There ain't no "Fast Lane," Baby

[ajqtrz]

Okay, I admit that this thread is being moved, as much as it can be, from the "Things that Bother Me" thread. I also admit that maybe I should have attempted to move it a lot earlier. To those in that thread I am sorry I did not suggest it or do it earlier.

Now for the question at hand. Is there a "Fast Lane" on the freeway? The answer depends, like many things, on your definition of "fast lane." States in the US often mark their freeways with "slow traffic keep right" signs. Some have rules about the far left lane, designating it as the "passing lane." But no state calls, legally speaking, the left lane the "fast lane" with the intention of allowing those who wish to go over the speed limits to do so without penalty. In other words, if you are defining the "fast lane" as the lane for speed limit breaking you are legally speaking, on thin ice. What we are addressing here is not the general legal definition but the idea that some people hold that the far left lane is where they should be free to exceed the posted speed limit and where anyone not holding that definition (as evidenced by their going at the speed limit) should not be in that lane.

In good debate form here is the question: There is no fast lane on the freeway system.

I will, of course, take the pro view.

Opening assumptions:

1) Maximizing safety while promoting efficiency is the goal.
2) The best way to be safe and promote efficiency is to have all vehicles on the system travel at the same rate and in the same direction.
3) Since, in general, most cars are traveling in roughly the same direction on the freeway (we are limiting it to one side here, of course), it must be that if there is an accident somebody changed speed, direction, or both.

Argument:

If the three observations above are true it stands to reason that understanding the causes of change need be examined. The greatest agent of change in the freeway system on an ongoing bases are the decisions individual drivers make regarding direction and speed. Since every driver is autonomous there is great variation in the obedience to the posted speed limits (minimum as well as maximum). The causes for these variations are psychological and sociological, including three prevailing beliefs among the driving population.

First, most people believe they are driving rationally.
Second, most people believe that everyone drives like they and this reinforces the belief that they are driving rationally.
Third, most people assume that their experience gives sufficient warrant for their driving as they do, including exceeding the speed limit.

Most people drive according to how they feel at the moment. According to the US Dept of Transportation 40% of the drivers on the road at any one time are driving "significantly" over the speed limit (significantly meaning 10mph over or more) while an additional 40% are driving between 3 and 10mph over the speed limit. Between 20 and 90 percent of drivers will drive the speed limit, depending upon where in the US you are driving. The larger the metropolitan area and the closer to the coast the more likely fewer drivers will be doing the speed limit. Studies show that most drives derive their speed by sensing the speed of those around them and then they do that they usually pick vehicles traveling at the speed at which they feel comfortable. In other words, if you feel like traveling at 75mph you will join any group traveling at that speed and feel that that speed is the "flow of traffic." Being comfortable with the flow of traffic they assume the flow of traffic is the acceptable speed.

But are not "keeping up with traffic," they are forming a social group that is traveling together through traffic. The very fact that there are usually several speeds at which traffic is flowing and several groups intertwined means they are, by their behaviors, actually increasing the chance of an accident (see number 2 above). Furthermore, because they are comfortable with the speed they are doing, the distance between themselves and other cars is generally much closer than it should be. In fact, around 23% of freeway traffic accidents are due to tailgating. This "comfort zone" driving means drivers are less attentive and often actually engage in activities like reading, eating, drinking, and even messaging (which is illegal in most states). The results are that for every 5mp over the speed limit there is a 1.6% increase of accidents and a 12% increase the severity of the accident. At 10mph over the speed limit the accident rate increases by 3.2% and the severity by 24%. The simple fact is, the faster you drive the less time you have to react to change. And that translates into accidents and those produce, at higher speeds, more serious injuries and fatalities. In addition, these social groups generally maintain a set speed but in order to do so they have to change lanes to go around slower traffic. The average speeder will change lanes every 2 - 3 minutes Sadly often the one changing lanes is not aware of the mayhem he or she has caused. Drivers feeling like they are being cut off often over react and if there is somebody tailgating they often can't stop. One forth of the tailgating accidents were caused by a driver not at the scene because they cut somebody off and caused the accident.

