple digits. Indeed, you might need to drive 130 to "seem fast," but you'll need the same distance to stop as you did the very first time you drove the car that speed.
That violates basic laws of physics. The faster one goes the more force one exerts by the square of the increase. In other words a car traveling at 80 MPH exerts 4 times as much energy as if it were going at 40 MPH. So yes faster speeds would result in more damage and therefor bigger claims.
2011 Hyundai Sonata, 2014 BMW 428i convertible, 2015 Honda CTX700D