Fast lanes for faster drivers/ If you can drive fast safely, shouldn't you be allowed

[digitalsublimacy]

I ran accross this article and is so true!!.... read and comment...


It's sad--and indicative of their woeful lack of comprehension of the fundamental source of our traffic problems--that the self-styled "safety advocates" who bleat endlessly about "speeding" rarely, if ever, focus on our frighteningly lax driver's-licensing procedures. A "speeder" is arguably far less dangerous than a person lacking the skill to merge safely onto a freeway--who, riding his brakes, timidly pulls at 35 mph into fast-moving traffic--or who parks in the far left lane at exactly 55 mph, refusing to yield to faster-moving traffic.

We need to get away from the idea that driving is a right--it isn't--and direct people who are not sufficiently competent to the bus station--not the parking lot. All by itself, this step would likely result in a drop of 20 percent to 30 percent in nationwide accident and fatality rates within 5 years of implementation.

The next step should be the creation of an "expert" endorsement for driver's licenses. The bearer of such an endorsement could use dedicated "fast lanes" on the highways, where speed limits would be significantly higher than elsewhere.

Given that the interstate highway system was designed back in the 1950s for average speeds in the 75- to 80-mph range (and that was assuming 1950s brake, tire, and suspension technology), 90- to 100-mph limits in the fast lanes doesn't seem unreasonable today. Modern cars have far better brakes (usually four-wheel discs with anti-lock vs. the pre-ABS drums that were common in the '50s), radial tires that can handle higher speeds much more safely, stability control, etc. If a 1950s-era Packard riding on 14-inch bias-ply tires was deemed safe to run at 75 mph by traffic-safety engineers, surely a 2004 high-performance sport sedan, enjoying all the benefits of the technological advances of the past 50 years, can be driven at least as fast with equal safety.
ERIC PETERS
article

[BLU CIVIC]

that's a good point....what's the url of that article

[mycivic]

there is more to the article...there is a read more at the bottom. the link is at the bottom of the article underlined. that article is very true...a very good point made.

[ArideII]

I agree as well, there is a major difference between driving fast and driving careless. If I can go 90Mph without having to go in and out of traffic I think it is ok. People should get a ticket for weaving through traffic, sitting in the fast lane and not getting back over, not yielding (I hate when people don't yield), not taking control of the intersection when they are waiting to turn, etc...

Anyway, good article

[Stoggers]

Basically the article is sound, however there are some additional features which need addressing before such a system could be introduced.
Essentially the law makers had to cater for the lowest common denominator, which means poorly maintained old cars of minimal design specification, poor drivers, high traffic density, etc. If you could guarantee that only skilled drivers in well maintained, high performance cars would drive in low traffic density then they'll probably change their minds and the laws. However, would you put your name and career on the line for a bill increasing speed limits which then results in people being killed in high speed accidents...no? Neither would I.

• Cars need to be of a minimum performance standard.
  Drivers need to be graded.
  Roads need to be graded.
  Monitoring and control needs to be implemented.
  Someone needs to pay for all this.

[freakonaleash1187]

that would be cool if we had faster lanes, but i do agree with stoggers. i think that u should be able to go to a drivers school type thing and if u and your car passes, u can go a higher speed limit.

[ferrari_adidas5]

that would be a great idea, because if you think about it, 10 mph in a crash isnt much but you get places alot faster, it would be great if they had an extra lane on the side of the road where you can drive any speed, but there is no passing. that would be safe unless you are stupid and speed around corners on ice or something

[Stoggers]

In the UK they are now introducing toll roads where if you pay, you can go on less busy roads...
How about introducing toll roads where you can only go on them if you've taken a 'Performance Driver' course (at your own expense) and acquired a licence which permits you to drive at high speed.
The course would focus only on performance driving similar to that which Traffic Police take, rather than on how to park, drive safely through School zones, etc

Private roads..hmmm how would the insurers see that?

[84and85bird]

I agree that there are some roads that the speed limit could be safely raised. Even with the gains in automotive technology, there is still always the human factor to think about. Even if the car could stop in time, you have to figure that it will take the driver a certian amout of time to react to a sudden obstical (such as a deer or debris in the road). Even if special permission was needed, who's to say that a so called 'good' driver isn't going succumb to any of the common distractions that all drivers face. Most people don't want someone fidgeting with their radio (or worse yet....a cell phone) while they are driving at 100 mph. Even people with some sort of 'special' permission on their license will be doing such things. No matter how good the stopping power of the car is, the laws of physics still apply. If you double your speed, your stopping distance increases by 4 times.