The idea that cops will "give" you so many miles over the speed limit is not something you should count on. Cops generally don't stop you for doing 10mph over because they are busy stopping the guy doing 20mph. Cops are selective because they can't pull everybody over...there are just too many people traveling in too many groups to do so. So they 'pick and choose' the worst offenders because they know the greater difference in speed on the freeway the greater the likelihood of an accident.

So keeping up with traffic is neither true nor wise. UNLESS you mean traffic going at or very near the speed limit. Remember those "slow traffic keep right" signs? "Slow traffic" is traffic traveling significantly below the posted speed limit. While you may have heard that you can get a ticket for doing the speed limit and by doing so "impeding" traffic, if you do it cannot be enforced. The law is pretty clear. No government can give you contradictory instructions and then fine you for not obeying. If you get a ticket for "impeding traffic" because you obeyed the speed limit the speed limit sign is your defense because "specificity" is more clear than what it means to "impede traffic." The courts have come down on the side of the driver every time it's been challenged. Any cop worth his or her salt will tell you they would prefer it if everybody just obeyed the rules, but given the number of cops and the number of irrational drivers, they take the easy route.

But you might ask if it isn't more dangerous to do the speed limit when "everybody" around you is speeding? The answer is yes and no. In terms of accident rates it's pretty much a wash. The increased speed increases the accident rates about as much as driving the speed limit in the midst traffic moving 10mph faster. However, doing the slower speed does significantly decrease the severity of the accidents. Overall then, it is safer to drive the speed limit even in mixed speed traffic (which is most traffic). Again, it's not the speed, strictly speaking, it's the difference in speed and direction.

In conclusion: You may not like it, but you are probably an irrational driver. You probably don't really ponder your driving habits and feel like everybody is just going with the flow. That's how you feel. The reality is that, if you are speeding by even 10mph over the freeways speed you are raising your chance for an accident and greatly raising your chance of that accident causing you serious harm and maybe death. So go to those who care about you and ask them this question: "Is it okay with you that I drive in a manner that raises my chance of getting into an accident slightly (or greatly if you are really speedy) and the chances of serious injury 24% or more?" How many do you think will tell you, "sure, go ahead, I won't miss you when you're gone and besides, everybody does it, don't they?"

There is no fast lane. And in any case, if you adopt the speed limit as your speed you will have no need for the fast lane and be safer, in some ways much safer. So decide to drive rationally and you won't be looking for the imaginary fast lane.

AJ

 

[Ashrem]

Couldn't get any takers last time, so you decided to just do it all over again?

 

[ajqtrz]

Please refer to the previous post in things that bother me. I'm too lazy to respond with the same reply to the same poser of the question.

AJ

 

[Ashrem]

I kind of hoped you'd delete the other one once you were reminded that you publicly apologized for the last time you took over a thread for your personal soapbox, but I probably should have know better.

 

[samidodamage]

I kind of hoped you'd delete the other one once you were reminded that you publicly apologized for the last time you took over a thread for your personal soapbox, but I probably should have know better.

Nothing to say, but there's not a like button in this forum...

 

[shimmerfly]

Oh geez again??????????????????????????

 

[hvariidh gwendrot]

can you say dumb ass in forum ? i have a stupid donkey in my fast lane

 

[ajqtrz]

Maybe the reason it keeps coming up in other threads is nobody seems to really want to discuss it here. Everybody seems to have an opinion about it, but are only able to express their opinion about where it's brought up, how many times, and if the one bringing it up is of sound mind. Perhaps I've not made myself clear? The subject, if you are having a difficult time figuring it out, is NOT me, it's if you, me, and everybody else should drive the speed limit. Repeat after me: "the subject of the thread is driving the speed limit, not AJ's intelligence, ability to remember where he speaks about something or not, or where the subject is appropriate." Scoring debate points is not the purpose of this thread I started -- it's to explore the subject of speed limits and if you and I should obey them or not.

Having, I hope, delineated what this thread is about, I do hope somebody out there actually responds. So far only a few responses offer any real discussion of the subject. Unfortunately they are scattered around. Can those who actually have a well thought out point of view, complete with reasoning, statistics, and all that, respond here? That would be nice. At the same time could someone who's need to respond falls into the category of "I have nothing to say on the matter of importance but I feel so strongly about the subject all I can do is attack AJ" start a thread, "Attacking AJ" where you can express your emotional state to your hearts content. Really, I won't mind. It really would help get this thread back on the right track and who knows, I might become convinced by such a thread that I really am a ____________________ <--------------- you fill in the blank.

