Proof of why we are safe without speed limits

[mat1583]

...on major highways at least.

The German Autobahns is celebrating it's 75th year of existence since it's completion in 1932. In case you've been living under a shell, the Autobahn is famous because it is a large system of highways that has no speed limit at all. Although drivers are not required to follow a speed limit, they must not drive recklessly. Here are some facts about the Autobahn I gathered from a recent cnn.com video about it:

-The Autobahn was not 'invented' by Hitler (as he claimed), but by the mayor of Cologne.
-It was completed one year before Hitler came to power in Germany.
-Though the autobahn has no speed limit, there are less accidents on this highway system than almost any other highway system in every other country (including the United States).
-When Hitler came to power, he instituted a speed limit on the Autobahns. It was only after Hitler was defeated after WWI that the United States military command that got rid of the speed limit!
-A 2005 study by the Federal Minister of the Interior indicated there were an equal number of accidents per mile on the autobahn in sections without any speed limits.

Separate from the Autobahn:

From 1996 to 1999, Montana joined the Autobahn by reverting its state speed limit policies. They adopted a similar policy to the Autobahns - no speed limit as long as you drive at reasonable and prudent speeds. Interestingly enough, in the 4 year period of no speed limits, Montana reported fewer fatal car accidents and fewer multi-car accidents...here's a summary:

Summary of the effects of no daytime speed limits:

1. Fatal accident rates on these highways reached an all time low in modern times.

2. On 2 lane highways with no posted limits the frequency of multiple vehicle accidents dropped 5 percent.

3. Seat belt usage rose to 88% percent, with only a secondary enforcement law.

4. Posted limits and their enforcement, had either no or a negative effect on traffic safety.

5. As predicted by the engineering models, traffic speeds did not significantly change and remained consistent with other western states with like conditions.

6. The people of Montana and its visitors continued to drive at speeds they were comfortable with, which were often speeds lower than their counter parts on high density urban freeways* with low posted limits.

7. The theory behind posting speed limits on this classification of road is to reduce conflicts in traffic flow, thereby reducing accidents. The paradox is that the desired effect from posting speed limits was achieved by removing them.

Unfortunately Montana was 'forced' by the federal government to reinstitute all its speed limit laws, else it would lose a great portion of its federal funding. In other words, money-hungry politicians thought it would be better for more people to die on Montana's highways than to lose federal funding...

-washboard

[Evanescence]

First of all...ever drive in Montana? You CAN'T drive fast cause the roads suck and are deadly if you go fast. 2nd, there's no one out there.

Now, while agree some speed limits are bogus, we need to keep people in check in certain areas. People in Germany are different than here in the US. They actually have manners and give a rip about their fellow man. Not to sound cynical, but its true.

Not to mention speed limits help catch bad guys. Speeders are sometimes caught with drugs, DUI, Guns or outstanding warrants. Not that we ned big brother, but we ned to be checked on now and then and speed enforcement is a good way to make sure people are being cool.

I just came back from OK and most speed limits are 65 to 75 on the interstates. I think its fast enough....especialy when people always go 5-10 over.

Even me. :cool:

[mat1583]

First of all...ever drive in Montana? You CAN'T drive fast cause the roads suck and are deadly if you go fast. 2nd, there's no one out there.

Now, while agree some speed limits are bogus, we need to keep people in check in certain areas. People in Germany are different than here in the US. They actually have manners and give a rip about their fellow man. Not to sound cynical, but its true.

Not to mention speed limits help catch bad guys. Speeders are sometimes caught with drugs, DUI, Guns or outstanding warrants. Not that we ned big brother, but we ned to be checked on now and then and speed enforcement is a good way to make sure people are being cool.

I just came back from OK and most speed limits are 65 to 75 on the interstates. I think its fast enough....especialy when people always go 5-10 over.

Even me. :cool:

The problem is that the logic that has been used as a reasoning for speed limits has proven to be faulty. I'll explain more tomorrow. I gotta hop in the shower, then over to see my g/f. For some reason she doesn't like smelly, sweaty washboard. :)

[Evanescence]

The problem is that the logic that has been used as a reasoning for speed limits has proven to be faulty. I'll explain more tomorrow. I gotta hop in the shower, then over to see my g/f. For some reason she doesn't like smelly, sweaty washboard. :)

A man after my own heart...:D

[Aussie3rddayfan]

...on major highways at least.

The German Autobahns is celebrating it's 75th year of existence since it's completion in 1932. In case you've been living under a shell, the Autobahn is famous because it is a large system of highways that has no speed limit at all. Although drivers are not required to follow a speed limit, they must not drive recklessly. Here are some facts about the Autobahn I gathered from a recent cnn.com video about it:

-The Autobahn was not 'invented' by Hitler (as he claimed), but by the mayor of Cologne.
-It was completed one year before Hitler came to power in Germany.
-Though the autobahn has no speed limit, there are less accidents on this highway system than almost any other highway system in every other country (including the United States).
-When Hitler came to power, he instituted a speed limit on the Autobahns. It was only after Hitler was defeated after WWI that the United States military command that got rid of the speed limit!
-A 2005 study by the Federal Minister of the Interior indicated there were an equal number of accidents per mile on the autobahn in sections without any speed limits.

Separate from the Autobahn:

From 1996 to 1999, Montana joined the Autobahn by reverting its state speed limit policies. They adopted a similar policy to the Autobahns - no speed limit as long as you drive at reasonable and prudent speeds. Interestingly enough, in the 4 year period of no speed limits, Montana reported fewer fatal car accidents and fewer multi-car accidents...here's a summary:

Summary of the effects of no daytime speed limits:

1. Fatal accident rates on these highways reached an all time low in modern times.

2. On 2 lane highways with no posted limits the frequency of multiple vehicle accidents dropped 5 percent.

3. Seat belt usage rose to 88% percent, with only a secondary enforcement law.

4. Posted limits and their enforcement, had either no or a negative effect on traffic safety.

5. As predicted by the engineering models, traffic speeds did not significantly change and remained consistent with other western states with like conditions.

6. The people of Montana and its visitors continued to drive at speeds they were comfortable with, which were often speeds lower than their counter parts on high density urban freeways* with low posted limits.

7. The theory behind posting speed limits on this classification of road is to reduce conflicts in traffic flow, thereby reducing accidents. The paradox is that the desired effect from posting speed limits was achieved by removing them.

Unfortunately Montana was 'forced' by the federal government to reinstitute all its speed limit laws, else it would lose a great portion of its federal funding. In other words, money-hungry politicians thought it would be better for more people to die on Montana's highways than to lose federal funding...

-washboard


Here's a few other things to consider:

* The quality of the German and Belgian autobahns are amongst the highest quality surfaced road in the world.
* The quality of german cars (as well as other European cars) is far superior to that of Japenese or American cars. They are much better engineered and also much safer

Simply put:
High quality road surface + safe and well engineered cars + well educated drivers = safe drivers:D

[mat1583]

First of all...ever drive in Montana? You CAN'T drive fast cause the roads suck and are deadly if you go fast. 2nd, there's no one out there.

Now, while agree some speed limits are bogus, we need to keep people in check in certain areas. People in Germany are different than here in the US. They actually have manners and give a rip about their fellow man. Not to sound cynical, but its true.

The problem with your argument is that no matter how crappy the roads may be in Montana and no matter how much traffic is on the roads, the percentage of fatalities and multi car accidents dropped by almost 15% in that 4 year time span. This drop had nothing to do with the condition of the roads. And in fact, during that time span traffic flow actually increased on Montana highways. While the rest of American highways acted as the control for those 4 years, Montana's was the experiment...which proved that major highways without speed limits were safer.

