Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site pegasus.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxl!ihnp4!pegasus!mzal From: mzal@pegasus.UUCP (Mike Zaleski) Newsgroups: net.auto Subject: 55 MPH limit: A call to arms! Message-ID: <1469@pegasus.UUCP> Date: Wed, 4-Jul-84 21:45:00 EDT Article-I.D.: pegasus.1469 Posted: Wed Jul 4 21:45:00 1984 Date-Received: Thu, 5-Jul-84 06:30:18 EDT Organization: AT&T Information Systems, Lincroft NJ Lines: 210 I have decided to send the following letter to a few of the popular automotive magazines. It is basically a copy of my original posting on "What to do about the 55 MPH limit?" with a bit of explaination and expansion on my points. Will this really lead to the formation of a motorists movement to get rid of the 55 MPH limit? Time will tell. If you'd like to send a copy of this to any other automotive magazines, or spread this message anywhere else, please feel free to do so. Also, thanks to those people who wrote back to me or net.auto about this subject. (Unfortunately, some mail messages arrived empty.) -- Mike^Z ----begin letter: 4 July 1984 To the editors of Car Collector and Car Classics, Car&Driver, Hot Rod, Motor Trend, Road and Track and the readers of net.auto Having been a reader of your magazine for some time, and noting an anti-55 MPH Speed Limit sentiment in your magazine, I thought I would write to you with my suggestion for some real methods to deal with the limit. The contents of the following pages were posted on the nationwide auto enthusiats computer network bulletin board. These remarks were made in the context of a discussion relating to the 55 MPH limit and in particular of some discussion about gas milage and safety at that speed. ----Begin enclosure---- Judging by the recent number of articles in this group complaining about the 55 MPH limit, it seems the readers of net.auto are quite unhappy about it. It also seems that this energy could be channeled more effectively. First, we must be really honest with ourselves. Dubious arguments like increased gas mileage above 55 MPH or claims that the 55 MPH limit cause more accidents aside, the real reasons we are unhappy with the limit is that it restrains our emotional desire to drive fast (i.e. have fun driving) and makes long trips drag out. So, how can we drivers go about scoring a political victory with few facts to support our cause? I have two proposals: A driving boycott and a nationwide publicity blitz against the limit. - A Boycott? - Suppose we (drivers and our friendly automotive press) declared some weekend a "no travel" weekend. A slogan something like "Too slow, why go?" might do the trick. The idea here is that we don't go anywhere that weekend. No ski trips, beach trips, shopping trips, or anything of that sort. If such a boycott is in any way successful, toll roads, gasoline companies, retail businesses, recreational facilities, and even the police should see a reduced income for that weekend. The hope is the fear of continued loss of revenue from additional boycotts (or the hope that increasing the limit might increase revenues) will cause business people to sit up, take notice, and start putting some real pressure on the political wheeler dealers to raise with the limit. - A Publicity Blitz? - Typically, issues of this sort are fought with more emotion than fact on both sides. Mothers will cry over the loss of their children under the wheels of speeding motorists on suburban streets as if this was in some way related to interstate highways. How can we fight this? Equally emotional advertisements in the non-automotive press which: - tell a sad tale of a family breaking up because the breadwinner lost his or her license for too many speeding tickets, couldn't get to work, lost a job, lost a home, etc, etc. - appeal to people's fear of crime, leave the impression that police watching the highways are not doing useful police work. (Actually, a large number of police are killed every year in traffic accidents. Perhaps a police organization or two could be encouraged to come out against the limit?) - appeal to people's distrust of technology. (Ever get a wrong bill from a computer? How can you trust a radar unit that gets banged around, has coffee spilled on it, etc, etc?) - appeal to nationalistic desires, implying that because we have a lower speed limit than many other countries, we are really a second class nation. - imply that driving slowly induces stress and other sorts of unhealthy things. - imply that the 55 MPH limit has given the police another tool to use to spy on and harass innocent citizens. - imply that the 55 MPH limit is a plot by lawyers and politicians to make more money without adding anything productive to the economy. - Are There Any Facts? - In point of fact, the following could probably be offered as evidence against the 55 MPH limit: - Any gas savings are more than offset by time wasted, if one values their time as being worth at least the minimum hourly wage. - The actual number of fatalities on the high speed, limited access highways is only about 10 percent of the total number of fatalities. Also, it appears that the actual number of highway miles driven has fallen since the 55 MPH limit was imposed, so the number of fatalities per highway mile has in fact remained fairly constant (hence refuting the safety argument). - The effective throughput of the highways might be increased if traffic could move along faster. - A Compromise? - Finally, we should realize that we are not going to see limits go up to 75 MPH, or have unlimited speeds on our highways. Personally, what I think would be reasonable: 1. Raise the speed limit to 65 MPH. 2. Speeding offenses of up to 10 MPH over the limit would be treated as simple fines, with no points or insurance consequences. In return for this, I would be willing to accept either a national seatbelt law, or a law requiring airbags, or both. I'd be interested in hearing other people's comments on these thoughts of mine. -- Mike^Z Zaleski@Rutgers allegra!pegasus!mzal ----End enclosure---- In short, what my message was appealing for is a motorists lobby to push for changes in laws which are of interest to drivers, such as the 55 MPH limit. The reason I am writing to the editor of this magazine is to suggest that the automotive press could provide the crucial impetus to start such a movement. The automotive press has a number of advantages: - You can reach a large number of enthusiasts. - You are respected publishers and your help in starting a motorists lobby would be taken seriously and not regarded as a moneymaking scam of some sort. - You may have access to more people at higher levels in the governemt, industry, and advertising world. A specific course of action I would suggest: 1. Publishers of automotive magazines get together and agree a. To put up a reasonable amount of "seed money" to fund an initial thrust. b. To try to raise some money from various automotive businesses. (Car manufacturers, the oil industry, anyone who might benefit from an increased speed limit. Extremely large donations - which are unlikely, in any case - should be discouraged to prevent this from looking like a big business "plot".) c. To provide some free advertising space to encourage readers to contribute to the cause of fighting the 55 MPH limit. (I.e. to raise money for more anti-55 advertisements.) 2. Spend as much of the aforementioned "seed money" as possible on a publicity blitz in the non-automotive press along the lines I discussed above. 3. Have the automotive press declare some weekend a "Too slow, why go?" driving boycott weekend. Do it with great fanfare and hope for a good showing. If it isn't successful, no real harm is done and we can just look for another technique to apply economic pressure. I admit that many important details are left out of the plan I have discussed above. However, I think the basics of a good idea are there. It may seem odd that I don't mention writing to one's congressperson. However, in my experience this has generated either no response or in one case, an unsupportive response. People can write if they want, of course. But i believe that asking people to NOT do something (i.e. drive anywhere on some weekend) will be more likely to generate a response. Any comments? -- Mike^Z Arpanet: Zaleski@Rutgers uucp: allegra!pegasus!mzal US Mail: Michael Zaleski AT&T Info Systems Room 1C-307 307 Middletown-Lincroft Road Lincroft, New Jersey 07738 (201)-576-6260 [The use of my business address should not be taken as an indication of any official AT&T policy or involvement. All opinions contained herein are my own. I am only using this address because I may be moving soon.]