=v= Since childhood I've heard speeding tickets described as
"revenue enhancement," a phrase that generally accompanies
the notion that speeding is a "right." Most motorists have
little grasp of the real costs inflicted by cars, which is
unfortunately actually pretty much the point of propping it
up with so much subsidy.
=v= Another part of the problem is the post-WWII practice
of determining speed limits (based in part on factors not
obvious to motorists, such as the existence of people in
the outdoors who aren't driving) and building roads wider
than needed to put in a margin of safety. This makes roads
"feel" as if designed for speeding, which erases that margin.
Police and judges are subjected to the same "feeling," so it
goes unenforced.
> I agree with you about the comments section of the paper.
> For the most part, I simply don't read the comments. There
> are times - especially when the topic is something about
> transportation, transportation funding, land use issues,
> etc - when I can't resist. I normally regret my curiosity.
=v= I check in on those very topics as well, which is one
reason I know that the phrase "revenue ehancement" and the
speeding-is-a-"right" ignorance of my childhood is still
thriving. Also, apparently bicyclists are the only ones
who ever break traffic laws, so they should be forced to
get licenses (because that works so well for motorists).
Q.E.D.,
<_Jym_>
_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org
