Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Should the 55mph speed limit be re-imposed?

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:38 PM
Original message
Should the 55mph speed limit be re-imposed?
I read an interesting advert in Time magazine today (the one with the face of Zucchini or whatever his name was on it)_

If everybody did drive 55 and not 65 (or faster :wow: ), how many gallons of gas would be saved?

Some say up to 300 million.

http://www.google.com/search?q=65+55+mph+million+gallons+saved+&btnG=Search&hl=en&lr=&safe=off

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Freedom_Aflaim Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:39 PM
Response to Original message
1. of course not
Edited on Thu Jun-15-06 06:40 PM by Freedom_Aflaim
55 is to slow.

Maybe if the Republicans propose it, because then they'll finally be driven from office.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MissWaverly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
2. Yes, and it would save people money
because people travel at the rate of others around them so it would save money, and oil


Okay, before you flame me, I say let's clean cut down on our gas emissions, who wants
more Katrinas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Been there, done that, doesn't work.
Neither vehicles nor freeways are designed for only 55. Nobody did it before, and no one will do it now. Encourages contempt for the law, and we already have a President to do that.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:46 PM
Response to Reply #3
8. What about Lee Raymond and Fat Bastard??
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #8
15. Fat Bastard is much better looking, and much poorer.
If there is a God, there won't be many years for him to enjoy his ill-gotten evil gain.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BrklynLiberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:57 PM
Response to Reply #15
19. From your keyboard to god/ess's ears.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:41 PM
Response to Reply #19
37. As usual (yawn. . .) Great minds again think alike.
And you Republicans will take it, and you'll like it.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #15
44. BWAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!
:rofl: :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:51 PM
Response to Reply #3
17. The freeways are at something like 250% capacity
they weren't designed for that either. They were designed for people to travel 70mph at traffic levels from what? 50 years ago?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
uncle ray Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:37 PM
Response to Reply #17
45. so driving slower will increase congestion.
the slower you drive, the more time you spend taking up space on the road.

besides, it's only some freeways in urban areas that are past their designed capacity, there are many miles of wide open freeway with very low traffic densities where you can open her up a bit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LisaM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:41 AM
Response to Reply #45
49. Actually, that's not necessarily true (where it's congested)
They did a study that showed if you slowed traffic to 45 MPH within city limits (on freeways) traffic would actually move faster. It's 60 mph within the city of Seattle, which is too fast. It's always congested (or usually) because people can't easily merge in and out. Since Seattle has a lot of entrances and exits on both the right and left, there is a lot of criss-crossing going on. Instant logjam. But, I suppose we can't change it because people like the guy I saw today in a giant pickup with a big "JESUS" bumpersticker on the back wouldn't like it.

Also, we frequently drive from Seattle to Anacortes, about 70 miles. It can be congested almost the entire way, not just in the cities. They had to lower the speeed limit at one point because of the number of fatal accidents.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ayeshahaqqiqa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
4. Where I live, the max I can drive is 55 mph
I know that when it was the national speed limit, highway deaths went down. But I am not sure about gas mileage improving. Our Geo Prizm made over 40 mpg when we drove at 65 mph on a trip back East last year. But I realize most engines aren't Toyotas, so probably the average mpg would be a savings at 55.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
seemunkee Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:50 PM
Response to Reply #4
14. I remember an article from that time
Highway traffic deaths were on the decline before 55 was imposed. There was a greater drop the year we went to 55 but the number of highway miles traveled dropped that year too.


I know wind drag comes into play but transmisson gearing can make a difference in your mileage too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DerBeppo Donating Member (452 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:41 PM
Response to Original message
5. only if
people actually drove 55, which is a genie who will never be put back in his bottle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gatorboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:42 PM
Response to Original message
6. But, but, but...
I can't drive 55!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kajsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:47 PM
Response to Reply #6
9. I love that song!
:7
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
guinivere Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:43 PM
Response to Reply #6
38. Great song!
I can't drive 55 either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
AllNamesHaveBeenUsed Donating Member (140 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:33 PM
Response to Reply #38
43. I HATE that song...
Having said that, I can't drive 55...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
deaniac21 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:27 PM
Response to Reply #6
57. Go on & write me up for 125
Post my face, wanted dead or alive
Take my license n' all that jive
I can't drive 55!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kajsa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:45 PM
Response to Original message
7. It would save gas, but---
the drivers here in SoCal can't even keep to 65 MPH on the freeways.

The average speed is closer to 70-75 MPH.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LeftyMom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:47 PM
Response to Original message
10. I hope not.
My car does better at 65-70ish, which is a damned good thing because everything in the valley's so spread out it takes ages to get anywhere as is.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jedr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:36 PM
Response to Reply #10
33. My "03 Accord gets 32 mpg adv. 75-80 mph.
I don't get any better at 55-65 mph. Have checked it several times on trips from Pa. to Fla....Considering I'm spending less time on the road, I use less fuel. My 4 cly. Accord preforms very well at the higher speeds and overall takes 4 of us from Pittsburgh to Naples Fla. for less money than airfare , but It's a 2 day trip instead of one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Reverend_Smitty Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
11. It's a good idea but...
if you've ever taken a trip on the NJ Turnpike, you will find out quite fast how it will never realistically work
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totallybushed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:48 PM
Response to Original message
12. NO!!
I have to commute 150 miles each day. I would be on the road forever. NO.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:52 PM
Response to Reply #12
18. You need that transporter. . .
Now.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:07 PM
Response to Reply #12
24. If I was a republican, I'd say
"Not my problem you chose to live so far from work".

As a Dem, I'd still suggest you move closer to work. The amount of time needed to drive takes up so much out of your soul each day...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Totallybushed Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 06:44 PM
Response to Reply #24
63. Can't be done.
I need to stay where my wife works. I'd rather make the trip than have her do it. And both jobs are too good to give up.

I'm not complaining, mind you. I enjoy the ride. I just don't need the government telling me my choices are wrong. Screw 'em.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PWRinNY Donating Member (456 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:49 PM
Response to Original message
13. If time is money
Then how much money is saved by going faster?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tactical Progressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:51 PM
Response to Original message
16. 40 mph saves mores gas than 55 mph
Edited on Thu Jun-15-06 06:53 PM by Tactical Progressive
Proponents of a 55 mph speed limit apparently don't care all that much about saving gas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Igel Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:02 PM
Response to Reply #16
23. Walking saves more gas than going 40 mph.
Our lifestyle, where we live in Houston ... we seldom get up to 55.

But when we break out of our little coccoon and go someplace other than the supermarket, local mall and shopping centers, and work ... 55 mph would be idiotic.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:08 PM
Response to Reply #16
25. Last I recall, I thought 35MPH was the peak performance/usage ratio...
Still, 40MPH does save more than 55MPH, no argument from me.

I'd support that too.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:14 PM
Response to Reply #25
28. "0" MPH is the fuel-burn optimum
oh, time magazine's cartoon issue strikes again with anti-libertarian views.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Tactical Progressive Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:18 PM
Response to Reply #25
30. Can you even imagine
a 35 mph speed limit on highways?

My god, there would be twice as many cars on the road as there are today.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LostinVA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:46 PM
Response to Reply #25
46. It's 50-55 mph on my car -- every car is different
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Faygo Kid Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:39 PM
Response to Reply #16
36. 10 miles an hour, and someone to warn the horses!
I have a crush on Connie forever, even if she is colorized.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:26 PM
Response to Reply #16
56. Depends Upon The Shift Point Of The Transmission
At 55 you're almost assured of being in 4th or 5th gear. At 40, it will be in a lower gear, therefore requiring more torque and horsepower per unit velocity. So, the difference is based upon how many RPM's one turns to minimize power.

My car hits it's minimum RPM and torque at the shift to 4th gear which is about 49 or 50 mph. Below that, i'm not going to see any significant or measurable improvement in mileage. Above that, i will only see a reduction in mileage.
The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Spock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 06:58 PM
Response to Original message
20. No effing way!
Just gives the cops another reason to pull you over. Many vehicles these days due to technology improvements & overdrive transmissions are pretty efficient at 65 MPH. It's the fact that most of the SUV crowd seems to have to go 75-85 MPH in those air dam shaped vehicles that kills gas mileage...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:10 PM
Response to Reply #20
27. Link?
I posted one.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mr_Spock Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:09 PM
Response to Reply #27
41. "Drive 55, save gas -- get flipped off "
"Trip shows slowing down boosts mileage but can make you unpopular on the road"

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/10/19/MNG3NFAOF11.DTL



...