Thanks,

AJ

 

[DeletedUser20396]

I might become convinced by such a thread that I really am a ____________________ <--------------- you fill in the blank.

Don't be to hard on yourself, AJ. Really, my mom drives 80 sometimes. She says, that if it's safe, weathers good, not impeding traffic, no ones in danger of getting hit, then it's ok. She's been driving for so long, she says she could do it in her sleep, and actually, she has. My sister had to slap her across the face to wake her up.

 

[Ashrem]

Speaking only for myself, as one of the people most likely to provide arguments, I already did so, once, and I am in no hurry to repeat the experience. I've got zero interest in debating you.

 

[Gath Of Baal]

When you get paid by the mile, faster is always better I used to get so irritated by 2 cars side by side blocking traffic going the exact same speed, I mean really, what was the point of trying to pass the other car then. Other then being the "Morality police" or an upcoming left hand exit or moving over for a state trooper, breakdown, accident or debris on the road, there is really no good reason for 2 cars going the same speed to be side by side holding up everyone. else .

And yes, there are times when breaking the posted speed limit is acceptable, such as:

1) Passing on a single lane road, where you must quickly and safely get around the vehicle in front of you. Even the drivers handbook says to increase speed above the posted speed limit to pass.
2) Federal License plated vehicles do not have to follow posted speed limits
3) Disaster Relief loads <-- I learned this from hurricane Izabella, and did not have to follow speed limits, hours of service regulations , did not have to stop at weigh stations or keep a log book, this was great on a 1150 mile trip at $1.81 a mile.
4) Military vehicles that are able to can go above speed limit
5) Emergency Vehicles
6) In some states, medical emergencies let you break posted speed limits. Like wife in labor or someone dying in the back seat etc.. You might still get pulled over but once the mitigating circumstances are know you will probably get an escort or worst case still get a ticket that a judge has to determine if it warranted the breaking of the speed limit

How do the "morality police" know exactly who is trying to get by them? 4 and 5 are obvious to the eye, but the rest 2,3 and 6 are not so obvious when looking out a rear view when someone decides to hold everyone up because they shouldn't be speeding in the first place

Me personally, I speed for selfish reasons when driving my Trans Am or Camaro And speed for financial reasons when driving my Peterbilt

I do not go to the "Morality Police" place of work and keep them from working to make money for their family so please do not come to my place of work and keep me from doing the same

 

[DeletedUser20396]

I can't like this, but it is so true. What Color is the Trans Am? Is it like the Smokie and the Bandit one? you know, Black with a gold eagle?

 

[Gath Of Baal]

I can't like this, but it is so true. What Color is the Trans Am? Is it like the Smokie and the Bandit one? you know, Black with a gold eagle?

1999 Trans Am with LS1 with Mods that push it up to 514 hp.. I like the black and gold like the bandit version but I only buy red cars lmao.. Red goes faster and is more fun to drive in my opinion BTW my Peterbilt has a 550 cat and it is Red also.. zoooooooom zooooom

 

[DeletedUser20396]

Cool!

 

[ajqtrz]

Don't be to hard on yourself, AJ. Really, my mom drives 80 sometimes. She says, that if it's safe, weathers good, not impeding traffic, no ones in danger of getting hit, then it's ok. She's been driving for so long, she says she could do it in her sleep, and actually, she has. My sister had to slap her across the face to wake her up.

It may seem you and I have the necessary skills, experience, and judgement to determine the safe and sane speed for a road. It may seem that way because our personal experience, and the experience of our friends and family, seem to indicate when we drive over the speed limit in some conditions, we are "perfectly safe." Rational thinking though, has to question our sense of the matter. The point being: are you going to live rationally or by your "feelings" (probably better understood as an un-examined sense of what to do in the particular context than an purely emotional (and therefore, assumed to be "irrational") response.

