Guilliani Confiscating Cars

Like, wow! DC, that's a very clear and susynct analysis. Disgusting, ain't it?

Rob, in 1994(?) the Federal Highway Administration published a report that stated that the speed limits on 85% of the roads in the US were under posted (too slow). Since the speed limits are set locally in many cases, it doesn't take a great leap in logic to suspect that most speed limits have a whole lot more to do with revenue enhancement than public safety.

And the sheeple just go along. . . DAMN

M2
 
Mike, I recall reading about that study in the Sunday paper. I think it was from the National Highway Traffic and Safety Administration. I believe it too - had more than one LEO tell me that a certain limit was set more as a political matter than an engineering concern. Perhaps sometimes it is for revenue, but I think many other times it is simply because Mr. / Mrs. Smith just don't want fast cars on 'their' street.

And Rob, I used to be a mechanic in a bike (motorcycle) shop, and some of our customers missed appointments because they were killed over the weekend (usually by at-fault auto drivers). And, I've seen at least one rider / body scraped off of the street. Doesn't matter how good a rider you are - the car wins. Please be real careful out there - we like you here on TFL, in one piece. Done preachin'. :)
 
The interstate system reached final design in the late 50's. Of course, it was designed for the capabilities of the cars of the time. The design speed was for safe handling of 1950's automobiles at 70 to 75 miles per hour with a fairly conservative safey margin built in. To remain objective, one must note that the degree of urban sprawl and congestion was not anticipated by the original planners. Thus, my conclusions do not pertain to urban areas. Modern vehicles can perform better in all areas of handling on wet pavement than 1950's vehicles could on dry. If the original vehicle performance and safety parameters used to design the interstate system were used to evaluate the equivalent speed safe for modern vehicles, I would not be surprised to see a value obtained from 85 to 95 mph. This is on the open interstates not urban interstates, mind.

All the speed limits on the open interstate are political- none are engineering. On the other hand I have seen many two lane highways with a posted 55 mph that were not safe at that speed. Once again the reason is political not engineering.

On the motorcycle issue, unfortunately I stopped riding many years ago. It seemed to me that the little old ladies with blue hair in white Cadillacs were out for my blood :)
 
I'm trying to get those on the MADD discussion board to acknowledge that this law is flawed. By stating some of what has been said here and adding my own I've managed to at least make one member acknowledge the problem.

Could really use some additional help.
 
Don't know If I really have the nag of how their discussion area works, btu I {i]tried[/i] to post the following in three seperate but relevant areas:

_______________

Who really thinks that this confiscation law is fair?

Have you considered that this is confiscation before conviction?

Of the 6000 DUI cases in NYC last year, the average trial as over a year
after the initial arrest? THat means an innocent person could be without
his vehicle for over a year. His family and his kids could have no means of
transportation. Sure, NYC has a public transit system, but what if the
person is a visitor?

Imagine: A visitor to NYc is driving with his family. He is from a rural area,
perhaps in the south.. he is flustered by the conditions while driving
through NYC and makes an erratic maneuver. NYPD pulls him over and ends up
charging him with DUI and taking him for a blood test, based on his actions. Imagine this person's predicament.

Or, this one: YOUR car is stolen and the individual is drunk. In trying to
achieve the maximum penalty for this criminal, he is charged with DUI as
well as with grand theft auto. YOUR car is now confiscated. YOU lose
your car, because you were a VICTIM!! Doom on you.

I can't belive that the normally thoughtful, courageous people at MADD
are supporting this ridiculous law.

-Rob
trendsetter@bellsouth.net
www.thefiringline.com
 
Saw your response in the general discussion there.

Hopefully between us we can show a few members the problems with this.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top