Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site shark.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!seismo!harpo!ihnp4!alberta!ubc-vision!uw-beaver!tektronix!orca!shark!waltt
From: waltt@shark.UUCP (Walt Tucker)
Newsgroups: net.followup
Subject: Re: Fast Driving and Other Inane Legislation
Message-ID: <218@shark.UUCP>
Date: Wed, 18-Jan-84 13:19:37 EST
Article-I.D.: shark.218
Posted: Wed Jan 18 13:19:37 1984
Date-Received: Sat, 21-Jan-84 23:12:11 EST
Organization: Tektronix, Wilsonville OR.
Lines: 53

------------------------

A few disjointed speculations and personal opinions:

After driving years at the 55 mph speed limit, I (personally) would 
find it hard to adjust back to a 70-80 mph freeway (expressway for
Easterner's) speed limit.  However, I would support a raise to a
60 or 65 mph limit, which seems to be the normal freeway speed, anyway.

A number of weekends I've gone on 100+ mile freeway cruises and just keeping 
up with the flow of traffic puts me between a constant 60 to 65 mph.  At 
least in Oregon (and California), the 55 mph limit does not seem to be 
enforced.  

I do not believe the 55 mph speed limit saves lives or fuel, as opposed 
to a 60 or 65 mph hour limit (but certainly compared to faster speeds) for 
many of the reasons mentioned in this newsgroup (I won't bother to repeat 
them).  I also agree that there are better ways to legislate and enforce 
saving lives and gas than through the type of legislation that gets passed 
in the state legislatures (more about this later).  

However, in a practical sense, raising the speed limit could cause a 
problem I haven't seen mentioned.  In Oregon, a lot of the freeways 
and highways throughout the state go up and down hills, over mountain
passes, etc.  Since the trend in American cars (which I'm sure many of 
you own) in the past few years has been towards gas-saving four cylinder
engines, raising the limit could cause a traffic snarling problem.  My
wife has a four cylinder Capri.  If I use that car to go into Portland,
there are hills where I will pull down to 55 and 60 (even 50 on other
passes in the state).  No problem if I am only going 5 mph slower than 
other traffic, but you put a lot of cars like that on the road that 
average 15 mph slower than the top end of the limit, and you have a 
problem.  10 years ago, when cars had larger engines and higher gear-ratios, 
they were built for sustained higher speeds of 70 and 80.  But, in the 
past few years, American cars (which you'll have to admit still comprise 
a large segment of the driving population) have been engineered for 
lower speeds.

Now, an example of inane legislation.  The trend in the past few years
has been to get the drunk driver off the road.  OK, fine and dandy.
Bars close at 2 AM in Oregon.  Convience stores used to have to stop
selling beer and wine at 1:30 AM (hard liquor is sold through state
licensed stores and stops selling much earlier, like 10 PM), which
is 1/2 hour before the bars close.  Now, a couple of years ago, the 
legislature raised the fine for drunk driving up to about $1000 (it 
has since been raised again).  In the same legislative session, they 
extended the time that beer and wine could be sold from 1:30 to 2:30.
Does anybody besides me see something wrong with this?

                           -- Walt Tucker
                              Wilsonville, OR
be sold