The even more ironic thing is that the drinking age is much lower in Germany that compared to the US (16 in Germany, 21 in United States). To combat drinking and driving, Germany has adopted tougher drinking and driving laws - which has worked!


Not to mention speed limits help catch bad guys. Speeders are sometimes caught with drugs, DUI, Guns or outstanding warrants. Not that we ned big brother, but we ned to be checked on now and then and speed enforcement is a good way to make sure people are being cool.

I think most drugs should be legal, so I disagree with you here. Some cops will pull you over for speeding just to try and convince you to let them search your vehicle. Believe me, I had it happen to me. What if I had decided to carry a gun with me for protection, yet didn't have a 'permit' to carry it (although I am given permission by the 2nd Amendment, not by some stupid permit.)



I just came back from OK and most speed limits are 65 to 75 on the interstates. I think its fast enough....especialy when people always go 5-10 over.

Even me. :cool:

Which brings up one of the best points yet! :)

"During this 6 year period, Montana's rural interstates daytime speeds (no speed limit) were consistently lower (on average 5-10 mph and more) than the speeds being reported on many sections of Southern California's 65 mph posted urban interstates."

Here is an interesting study done by the US DOT on the effects of raising and lowering speed limits. The results:

"The results of the study indicated that lowering posted speed limits by as much as 20 mi/h (32 km/h), or raising speed limits by as much as 15 mi/h (24 km/h) had little effect on motorist' speed. The majority of motorist did not drive 5 mi/h (8 km/h) above the posted speed limits when speed limits were raised, nor did they reduce their speed by 5 or 10 mi/h (8 or 16 km/h) when speed limits are lowered. Data collected at the study sites indicated that the majority of speed limits are posed below the average speed of traffic. Lowering speed limits below the 50th percentile does not reduce accidents, but does significantly increase driver violations of the speed limit. Conversely, raising the posted speed limits did not increase speeds or accidents."

http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html

-washboard

[mat1583]

Simply put:
High quality road surface + safe and well engineered cars + well educated drivers = safe drivers:D

If this is true, perhaps the United States should follow in Germany's footsteps. Usually when this is proposed, politicians and states refuse to make American drivers safer. Instead they opt for more revenue...and higher fatality rates.

-wahsboard

[freakysoccer]

...on major highways at least.

The German Autobahns is celebrating it's 75th year of existence since it's completion in 1932. In case you've been living under a shell, the Autobahn is famous because it is a large system of highways that has no speed limit at all. Although drivers are not required to follow a speed limit, they must not drive recklessly. Here are some facts about the Autobahn I gathered from a recent cnn.com video about it:

-The Autobahn was not 'invented' by Hitler (as he claimed), but by the mayor of Cologne.
-It was completed one year before Hitler came to power in Germany.
-Though the autobahn has no speed limit, there are less accidents on this highway system than almost any other highway system in every other country (including the United States).
-When Hitler came to power, he instituted a speed limit on the Autobahns. It was only after Hitler was defeated after WWI that the United States military command that got rid of the speed limit!
-A 2005 study by the Federal Minister of the Interior indicated there were an equal number of accidents per mile on the autobahn in sections without any speed limits.

Separate from the Autobahn:

From 1996 to 1999, Montana joined the Autobahn by reverting its state speed limit policies. They adopted a similar policy to the Autobahns - no speed limit as long as you drive at reasonable and prudent speeds. Interestingly enough, in the 4 year period of no speed limits, Montana reported fewer fatal car accidents and fewer multi-car accidents...here's a summary:

Summary of the effects of no daytime speed limits:

1. Fatal accident rates on these highways reached an all time low in modern times.

2. On 2 lane highways with no posted limits the frequency of multiple vehicle accidents dropped 5 percent.

3. Seat belt usage rose to 88% percent, with only a secondary enforcement law.

4. Posted limits and their enforcement, had either no or a negative effect on traffic safety.

5. As predicted by the engineering models, traffic speeds did not significantly change and remained consistent with other western states with like conditions.

