I hear what you're saying but speed limits, IMO, are patent BS as currently set. Speed limits haven't been raised since the 60's and cars today are much safer and higher performing than they were then. The quality difference in tires alone is huge.
I agree with this. I'm of the opinion that overkill speed enforcement
on highways is basically the result of the collusion of
the insurance industries with the state. The insurance providers
make all kinds of cash off premium increases caused by "points"
that get added, etc. They also get revenue from people who
may have been busted for speeding many times, but may have
never been in an at-fault accident. The whole thing is free money
for them. The state also profits bigtime revenue wise because
most tickets probably don't get challenged. A good friend of
mine for instance, fits this profile perfectly. Never had an at fault
accident in his known life; but yet came close to losing his license
a couple of times because of the "3 in a year" rule. He's been
driving for 20+ years, too, with at least 20K miles a year (he does
sales. ) Yet, somehow the insurance companies still think that
he's a "risk".
I don't have a problem with the police stopping DANGEROUS
drivers, but this revenue collection ponzi scheme crap is
sickening. It's revenue collection under the guise of
safety.
In addition, I've done a lot of commuting on MA highways including Rt 3 between 128 and NH. You will never (or nearly never) see a state cop handing out tickets during rush hour. If you're on Rt 3 in the morning, you'll often see a cop on the opposite side but never on the busy side. That tells me that they don't want to slow traffic even though it's the most dangerous time to speed (and plenty of people are).
I think it has more to do with the fact that the risk to the officer
of getting into an accident or getting hit while outside the cruiser
is probably 100 times higher during rush hour, just because of the
sheer number of cars. Trying to pull someone over in that
kind of bedlam just seems like a dangerous exercise, for the LEO
and for the drivers. I think it's a matter of competing harms... it's
"cheaper" to just allow the mass civil disobedience to occur than it
is to try to stop any of it.
Finally, I'd love to see stats on citations handed out for speeding vs. other moving violations (lack of signaling, failure to keep right, running redlights, etc). I'd put money on tickets written for speeding are far greater than those for all other moving violations combined. The reason for that is obviously that technology makes catching speeders easy
I would believe this, too. A lot of it is because the other offenses are simply harder to bag someone for.
-Mike