[vsiev]

I think the DMV should have tougher test/requirements. Also they should have awareness test cause some people are just plain blind or just stupid....Like they should give you a picture( a real one not some hand made drawing) with a whole scene and who should yield and all that crap....I am tired of these blind people who don't know when to yield and read signs...it is annoying as the blind/idiots who just merge without signalling and even looking....like they expect us to be mind readers and know they want to switch lanes.....

[JoeWagon]

It would probably happen except for one thing:

Speed limits aren't for safety, they were imposed after WWII as a source of revenue for the government. Police officers don't pull you over for speeding because it's unsafe, they do it for money.

The only time they will pull you over for being unsafe is if you are going WAY OVER the limit. In this case, it's not called speeding but 'reckless endangerment' or 'exhibition of speed'

Nobody ever said speeding was dangerous... only that it's dangerous in bad conditions or way too fast.

[veyron 16/4]

hell yeah!

[Jlink2004]

First of all a lot of what people are saying is true I just wanted to address a couple of posts. First Referring to "ferrari_adidas5"'s commment "10 mph in a crash isnt much but you get places alot faster" and " it would be great if they had an extra lane on the side of the road where you can drive any speed, but there is no passing" However going 10 mph faster is NOT going to get you places faster I drive at least 50 miles to school one way 5 days a week. If I drive regularly I get there in an hour If Im late and speeding like crazy I can get there in 50 minutes. Most trips people take in a car are only an average of 10-20 minutes long how much time is it going to save people a few minutes at best that doesnt sound like much of an improvement to me. As for the second comment/idea of a special lane for speeders. Think about it some kid gets in that lane in his "cool" little civic thinking hes hot stuff and decides the gentlmen in the Lincoln Continental going 65 in a 40 isnt going fast enough and since hes not going to get in trouble for going 80 he gets mad and trys to pass even though its illegal and ends up killing 10 people. Second of all where would this lane be? on the left? in the middle? how would turning work would the speeders have to weave over three lanes to turn right or would the regular slow drivers have to merge into the fast lane to turn right. My point is creating such a difference in speeds in lanes is dangerous think about it you have people going slow constantly wanting in and faster drivers constantly deccelerating to get out of it. Then on three lane roads you make one of them a fast lane 80% of people then want to use it and it gets crowded and dangerous. then People will just want to raise the whole speed limit and isnt that the issue now. One more thing I just thought of reffering to JoeWagons comment on the safetey of driving fast. I agree driving fast is very safe... for an experienced alert driver. however when you lean over to grab a cd @ 90 mph it doesnt take as much to screw up and cause a pileup. what about people who are inexperienced at fast driving or people who overestimate their skills. Granted we could grade drivers and their cars and roads but cops cant tell the difference between a real experienced driver in a safe car and some guy who thinks hes cool until he wrecks and kills someone. To conclude it does sound like kind of a good idea but there are so many things that could go wrong the whole idea is a ticking timebomb. please think about this and tell me your ideas I would love to entertain them



- The mark of an educated mind is the ability to entertain an idea without accepting it.

[Mike (M3)]

JLink2004 has the right idea here; id just like to add that 10 mph in a crash IS actually quite a lot more dangerous for the people involved- obviously depends what kinda speeds we are talking about here.

Unfortunately speed limits arent imposed to create revenue, theyre designed to limit the number of crashes and fatalities on the roads; after the speed limits were introduced on the motorways in England the number of fatalities dropped dramatically ( speed cameras are a whole other kettle of fish ).

You dont seriously think we can have a whole lane reserved for "better drivers"? come on!

[op012503]

Originally Posted by Stoggers

In the UK they are now introducing toll roads where if you pay, you can go on less busy roads...
How about introducing toll roads where you can only go on them if you've taken a 'Performance Driver' course (at your own expense) and acquired a licence which permits you to drive at high speed.
The course would focus only on performance driving similar to that which Traffic Police take, rather than on how to park, drive safely through School zones, etc

Private roads..hmmm how would the insurers see that?

These roads dont exist here and they never will. And as for the idea of having certian cars with 'expert' drivers in fast lanes is bs. How will police enforce this?

I live in NY so with all the traffic around here its rare to find a safe place to go over the speed limit anyway. I do agree though that in places where traffic flow is light and the roads are in good shape, there should be either no speed limit or a limit of say 90.