Rational thinking assumes that when faced with a situation you make the choice you make based upon the probability that the outcome you get will be the one desired. The problem with this is that most of the time you don't have the actual scientific statistical measures necessary to make the determination and thus, must fall back on your sense of those probabilities. There are two, therefore, types of probability. One is psychological, the other mathematical. The psychological probability -- the sense of the likelihood that X will be the the result rather than Y, -- varies with the amount of experience and knowledge the person has about the situation. Young persons, for instance, are not allowed to drink because it has been shown when they do, in general, their life experiences are insufficient for them to make safe and sane judgements -- or at least, to be fair, enough of them are in that state that we tell all of them they cannot drink. Scientific statistics, on the other hand, are much more likely to predict the outcomes of a course of action, provided that course of action and the results have been measured correctly and without bias.

One area of measure has been seat belts. Almost everyone of us has heard of or experienced an situation where wearing a seat belt contributed the death of someone. But, statistically speaking the laws were changed to compel the wearing of seat belts in most, if not every, state because, overall, lives were saved. Seat belts have contributed to the lowering of traffic fatalities, a statistic well documented and, with little dispute.

From this we ask: "Is it rational to drive over the speed limit, unnecessarily?" I give a nod to the poster who provides examples where driving over the speed limit is allowed and desirable. However, the vast majority of situations where people are driving over the speed limit are not those types of situations. In any case, is it rational in cases outside those listed, to drive over the speed limit? Do statistics support the behavior?

When I worked at the Seattle Engineering Department one of my jobs was to summarize the traffic accidents in the city each month. We were looking for patterns of behavior we could change. In most cases my report noted repeated accidents at certain intersections, exit and entrances to various types of roads, and sometimes blind access where bushes, trees, a new fence, etc. contributed to an accident. In my two years there I noted that we could fix many of these types of problems by a simple re-design of the intersection. The only notable exception was on the freeways. On the freeways nearly 90% of the accidents were caused by one person following another too closely....and both traveling at too high a speed. There were other causes of accidents -- road debris, icy conditions, poor visibility, etc, but even those were often exacerbated by people traveling over the speed limit and too close to the person ahead of them. Perhaps my own counting of the causes and measuring of the mayhem, has led me to be more sensitive of the matter? I don't know. But what I can say is that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration is adamant that the evidence is statistically clear: driving over the speed limit by 10 miles an hour significantly increases the likelihood of an accident and that the greater the difference between the posted speed and the speed at which you are moving, the greater the likelihood you will be involved in an accident. I am not aware of a single official, state, county, national or international agency who would disagree with this statement. Basic physics explains it all.

If you have everybody traveling the same direction at the same rate no accidents will ever happen. For there to be an accident something has to change. Somebody has to change directions or speed. The best way to insure you get the perfect results of everybody traveling in the same direction at the same rate is to agree on the direction and rate ahead of time and for each person to drive at that direction and rate. Yes, you may have exceptions -- but they are few and far between, and you probably aren't in a position to claim one of them.

So, if we have measured and found that driving over the speed limit leads to more accidents when not everybody is doing so (i.e. different rates of travel) and found that people travel too close to the car ahead are usually wanting to travel at a higher rate than the current traffic conditions allow (this has been measured as well), what is the rational thing for all of us to do? Will you admit that your mother's life experience is probably less accurate in measuring the actual risk she is taking than the statistics, and thus, she is driving irrationally? Remember, the posted speed limits are not set by considering the worst conditions, but the ideal. That's why the driving manuals all say to decrease your speed in poorer conditions -- otherwise they would say you can increase your speed as conditions come closer to 'ideal.' So if she's doing 80 in ideal conditions she is still increasing her risk of a accident by about 40%. She may be spry and have great reflexes, but that only reduces that 40% so much. And if she were driving at the speed limit it may be those spry reflexes (assuming she's awake to use them, LOL) may save her.

In the end you can either live by your psychological sense of the matter, and in most cases you will need to do so because most cases have not been measured. But the case of driving the speed limit or not, has been fully and consistently measured and the scientific statistical measures show that if you wish to live rationally you will drive the speed limit in almost all cases and almost all the time -- see the list above if you want some reasonable and necessary exceptions.