6. The people of Montana and its visitors continued to drive at speeds they were comfortable with, which were often speeds lower than their counter parts on high density urban freeways* with low posted limits.

7. The theory behind posting speed limits on this classification of road is to reduce conflicts in traffic flow, thereby reducing accidents. The paradox is that the desired effect from posting speed limits was achieved by removing them.

Unfortunately Montana was 'forced' by the federal government to reinstitute all its speed limit laws, else it would lose a great portion of its federal funding. In other words, money-hungry politicians thought it would be better for more people to die on Montana's highways than to lose federal funding...

-washboard

i find this fascinating. i want to go to germany just to drive on this road. i tend to think that sometimes if laws are less strict more people will be careful, at least this applies to me. i would personally love for the U.S.'s major highways and interstates to go to laws like this.

[mindyhere]

My opinion is that our (US) speed limit laws are all about money. I'm surprised that more people don't see this ...

[mat1583]

My opinion is that our (US) speed limit laws are all about money. I'm surprised that more people don't see this ...

I think a lot of people do see this, but they don't realize that we could be just as safe or even more by getting rid of some speed limits.

Here's another interesting article about traffic laws/signs:

Are streets without traffic signs conceivable? Seven cities and regions in Europe are giving it a try -- with good results.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/spiegel/0,1518,448747,00.html

-washboard

[Trillamum]

Here's my issue with this:

. Although drivers are not required to follow a speed limit, they must not drive recklessly. Here are some facts about the Autobahn I gathered from a recent cnn.com video about it:

- no speed limit as long as you drive at reasonable and prudent speeds. Interestingly enough, in the 4 year period of no speed limits, Montana reported fewer fatal car accidents and fewer multi-car accidents...here's a summary:



What exactly constitutes reasonable and prudent speeds? This leaves way too much room for police to interpret whether or not someone is within the law IMO

[DareDevil]

The general legal consensus is that drivers who are involved in an accident while crusing at more than 130 km/h (a bit less than 81miles/h) are partially guilty too. This doesn't necessarily mean that they have to pay a lot, but you've got to expect that you have to pay a bit at least. The faster you were driving the bigger this "bit" becomes, of course.

[mat1583]

Here's my issue with this:

What exactly constitutes reasonable and prudent speeds? This leaves way too much room for police to interpret whether or not someone is within the law IMO

This is a question that can't really be answered with strict legal jargon. It really just depends on the circumstances and situation a driver is in. "Reasonable and prudent" is used in states' statutes all across the United States for all kinds of situations...from driving to equine law.

In regards to speed limits, sometimes a driver can be going at a speed less than the speed limit, but still not reasonable and prudent for that particular situation. Take for instance a crash scene on an interstate. If you see a crash scene, it would not usually be reasonable and prudent for you to keep going the speed limit if stalled cars and debris are in your driving field. If you hit someone going the speed limit through a crash scene and kill them, you could be charged with manslaughter.

I think this actually allows more wiggle room for those who like to go a little faster. While it's almost impossible to argue a ticket for going 1mph over the speed limit, a driver can defend himself by justifying "reasonable and prudent".

-washboard

[clemsontigers23]

I don't know where yall live, but in small town Georgia if they get rid of the speed limits I'm staying off the road because we have some people who drive 80-85 even with speed limits.

[*I Believe*]

I live in Missouri and I'm not sure there are any worse roads in the country than what we have here! We have alot of people who drive 80-85 here with speed limits also, but the thing is...those people would probably go that fast with or without the speed limit. Get a ticket, pay a lawyer, rinse, lather, repeat.;)

[Gandalf]

I live in Missouri and I'm not sure there are any worse roads in the country than what we have here!
Our highways were below average a few years back, before the amendment went through to increase funding for MODOT. Since then, we've repaved just about all the interstates in the state, and many of the state and US highways. The roads here now are noticeably better than in most other states I've driven in over the last two years.

Michigan is still by far the worst I've encountered, though their interstates are improved over what they were 5 years ago.
Unfortunately Montana was 'forced' by the federal government to reinstitute all its speed limit laws, else it would lose a great portion of its federal funding. In other words, money-hungry politicians thought it would be better for more people to die on Montana's highways than to lose federal funding...
That's not true. It was Montana's own supreme court that decided "reasonable and prudent" was unenforceably vague, and said that if the state police were going to enforce a speed limit, it had to be a specific limit.
My opinion is that our (US) speed limit laws are all about money. I'm surprised that more people don't see this ...
That's true on major, limited-access highways, especially. Clearly, driving "too fast" can be unsafe (don't need to be doing 100 in a subdivision), but the limits on major highways are unnecessarily low in most cases.

When there was a national speed limit, it was motivated by fuel economy, not safety. The "speed kills" mentality that prevails now is all about money. Insurance companies routinely lobby for low speed limits.

[mat1583]

That's not true. It was Montana's own supreme court that decided "reasonable and prudent" was unenforceably vague, and said that if the state police were going to enforce a speed limit, it had to be a specific limit.


While true, that ruling was just a cop-out for the Montana legislature. The supreme court struck it down, but lawmakers did not pursue it further to change the structure of the law, so speed limits were reenacted and traffic fatalities rose immediately. The politicians made no move to save more lives primarily because they were concerned about losing federal funds (by warning of the federal government).

It would be interesting to see how Germany deals with the issue of vagueness.

Here's the Montana Supreme Court ruling in detail:
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=MT&vol=97&invol=486

-washboard

[Gandalf]

It would be interesting to see how Germany deals with the issue of vagueness.
There is no vagueness in Germany. Where (and when) there are speed limits enforced, they're posted as an exact speed, and enforced accordingly. When there is no speed limit, there's no "speeding" enforcement. They do aggressively enforce following distances, etc. but don't attempt to enforce speeding where there's no speed limit. They don't have vague "reasonable and prudent" limits that amount to a de facto 75 mph limit, as was the case in Montana. (While "reasonable and prudent" was the official limit, police would ticket drivers going more than 85 in daylight, which equates to how they enforce a 75 mph limit, ticketing those driving 10+ over). After the court decision, the legislature had a choice between picking a number and not having a limit, and they decided to pick a number.

So far as I can tell, the feds don't have restrictions on highway funding based on speed limits, only for open container and BAC limit laws. Several states (including MO) do not have open container laws that meet the federal standard, so are required to spend a certain percentage of federal highway dollars on "safety improvements" rather than paving. MS has no open container law whatsoever (you can have a beer in your hand when a cop pulls you over, as long as you're not drunk); MO's law is written such that passengers can have open containers, but the driver cannot. The federal requirement is that there be no open containers allowed in a vehicle at all. I don't know of any states that didn't adopt the 0.08 BAC limit law.

[DareDevil]

The general legal consensus is that drivers who are involved in an accident while crusing at more than 130 km/h (a bit less than 81miles/h) are partially guilty too. This doesn't necessarily mean that they have to pay a lot, but you've got to expect that you have to pay a bit at least. The faster you were driving the bigger this "bit" becomes, of course.
Just to make this clear: I'm from Germany and was talking about how things are handled on the Autobahn here.

[Gandalf]

Just to make this clear: I'm from Germany and was talking about things are handled here.
And that is dealing with partial fault in an accident, not just random speeding tickets when there is no accident. Seems quite reasonable.

The Montana issue that mat1583 mentioned was that they were giving speeding tickets to anyone driving 85 mph or faster when the posted limit was "reasonable and prudent". In the middle of nowhere, on a flat, straight road, in a high performance vehicle with a qualified driver, it would be "reasonable and prudent" to drive well over 100 mph if there's no other traffic to worry about. The courts in Montana basically said they couldn't enforce such a vague speed limit, ticketing people only for driving faster than the cop thought they should be driving when they couldn't know what such an arbitrary limit would be.