Sorry goat herder boy, that would be stupid. The ROAD wouldn't be safe to travel on at 120. The design velocity of the roads isn't anywhere close to 120 mph. The safety standards of the roadways with 65 mph speed limits or higher are based on a design speed of at least 70.

What's all this talk about legislation for seatbelts? Mandatory seat belt laws were enacted in all 50 states in 1994. Personally I think seat belt laws are a breach of freedom. If someone is stupid enough to not wear one and they die in an accident as a result, that's not the government's problem. Should attempted suicide be made illegal also?

 

It some states suicide is still on the books as a crime as is attempted suicide.

 

I dont know about attempt, but sucide is a federal crime, and is against the law.




No one has ever been charged with it though....

 

Wrong. In Arizona, you do not have to use a seatbelt. Children must be buckled in or in a car seat. Adults do not have to have a seat belt on.

Thought I had better add this:

 

You know engineer boy, statistics is a funny thing.

The fact is more people died after after the National 55 speed limit was removed.

The rate per million miles driven was the only thing that dropped 16 %.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

I have no desire to tell you how fast to drive or whether you wear a seatbelt.

 

These statistics should be broken down regionally to see where 55 mph is actually effective. I read somewhere that the Northeast and several Metropolitan areas with heavy population densities were the only areas that actually benefited from the 55 mph law. It should never have been a national standard.

 

It was all about gas usage, they tried to sell safety as a by-product.
I had only had my license two years when those double nickels went up everywhere.

I remember thirty cars lined up at every pump.
This was also before personalized license plates.
If your plate ended with an odd number you could buy gas on odd dates.
Even numbers on even dates.

There was an oil mid-east embargo going on and when gas spiked from 29 cents to $1.50, Big oil got hit with the 'Windfall Profits Tax'.

"DRIVE 55, DRIVE 55, DRIVE 55....
IT BEATS NOT DRIVING AT ALL"

I don't know if that jingle was about us running out of gas or them taking our license.
Ah, the good ole days.

 

More people have died because there are 40 million more cars on the road. More cars equals more wrecks. Here are the stats on the number of registered vehicles.

http://www.bts.gov/publications/nati...ble_01_11.html

The highway fatality rate, injuries, and crashes all decreased. Read the table.


The problem with talking with people who don't understand logic is if you talk to them long enough you can't tell the difference between either one of them.

 

So more cars = More accidents?

Thats not statistics.

That's the law of probability.



So I guess we need what percent of cars on the road today are in fatal accidents vs pre 70mph signs.

Which I would assume would be 0% then and now.

Becasue if they are on the road then they likely haven't been involved in a fatal accident.

 

40,716 dead in 1994
42,636 dead in 2004

Sell it to the additional 1,920 dead, they'll be glad have your opinion.

I understand your logic just fine.
More dead means the highways are safer.

Next, you'll be logically explaining how we are winning in Iraq.

 

With your logic you probably think that Hugo Chavez isn't a dictator because he's been elected 8 times.

 

.

How can you make that statement when you are looking at the same stat page we are?

Since 1994, the percentage of fatalities has dropped.

Plan and simple.

Why twist it into something it's not.

 

I don't think I'm twisting anything.

I read the article that was referenced in the first post....
"Driving on the highways is safer today than ever before"

Then I read this....
40,716 dead in 1994
42,636 dead in 2004

If the two numbers were reversed, I would agree with the statement but,

Don't pee on my leg and tell me it's raining.

 

Ok, now read this. again.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/

 

Ok, I read it, again.
I think I understand now.

If there were twice as many cars or drivers or population then

84,000 people could be slaughtered on the highways and stilll

"Driving on the highways is safer today than ever before"

sounds like a winning proposition to me.