For every mile per hour faster than 55 mph, fuel economy drops by about 1 percent, said Jason Mark, clean vehicles program director for the Union of Concerned Scientists. The drop-off increases at a greater rate after 65 mph. The faster you go, the faster the fuel goes.

There are costs the slower you go, however. It took 49 minutes longer to make the trip at 55 mph -- three hours and 36 minutes total -- but it seemed like forever. Sitting in the slow lane, tapping the gas pedal to maintain a steady speed, the car felt like it was traveling at 25. Everything from Porsches and BMWs to big-rigs, the AC Transit bus and pickups towing boats -- and they're supposed to keep their speeds under 55 -- cruised past in the left lane.

There are costs the slower you go, however. It took 49 minutes longer to make the trip at 55 mph -- three hours and 36 minutes total -- but it seemed like forever. Sitting in the slow lane, tapping the gas pedal to maintain a steady speed, the car felt like it was traveling at 25. Everything from Porsches and BMWs to big-rigs, the AC Transit bus and pickups towing boats -- and they're supposed to keep their speeds under 55 -- cruised past in the left lane.

A lot of drivers cast curious glances at The Chronicle's Malibu, and a woman in a black Volvo station wagon with three kids in the back seat glared. One person -- a preteen boy in the passenger seat of a Dodge Stratus -- made an obscene gesture, raising both middle fingers somewhere in Merced County.

A handful of drivers came within a few inches of the rear bumper before jerking their cars into the fast lane and flying by, but most simply passed. Actually, everybody passed sooner or later. The 830 cars and trucks that went by the Malibu as it poked along at 55 mph was nearly 10 times the number that passed on the speedier trip home.

...



The comment about the milage dropping off after 65 MPH & the hastle of driving 55 is essentially what I was pointing out. I just took the "millions" out of your Google search.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lectrobyte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 01:01 PM
Response to Reply #20
61. And if the speed limit was 55, then most people would probably
be going 65 or 70, instead of 75 or 80 (except for NJ, see post below).
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sendero Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:00 PM
Response to Original message
21. No where near as much as..
... so-called scientific studies say. A few percent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:01 PM
Response to Original message
22. People spending more time on the road translates to...
...greater congestion. For all I know, that might negate the savings in gas.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Deja Q Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:09 PM
Response to Reply #22
26. Different shifts, must everything be 9-to-5?
If people bothered, a LOT of problems we continually hear on the news would be eliminated.

Seems preferable to keep the things the same and complain endlessly.

Except there'd be less news, and we can't have that... :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Orsino Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:17 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. Take it a step further.
Edited on Thu Jun-15-06 07:19 PM by Orsino
I can telecommute, but my company won't hear of it except in inclement weather. They could take many of us off the road completely, getting to the heart of the problem.

on edit: my department works 24/7. Much of our job (troubleshooting Internet outages) has to be done on the other shifts.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
joeunderdog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:31 PM
Response to Original message
31. They should require minimum MPG not MPH. I got places to go! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HysteryDiagnosis Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
32. Consider this you Ford truck freaks..... an F-250/F-350 powerstroke
diesel will get you between 10 and 10 mpg or somewhere thereabouts.... while a Dodge Cummins powered 2500 FOUR WHEEL DRIVE can net you up to 25 mpg. Why someone didn't downsize that Cummins and put it in a midsize pickup truck and get 40 MPG is way above my pay grade. I know people who have gotten this sort of mileage with a 4wd Dodge 3/4 ton truck and if you do the math, think how much frigging diesel this country would have saved if Ford had the moxy to steal the Cummins away from Dodge.

Next year, this will come true and Dodge will have to settle for Caterpillar, no great consolation prize to be sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
stevedeshazer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:36 PM
Response to Original message
34. 100% yes
Edited on Thu Jun-15-06 07:37 PM by Steve_DeShazer
I drive a truck for a living.

I was also alive and an adult in the '70's.

The memory of the highway carnage of my youth is still very much with me. I lost good friends to excessive speed.

A lot of cars and trucks get a least a 10% reduction in fuel by slowing from 70 mph to 60 mph. For the short term, that would put a crimp in demand, thus lowering price.

Traffic safety would improve. Today's congested freeways are not conducive to the 70-75 mph speed they were designed for. Traffic volumes and density are much too high today for Eisenhower-era interstate freeways. Only in the rural areas should there be exceptions.

