why are highway limits so low?

[aussie muscle]

From Jalopnik
This guy makes some good points in his rage against speed limits. His arguments are well thought out and is quite funny too. recommended viewing
http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature...&v=2BKdbxX1pDw

source:
http://jalopnik.com/this-is-the-best...you-1302382244

[Spurious]

Limits are low 'cause they're made by people with degree's who wear glasses & know better than the rest of us.
We, the general public apparently can't be trusted to decide things for ourselves.

[Mr Hardware]

Originally Posted by FlivverFord

Limits are low 'cause they're made by people with degree's who wear glasses & know better than the rest of us.
We, the general public apparently can't be trusted to decide things for ourselves.

About a quarter of australians have degree's (sic) and two thirds wear glasses. Perhaps they are the general public?

[2011G6E]

Once they bring in a system of licence testing that deals with the seriousness of what you are actually doing, then they can raise limits.

I mean, you might trust yourself at 120 or 130...but look around in any average days driving, and realise that those drivers you are shaking your head at will also be doing 120 or 130kph coming the other way...


Maybe have a testing system like Finland...three years to get your full licence, high speed driving, skid pan testing, all sorts of difficult situations and techniques are covered...I mean, if you're going to do it, do it properly...

[joolz]

Originally Posted by FlivverFord

Limits are low 'cause they're made by people with degree's who wear glasses & know better than the rest of us.
We, the general public apparently can't be trusted to decide things for ourselves.

Better still dont even hold a drivers licence. My wife knew an engineer in Vicroads that has never driven a car. I guess he would be the expert on roads!

[335POWER]

Or because the country roads are crapola!

[JamesR]

Originally Posted by Troy23

Or because the country roads are crapola!

but in Victoria the freeways in the country have 110km/h limits, but closer to the city its only 100-80km/h...
so i dont know about that argument.

[csv8]

so they can raise revenue!!!

[Full Noise]

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showthread.php?t=11404742

[monte.b]

How would anybody text at 130 when they have trouble at 100

[kennyboy]

coz we have to share them with drop-kicks & sh?? heaps

[kennyboy]

Oh & I forgot the roos & wombats

[Mr G8]

Nice find!

Sent from my GT-N7105T using Tapatalk 4

[GCRXR6]

Gee .. here we go again .... the speed argument. OK ... Speed does not kill. But it's the sudden stop that does it. That's why speed limits are set at various limts in various places .. so our poor little bodies .. or those of the other person we hit .. stand a better chance of surviving. Yes Flivver Ford .. I wear glasses, and I have studdied my but off. Why? So I can go out at all hours of the flamin' day and night to scrape up those broken bodies and try like flamin' hell to save their life or limb before gettin' the buggers to hospital. The vast majority of RTC's I've been to, can be attributed to inappropriate speed in the circumstance/location. All, of course, are top notch drivers ... like many on this forum, who believe they are up to the job of driving faster than the posted speed. The great Peter Brock found that tree was not going to move ..... and that guy WAS a top driver. I can spend more time explaining to you how the sudden stop causes death ... but it's been shown before in educational TV ads .. but most think it's BS.

[cro142]

Originally Posted by GCRXR6

Gee .. here we go again .... the speed argument. OK ... Speed does not kill. But it's the sudden stop that does it. That's why speed limits are set at various limts in various places .. so our poor little bodies .. or those of the other person we hit .. stand a better chance of surviving. Yes Flivver Ford .. I wear glasses, and I have studdied my but off. Why? So I can go out at all hours of the flamin' day and night to scrape up those broken bodies and try like flamin' hell to save their life or limb before gettin' the buggers to hospital. The vast majority of RTC's I've been to, can be attributed to inappropriate speed in the circumstance/location. All, of course, are top notch drivers ... like many on this forum, who believe they are up to the job of driving faster than the posted speed. The great Peter Brock found that tree was not going to move ..... and that guy WAS a top driver. I can spend more time explaining to you how the sudden stop causes death ... but it's been shown before in educational TV ads .. but most think it's BS.

Yep, you are spot on - inappropriate speed in the circumstance/location is the always the problem.

The thing is that sometimes an appropriate speed, given suitable location, conditions, vehicle, driver skill etc, is higher than the posted limit.

Sometimes lower too!

It works both ways.

[NAK302]

insurance companies own us, so they dictate the terms of your life through a mob called government.

[malazn mafia]

Metro and suburban speed limits make sense. But who invented highway speed limits? My driving record expresses my massive contempt for 110 kph zones (and have paid for it accordingly and hold no remorse) but stick to all other suburban limits with no fuss.

[cro142]

I too agree with the urban limits, but highway limits are too low.

If we had a 130 kmh limit on good open roads, we could sit at reasonable 120 to 125 without the ridiculous clock-watching we have to do now.

