View Single Post
  #5  
Old December 6th 04, 06:28 AM
Big Bill
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

On Sun, 05 Dec 2004 17:43:07 -0800, "C.H." >
wrote:

>On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 11:18:11 -0700, Big Bill wrote:
>
>> The US Interstates d
>> and the Autobahn differ in far more than merely trhe speed limits.
>> The entire philosophy regarding driving is very different in the two
>> places.

>
>That doesn't change the fact that speeds beyond 75mph are not by default
>unsafe. There are US-Freeways where even 65 can be dangerous, others would
>allow much higher speeds without problems, and _that_ is why I told
>Anthony that his answer is bull****.


Yes, you're right. Speed in and of itself is not unsafe. I never said
it is.
But the difference between the crash rates is *not* because of the
different speed limits.
>
>> In the US, driving is seen as a necessity (almost a right) and is
>> treated as such; thus, we have much lower licensing requirements as
>> well as much laxer enforcement of driving rules than the Germans have.

>
>In Germany driving is also seen as a necessity and the licensing rules are
>not nearly strict enough, but that also does not make driving faster than
>75 by default unsafe.


The licensing and enforcement are indeed tougher than here in the US.
"Not strict enough" means nothing in this case.
>
>> The result is the fact that the two road systems have a very different
>> population of drivers. The speed laws are one method of reflecting
>> that fact.

>
>The speed laws are mainly reflecting the fact that most states (like the
>'Bundeslaender' in Germany) are suffering from a distinct lack of funds
>caused by overspending of politicians.


How do you come to this conclusion? >
>> The fact that there are, in the US, some drivers who are very safe at,
>> say, 90 mph does not negate the fact that they share the roads with
>> people who do not understand what those lines in the middle of the
>> road are for.

>
>If a driver is safe at 90mph he knows to adjust his speed to conditions
>and thus does not drive 90mph where the conditions, including other
>motorists, do not allow 90mph.


Which is pretty much everywhere.
Plus, your idea allows the individual drivers to determine when it's
safe to go 90; that's obviously not the way to do things; all one
needs to do is watch those who do go 90 to see that many of them are
not safe.
>
>Anthony, on the other hand, claims that 90mph is by definition unsafe and
>that and only that was the point I was trying to make.
>
>Chris


--
Bill Funk
Change "g" to "a"
Ads