I've seen too many accidents, many injuries, some fatalities.

I'm tired of being tailgated, stuck in traffic jams because some nitwit wanted to get to where they're going a few seconds sooner, and seeing the red-and-blues and the sirens and wondering who and what.

I'm sickened at seeing construction workers, cops, and paramedics being run down because some self-important asshole wants to shave a few seconds off a commute.

Now, personally, I estimate that I would lose about 40 minutes a day from this in my job. I would get time-and-a half, which ain't much. And I would save the company more than that in fuel economy.

I would also like to remind folks here that the Arab oil embargo of the early seventies, thanks to Henry Kissinger and the Nixon administration, is bound to be repeated by the oil-for-war criminals who are now making the highest profits of all time, led to long lines at fuel stations, rationing, odd-even license plate service (you had to have, say, an odd-numbered license plate on an odd-numbered day to even get in line) and all kinds of happy horseshit.

I can't think of any compelling reason to NOT slow down now.

Anyone else?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
OPERATIONMINDCRIME Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:37 PM
Response to Original message
35. Hell With That.
Instead make cars that get better gas mileage at 75 miles an hour.

I read a few of those articles, and it appears that cutting out idling, warming up the car and making sure tires are properly inflated could save quite a hell of a lot too. So I'll tell ya what, I'll cut down my idling and will make certain that my tires are properly inflated but continue to drive 75. I love compromise. :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Hippo_Tron Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 07:58 PM
Response to Original message
39. I say that we get a real energy policy instead
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Dude_CalmDown Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
40. Fuck no!
But thanks for throwing my blood pressure through the roof.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
demosincebirth Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:19 PM
Response to Original message
42. On city streets, yes, but not on the highways!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
genie_weenie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 08:56 PM
Response to Original message
47. Lower speed limits to 35 US wide
Save gas and lives!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
XOKCowboy Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Jun-15-06 09:01 PM
Response to Reply #47
48. You might as well. 55 is just a number...
If you're going to pick one out of thin air then 35 sounds as good as 55. The 55 mph speed limit was a failed experiment. Better to get a real energy policy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
lectrobyte Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:46 AM
Response to Original message
50. Yes, I think so. Given that 65 speed limits really mean 80 from what I
can see, slowing down to 70 for a 55 limit would save some gas.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
HarukaTheTrophyWife Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:28 PM
Response to Reply #50
58. Well, that would not work in NJ.
We drive the speed we want to drive regardless of the posted speed limit. People that can't handle it should stay out of NJ. PA drivers can be spotted from a mile away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LibDemAlways Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:31 PM
Response to Reply #50
59. I'm with you. A 55 MPH limit would mean
Edited on Fri Jun-16-06 12:31 PM by LibDemAlways
most people would be doing 65-70 instead of 75-80. My husband makes it a point to strictly obey speed limits and he ends up the target of a huge amount of road rage. Anything to slow people down a bit and get them to drive more sanely.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rose Siding Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:47 AM
Response to Original message
51. I'd support it
It's funny how so many bitch about the fossil fuel mess but are so unwilling to be participants in even a piece of a solution.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MadJohnShaft Donating Member (267 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:48 AM
Response to Original message
52. Cars don't get the reported highway mileage at 75 but no 55 is too slow
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
TX-RAT Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 11:49 AM
Response to Original message
53. Hell No
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProfessorGAC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:07 PM
Response to Original message
54. OK By Me
I think people could live with being in the car a little longer as a function of social responsibility.

Of course, i drive slowly anyway.

The Professor
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DelawareValleyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:21 PM
Response to Original message
55. I've been driving only that fast for a couple years now
Took a while to force myself not to go past that but I'm used to it now. Worse part is people always coming close to hitting the rear bumper. Best part is the improved mileage, about 3 mpg in my case.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Revolution Donating Member (497 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 12:58 PM
Response to Original message
60. No. Raise to 110mph
We need to make more efficient vehicles, not drive slower. If anything, we should be able to go faster. At least on the Interstate.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rosemary2205 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Jun-16-06 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
62. You think we need MORE road rage??
You slow people down even Kansans are going to start shooting each other. Let the states and cities handle their own speed limits but lets do slam car makers for churning out 8mpg vehicles.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed May 15th 2024, 12:04 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC