OT: Sens Lounge LXXVII | A Fridge Too Far Edition

[Upgrayedd]

About damn time

Make the speed limit 120 and enforce it to the letter instead of allowing some people to go over the limit sometime and some other time not so much

Just guessing, but i would assume $$$$ would play in to the speed limit decision. As much as we would all love to believe the people running cities/provinces/countries etc... are just good folk looking out for our best interest, i tend to believe otherwise. I would imagine alot of time and effort goes into figuring out what the best speed limits are to maximize profit as well as keep things generally safe. I know the federal government does this frequently, often times health and safety decsions are made with financials in mind, even if death is likely/possible.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

Crashes are more related to how far from the speed of the "flow" of traffic is going. Going faster or slower is dangerous. If the limit is raised to 120 and more people go 120 than the current limit the roads will be safer

Okay then, let's agree that variance is a significant factor. Trucks in Ontario (and, I presume, elsewhere in Canada) are governered so that they can't go above 105 km/h. If the limits are raised to 120, that means trucks will be physically incapable of going the limit which will create an even larger variance with an even heavier vehicle. And it's not a simple matter of changing the way the engines are rigged up, either — the governor is in place because of a law which would need to be repealed, and we all know how much government likes to drag its feet when changing law.

This is a classic case of "everyone breaks the law so let's change the law." To use an extreme example, that's like saying "everyone drives drunk so let's just make drunk driving legal."

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

Just guessing, but i would assume $$$$ would play in to the speed limit decision. As much as we would all love to believe the people running cities/provinces/countries etc... are just good folk looking out for our best interest, i tend to believe otherwise. I would imagine alot of time and effort goes into figuring out what the best speed limits are to maximize profit as well as keep things generally safe. I know the federal government does this frequently, often times health and safety decsions are made with financials in mind, even if death is likely/possible.

Also true. Speed limits are, by nature, a very political beast.

 

[Caeldan]

About damn time

Make the speed limit 120 and enforce it to the letter instead of allowing some people to go over the limit sometime and some other time not so much

Speed limits are actually generally enforced on an 80/20 type rule. You also typically get about a 10% leeway so they don't have to fight measurement uncertainty arguments.

Not impeding or being overly aggressive around the flow of traffic is what should be prevented. So people doing 100 in the far left lane when everyone else is doing 120 are actually more dangerous than the everyone else who is going 20 'over the limit'.

I've driven on sections of the autobahn in Germany and when you're following the flow, you're doing 140-160...I actually got up to near 200 in an Opel minivan with winters on without realizing it at one point because I was just cruising behind a Porsche Cayenne.

Over there though they do have variable limits and give you warning as they reduce them (due to volume or weather).

But yes, limits on the 401 should be adjusted because technology and volume of use has changed significantly since they were last set.

And there should be an enforced minimum speed (barring weather and exceptional circumstances (ie trying to get to a service center on a run flat) for the same reason there is a maximum limit.

 

[coladin]

A human body can also jump off a bridge. Just because there's a capacity to do it doesn't mean it should be done.

The problem is regulation. Is the speed limit 100? Great, then enforce it at 100. Is it 100 but the police are okay with letting people go 20 over since there are no demerits before that point? Great, then make the speed limit 120 and police it aggressively.

Regardless, the problem is enforcement. The 100km/hr limit isn't taken seriously because nobody forces people to take it seriously and legislation won't be respected SOLELY on the basis of it being legislation. People have to believe in it for it to make a difference.

Well, jump off a bridge or cruising along a sparse highway at high speed are two different things. In Europe people cruise well beyond 200 km/h safely.

I would imagine if they raised it to 120 there would be strict enforcement following 125...

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

Speed limits are actually generally enforced on an 80/20 type rule. You also typically get about a 10% leeway so they don't have to fight measurement uncertainty arguments.

Not impeding or being overly aggressive around the flow of traffic is what should be prevented. So people doing 100 in the far left lane when everyone else is doing 120 are actually more dangerous than the everyone else who is going 20 'over the limit'.

I've driven on sections of the autobahn in Germany and when you're following the flow, you're doing 140-160...I actually got up to near 200 in an Opel minivan with winters on without realizing it at one point because I was just cruising behind a Porsche Cayenne.

Over there though they do have variable limits and give you warning as they reduce them (due to volume or weather).

But yes, limits on the 401 should be adjusted because technology and volume of use has changed significantly since they were last set.

And there should be an enforced minimum speed (barring weather and exceptional circumstances (ie trying to get to a service center on a run flat) for the same reason there is a maximum limit.

Technologies have changed for the better (anti-lock braking, for example) but there are new problems now that weren't there years ago (texting behind the wheel, for example.) A slow reaction is bad enough at normal speeds, but gets amplified that much more at higher speeds.

And the idea of changing speed limits, while a nice thought, is somewhat flawed. Signage is taken a lot less seriously when it's not consistent and permanent. The speed limit on a given day may be 80km/h to account for adverse conditions, but it's not uncommon in places in the US that have this for drivers to keep going at the 'usual' posted speed. It's idealistic but the implementation leaves something to be desired.

 

[Do Make Say Think]

This is a classic case of "everyone breaks the law so let's change the law." To use an extreme example, that's like saying "everyone drives drunk so let's just make drunk driving legal."

Not only does everyone break the law, it's also not enforced and that's the problem

Either up the limit to 120 or enforce 100

 

[coladin]

Okay then, let's agree that variance is a significant factor. Trucks in Ontario (and, I presume, elsewhere in Canada) are governered so that they can't go above 105 km/h. If the limits are raised to 120, that means trucks will be physically incapable of going the limit which will create an even larger variance with an even heavier vehicle. And it's not a simple matter of changing the way the engines are rigged up, either — the governor is in place because of a law which would need to be repealed, and we all know how much government likes to drag its feet when changing law.

