Radar Detectors- Does this logic make sense?

Tyler

Dont ask people to explain the twisted workings of the government xD

**
The speed limit should not be changed, because if you knew anything about statistics, you'd know that the speed limits that are set in place, because they give enough time to give the driver enough time to adjust to any given situation, and still remain safe.
I guess you could compare it to a disclaimer.

GABRIELLA

i agree and disagree. First of all b/c sometimes you're in a hurry or like me you can't stand doing the speed limit and drive a little bit faster because you know you won't get caught. But on the other hand i disagree because there are some really bad drivers out there, even people without a drivers license, and there could be alot of accidents. you never know when an accident is going to be caused by a speeder and a family or a person that drives well.
so i guess they do force you to drive better even though we all know we're supposed to do it anyway

The Beerman

Yes. Some places put up signaling devices that can send text messages to some detectors.

pickingausernamesucks

Yes. Speed limit should be raised from 65 to 75 anyway.

Chris

Hmmm. Following your argument to its logical conclusion, there shouldn't be a speed limit where there's no radar detector. Allow me to explain.

The points you made:
1) You slow down where you know there's a speed trap
2) These are the places it's important to slow down

So, in the other places it's less important to slow down. People aren't complaining about speeding there so it's not a targeted enforcement area. Speeding in these areas is less dangerous.

Still agree?

Well, here are some problems with that.
1) Cops make money off speeding tickets. This is a problem because they're not pulling people over for safety reasons. They pull them over to make money (so they focus on places where lots of people speed; where it's easy to catch them; also in rich neighborhoods where the residents put pressure on the government...). So the speed traps are there to make money, and for all kinds of other 'social' reasons, not just to make the road safer. This should not be true, because it's a twisted system, but there you go.
2) If it's not dangerous to speed they should just raise the speed limit, or eliminate it. Instead of using a radar detector, you should get the speed limit changed.
3) More compliant you say? By breaking the law you make yourself a more naturally law-abiding person? Breaking the law just gets you accustomed to breaking the law. If you speed in 'safe' places you'll end up speeding in 'dangerous' places, because you're used to ignoring the limit.

I could go on. One of my favorite pet hates is people who slam the brakes when they see a cop. We're cruising at 65 in a 65 zone, the radar detector beeps, and they lock the brakes to get down to 45. Why? Because radar detectors make you a crap driver. With a radar detector, it doesn't matter what the limit is or how fast it's safe to go, so you don't pay attention to that. You know if you'll get a ticket, and that's all you end up caring about. And that kills motorcyclists like me because 15 cars suddenly hitting the brakes for no reason is a hazard situation. People don't know the speed limits where they're driving, so they slow down for every cop. And they sure don't know how fast it's SAFE to go. That takes way too much attention.

So fundamentally, it's an interesting idea, but no it doesn't make sense. It would make much more sense to set speed limits as high as possible, and then fine every driver as soon as they go 1 mph over the limit. All the time, every time.

CwboyBill

Who cares? I use one because i don't want a speeding ticket. Logical enough....

UCANTCME

Nope, thank makes zero since just stop speeding all together.

Enter Your Message or Comment

User Name:
User Email:
Post a comment: