Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
1788 messages, Last post on Nov 14, 2009 at 3:43 PM
You are in the Automotive News & Views Forum. Your Hosts are steve_ & claires
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 08, 2009 10:04 am) |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 08, 2009 9:03 am) You really do need to get out more so that you have a more sophisticated understanding of this issue. Many people drive 80-85 mph on limited access highways. It's perfectly safe. In fact, this past summer, I drove on a round trip from Las Vegas, Nevada, to Albuquerque, New Mexico, stopping at the Grand Canyon and the Painted Desert along the way back from New Mexico. So we spent considerable time driving in Arizona - your home state. We drove 80 mph most of the way on the limited access highways, and were still passed by a fair number of people. I guess in your world, something like 80 percent of the driving population are "speed freaks" because they drive faster than 80 mph. larsb: You are acting as if 100 years of automobile usage has taught us that SPEED DOES NOT KILL when it's in reality just the opposite !!! Uh, no, check out the safety statistics since the automobile came into common use and the government began compiling annual traffic fatality stastitics. Our roads are safer than ever, even as people are driving faster than ever. And limited access highways are among our safest roads, even with the highest speeds. So, the reality is the opposite of what you are saying. Really, you should not be wasting time posting on Edmunds.com. With your ability to pick a position, and insist that the entire world should share it, and then ignore the facts and continue to insist that said position is the right one, you should be heading the product planning or marketing department of General Motors. You could make good money, and when everything is on the verge of collapse, you could then journey to Washington, D.C. and get a big fat bailout because nothing was your fault... |
|
|
Replying to: xrunner2 (Jan 08, 2009 10:11 am) And I must say it again, these photo cash grabs seem to have pretty wide loopholes...just lie your way out of it. Telling a tale to a bunch of liars, cowards, and thieves isn't a sin, right? 
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 08, 2009 10:16 am) I've been an adult for 27 years, and am an owner of two college degrees. Spent 6 years in the Marine Corps. Make my living with my brain. I'm not saying 80-85 is unsafe. I said it's less safe than 70-75 mpg, and if you are unable to grasp the truth of that statement, then I feel for you. If you are unable to grasp the fact that more damage is done to human tissue in a higher speed wreck than in a lower speed wreck, then again, I feel for you. I'm finished discussing it with you, because it's obvious that only life experience will convince you of the error of your position. You get the last word. I'm man enough to let you have it. I'll not comment further on the issue with you. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 08, 2009 10:11 am) No, I'm the only still debating you NOW. Others have disagreed with you on this very thread. larsb: Driving faster wastes fuel, and it's NOT an opinion young man. Don't irritate me to the point where I have to start spouting statistics. I've got better beans to re-fry.larsb: Don't say anything else about it. You are flat wrong - couldn't be more wrong." Wrong - see above. larsb: ( I'm not going to challenge your "cred" because young guys like you are allowed to be wrong now and again. It's a learning process for you. ) When you have something to teach, please let me know. In the meantime, if you want to have a more sophisticated understanding of this issue, I'd suggest stop by what you think you know, because it isn't all that much. |
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 08, 2009 10:22 am) Sign of a person with a weak argument - they stoop to personal attacks. Over and over and over again.
|
|
|
Replying to: grbeck (Jan 08, 2009 10:22 am) What would it matter? When you refuse to accept facts, you cannot learn.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 08, 2009 10:20 am) That wasn't a personal attack. It was a suggestion that you don't know what you are talking about, and helpful advice on a new, possibly more lucrative career path. larsb: I've been an adult for 27 years, and am an owner of two college degrees. Spent 6 years in the Marine Corps. Make my living with my brain. Unfortunately, while your resume is impressive, and I applaud your service to our country, it doesn't appear to have allowed you much time to gain a true understanding of traffic safety issues, and what will really work to improve traffic safety. larsb: I'm not saying 80-85 is unsafe. I said it's less safe than 70-75 mpg, and if you are unable to grasp the truth of that statement, then I feel for you. Given your accusation that anyone who drives over the speed limit is a "speed freak," and that all speeding is dangerous, and regular wailing about people passing you at 75 mph, I'm not sure how you can now claim that you are not saying that 80-85 mph is unsafe. And please note that there is no proof that higher speeds on limited access highways have resulted in more accidents or fatalities...both of which are at record lows in the U.S. larsb: If you are unable to grasp the fact that more damage is done to human tissue in a higher speed wreck than in a lower speed wreck, then again, I feel for you. That is not a personal attack. We want the same thing - safe roads. I just advocate using what works - setting higher, more realistic speed limits, not worrying about "speeders" on limited access highways, tigher licensing requirements for brand-new teenager drivers, eliminating ignoramuses who camp in the left lane, and going after drunk drivers. Note that the use of photo radar isn't going to help in those enforcement efforts. |
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 08, 2009 10:25 am) Come to my office in Harrisburg, and over a nice lunch, I'll help you learn the difference between "facts" and "opinions." Lunch will be on me.
|
|
|
Replying to: larsb (Jan 08, 2009 10:24 am) 
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Automotive News & Views Photo Radar
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