This is a classic case of "everyone breaks the law so let's change the law." To use an extreme example, that's like saying "everyone drives drunk so let's just make drunk driving legal."

Or pot smoking...

I find that fuel consumption-wise, if I go 123km/h or thereabouts not only will arrive at my destination 23% faster than the going the speed limit, but I can get away with not refueling. I have gone to Toronto in 3 hours but had to stop for fuel . If I went a little slower probably would have been quicker by stopping less.

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

Not only does everyone break the law, it's also not enforced and that's the problem

Either up the limit to 120 or enforce 100

The problem is regulation. Is the speed limit 100? Great, then enforce it at 100. Is it 100 but the police are okay with letting people go 20 over since there are no demerits before that point? Great, then make the speed limit 120 and police it aggressively.

Looks like we're on the same page.

Or pot smoking...

I find that fuel consumption-wise, if I go 123km/h or thereabouts not only will arrive at my destination 23% faster than the going the speed limit, but I can get away with not refueling. I have gone to Toronto in 3 hours but had to stop for fuel . If I went a little slower probably would have been quicker by stopping less.

Pot smoking is nowhere near an apt analogy. In the case of raising speed limits, the argument is that speed differential is the main cause of accidents. So in this case, it's the people who follow the law that are supposedly causing the problems. I don't see anyone saying that those who don't smoke pot are causing problems.

 

[MainDotC]

Look if you raise the speed limit then it will take me less time to get to CTC. I expect your support in this matter.

 

[coladin]

Looks like we're on the same page.

Pot smoking is nowhere near an apt analogy. In the case of raising speed limits, the argument is that speed differential is the main cause of accidents. So in this case, it's the people who follow the law that are supposedly causing the problems. I don't see anyone saying that those who don't smoke pot are causing problems.

It was this that I was responding to in reference to my smoking pot comparison:

This is a classic case of "everyone breaks the law so let's change the law." To use an extreme example, that's like saying "everyone drives drunk so let's just make drunk driving legal."

 

[YouGotAStuGoing]

It was this that I was responding to in reference to my smoking pot comparison:

This is a classic case of "everyone breaks the law so let's change the law." To use an extreme example, that's like saying "everyone drives drunk so let's just make drunk driving legal."

Yup, I got that. But if you're driving over the speed limit, you're breaking the law and making it more dangerous for others to use the road legally. Same with drinking and driving. Not so much with pot smoking, unless it's done while or before driving. But that becomes a separate issue

 

[MakeOttawaGreatAgain]

Anybody else think that news stations are getting into too much detail about Robin Williams' dead body?

A side note: do people really deserve to know this much stuff about a person's personal life off stage?

 

[coladin]

Anybody else think that news stations are getting into too much detail about Roib Williams' dead body?

A side note: do people really deserve to know this much stuff about a person's personal life off stage?

Yes. I think as tragic as this is, and I count myself a huge fan of his, too much sensationalism that trumps major tragedies going on in the world

 

[MainDotC]

Anybody else think that news stations are getting into too much detail about Roib Williams' dead body?

A side note: do people really deserve to know this much stuff about a person's personal life off stage?

They know that much because most people will pay to hear it, and consumerism is all that matters.

 

[Larionov]

I could have done without getting all the grim details, definitely. On the other hand, at least it stops all of the speculation, which usually grows more vivid at each story telling...

 

[Caeldan]

On the speeding topic. While there is a posted maximum limit, enforcement is generally done based on the 85th percentile speed. This is because yes, variance is the problem.

And having trucks going slower is fine, so long as they're enforced having to stay in the right lane. The issue with trucks is the ones that go into the third lane because they're doing 105 and want to get around someone who is doing 104 just as they start climbing a hill, while being loaded.

Really one thing that needs to be better enforced is people using the middle and third lanes as driving lanes and not actually moving out of the way of people going faster than them (regardless of what speed the person behind is going, if you have room to move over - do it... you are creating a traffic obstruction otherwise). No, 'I'm doing 120, so they should too!' is not a valid reason to obstruct the lane and just forces people to undertake, which is significantly riskier. Any lane that is not the far right lane is technically a 'passing' lane unless marked otherwise (ie an HOV lane).

 

[saskriders]

An hour till the airport.

See you in a couple weeks HF, though I probably will make a couple posts

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Have fun and live it up!

Travelling is awesome, I miss it terribly

 

[Caeldan]

Have fun and live it up!

Travelling is awesome, I miss it terribly

Agreed! Trip to Brazil later this year for me though (reminds me, I still need to get my tourist visa dealt with).

 

[Do Make Say Think]

Turning 30 has had me realize I need to do a whole lot more of what I enjoy doing because the party is almost over

 

[StefanW]

Turning 30 has had me realize I need to do a whole lot more of what I enjoy doing because the party is almost over

My 30th was the only birthday in my entire life when I actually felt different afterwards.

 

[StefanW]

Re speeding: not entirely on topic, but one of the toughest things to get used to after moving here from Wpg is that highway speeds seem set at 80 through a lot of rural Ontario. Highway speeds in Man are almost always set at 100.

 

[FolignoQuantumLeap]

I booked a place in Brooklyn for a few days near the end of August. Got some tickets to the Yankees game that weekend and we're planning on seeing Aladdin on Broadway. I'll have knocked off 3 ball parks from my quest to see a game at every MLB venue this summer and 4 in the last 12 months! I think Pennsylvania will be next on my list for next summer.

 

[Mr Invidious]

I just ate 7/8ths of a large pizza in 30 minutes along with 4 cans of Diet Coke.

Ah, Summer. You're too good to me.