[xisled]

To me it makes no difference if the limit is 100 or 500. On my average day of driving I would be lucky to get to 80. I drive in peak hour bumper to bumper. The limit on the west gate freeway could be 500 but I would still be stuck doing 10ks. Instead of fixing the speed limit, I would rather the gov spend money on the road system to fix peak hour and the worry about the speed limit.

[irish2]

Originally Posted by xisled

To me it makes no difference if the limit is 100 or 500. On my average day of driving I would be lucky to get to 80. I drive in peak hour bumper to bumper. The limit on the west gate freeway could be 500 but I would still be stuck doing 10ks. Instead of fixing the speed limit, I would rather the gov spend money on the road system to fix peak hour and the worry about the speed limit.

Maybe there are other people in Australia who do not drive only in peak hour, and would benefit from a higher speed limit preventing rolling road blocks.

Drive in any developed nation other than Australia and NZ, and you will see the speed laws and enforcement are quite different. They also have lower death rates.

[TC200six]

If you look at an update on the 9 News Facebook profile today, you'll see nothing but fear mongering regarding a story about raising highway limits. They must think every little street in QLD will be increased to 140. I believe limits should be increased where it's safe to do so. The only road in QLD that comes to mind is the M1 from Beenleigh to Helensvale.

[doktoravalanche]

Because Australia is the home of the "nanny" state!
Oh, and raising money through speeding fines.....

[blackf6]

The limits are only as slow as you want to go. What are you scared of?

[4stanger]

After a massive road trip over the last 11 days, where We (wife & son) drove from Rockhampton the Leichardt, Newell, Monaro, Princess, Great Ocean Road, Western Freeway (Ballarat to Melbourne in pouring rain) Hume, Mid Western, Pacific, Bruce Highways through 4 capital cities back to Rockhampton again. Yes some sections of these roads are suitable for 110 km/h speed limits and some sections deserve more (& some were questionable).
Problem is the idiot factor, when people still think they can drive at 110 km/h when there is the risk of caravans, trucks & wildlife in poor conditions (dusk, dawn, heavy rain, fog, smoke) that can appear without any notice. The government has to set laws for idiots to;), gee I saw some occasional shocking driving on the highways during this trip, drivers using mobile phones struggling to drive within their lanes and the "old speed up in the overtaking lane" drivers who create frustrations & desperate overtaking moves.

[mad cow]

IMO the limiting issues here is the state of our roads and the average quality of our drivers.

also if anyone else here has hit a roo at 100kph then had to pull the car up while the roo kicks the hell out of the interior of your car you may see the sense in going at a sensible speed on country roads.
but in saying that im not a nark. I do drive over the limit where I deem it safe. but in all honesty a lot of drivers on our roads are incapable of good judgement in these areas.

[LTDHO]

Two reasons.
1) Our drivers have NFI and would more than likely still sit in the right lane doing 80!
2) it would go against all the the goverment has said regarding 'speed kills'. Yup, the drones will awaken to the truth!

[shane3]

Our license testing is whats wrong, nothing more then a car park test and that's all, not once have I seen a "L" driver doing a test on the freeway or highway to see if they can actually drive at 100km/h (not kph!!!), 99% of people jump in there cars and turn off there brains.
Like in Germany we need to do driver training NOT "driving classes", who has ever seen some on get killed from doing a 3 point turn in a small back alley, or from parallel parking (then again most drivers can't even do this in a small car!), real world driver training not the B/S they try and pass as driver education.

[mechanic]

It's identical to the Gun Control argument, guns don't kill anybody without a human's finger on the trigger.

As with motor vehicles, quite safe until a human gets behind the wheel.

What revenue raising govts. don't want to acknowledge is the idiots who don't stop at level crossings, drive while drunk or drugged, drive while tired,take no notice of traffic lights, drive like they own both sides of the road and have very poor reflexes and absolute rubbish judgement.

Much more profitable to sit a cop on overtime in a van and pick off the average taxpayer doing 2 k's over the limit.

It's obvious from the penalties applied after serious car crashes that driving in a dangerous or negligent manner is OK as a lot of offenders walk away scot free even after causing the death of innocent people.

[xxx000]

Originally Posted by mechanic

It's identical to the Gun Control argument, guns don't kill anybody without a human's finger on the trigger.

As with motor vehicles, quite safe until a human gets behind the wheel.

Knives don't kill anyone either unless used by someone but like cars they are necessary in society and have a useful and reasonable purpose in our everyday lives.

Guns on the other hand are hardly useful or necessary in 99.9% of modern society.

The 'guns don't kill people....' statement is a simplistic and absurd one ignoring common sense

[Trevor 57]

If you think that the road safety measures in Australia don't work, have a read:
http://www.photius.com/rankings/road...ings_2009.html