I do thank you for your comments and that they were calmly and politely offered. I also thank the provider of the "list of exceptions" as I would agree pretty much with most of them -- though not entirely. I thank you both for your responses.

AJ

 

[Gath Of Baal]

You make some good points with your posts, but I do disagree with you on this point.

If you have everybody traveling the same direction at the same rate No Accidents will ever happen.. For there to be an accident something has to change. Somebody has to change directions or speed. The best way to insure you get the perfect results of everybody traveling in the same direction at the same rate is to agree on the direction and rate ahead of time and for each person to drive at that direction and rate. Yes, you may have exceptions -- but they are few and far between, and you probably aren't in a position to claim one of them.

Even if everyone traveling in the same direction at the same speed even with proper following distances and no lane changes and ideal driving conditions, that accidents can and will still happen with more frequency then just the occasional exception.. There are hundreds of thousands if not more possible exceptions, Yes each type of exception might only be a small amount, but even small amounts of those possible exceptions when viewed as a total still adds up to a lot of accidents..
Yes the number of accidents in total would be reduced significantly, when you take away speeding, following distance and lane change accidents, but it would still not eliminate all the different types of accidents that can happen while driving. To eliminate them you would need to "Fix" all the categories of accidents I will elaborate about

I will list what in my opinion are the main categories behind each exception, but bear in mind each category can be further broken down , which I think people in to statistics would have a field day with.. I have no proof of any of this other then personal experience with 10+ million miles of safe accident free driving experience as an over the road cross country tractor trailer freight hauler Even got a nice gold and diamond watch from the company for my achievement.

Catagories:

1) Acts Of God
2) Animal -- Everything related to an animals being the cause of an accident (to include ocean, land and avian)
3) Vehicle Malfunction --- Everything related to mechanical issues with a vehicle that could relate to an accident happening
4) Driver Malfunction --- Everything that could happen to a driver involved in an accident even though they were driving the "proper" way
5) Bad System -- which would include poor highway system design in areas which could cause an accident
6) Humans Being Human --- All other outside human influence being the cause of an accident


Ok so in my opinion there are only 6 major categories with each Major category broken down into thousand upon thousands of exceptions to the rule, for example lets take #2 Animals since it would be the easiest for this example

Accidents caused by cows, horses, donkeys, dogs, cats, squirrels, hawks, eagles, owls, ravens, pigeons, Flying fish, bears, elephants, mountain lions, monkeys, deer, moose, caribou, elk, and the list can go on and on, with each one being its own exception to the rule of safe driving and accidents. I would love to see statistics on how many hawks related accidents are caused on a yearly basis, from them diving across the highway as they zoom in on their prey and a driver doing everything the right way hits them head on the windshield which could cause an accident. The number is probably very low but when added up with all the other animal types, and yes I think you would have to categorize them all individually in order to get a better understanding on which animals are a detriment to safe driving. You would probably have to break it down even further to sub categories on what time of year, what time of day, what state, what type of area it happened in, what species of hawk, etc, so in the end you could know that male red tail hawks during the day time in summer forested areas in the NW regions of the united states present a .30% chance of causing an accident on Thursdays..
In the end you can end up with hundreds of thousands if not millions of exceptions when it comes to accidents beyond a safe drives ability to control. And it only gets worse with more and more people joining the driving community daily, you add more odds that these exceptions will happen more often, making occurrences. like these more common place and not so rare.

Staying in your lane with proper following distance and everyone following the speed limit would cut down on accidents. but by no means are there only a few exceptions and that they are rare occurrences.. Just my 2 cents worth

P.S not trying to argue with you, just letting you know there are still loads of ways to get into accidents be it minor or major, Even if a person is "driving safe"

 

[ajqtrz]

Gath of Baal,

I agree that there are exceptions to the general category of "follow too close" and "going too fast" as the causes of accidents. However, even an "act of God" must change the direction or speed of an object to get it to crash into another object. All the causal categories you mention include the change of speed or direction. My point was pure physics, not as statement about human error vs other types of causes.

What I really appreciate about your response, though, is that it addressed the issue, and made a great point. Discussion in that tone is usually a good discussion and enjoyable to read and respond.

Thanks,

AJ