Is this the end of the Cannonball Run?(atlasobscura.com)
atlasobscura.com
Is this the end of the Cannonball Run?
https://www.atlasobscura.com/articles/cannonball-run-cross-country-racing
194 comments
While I don't think they should exist at all and are blatant corruption, that's wildly overstating the level of "discretion" you're likely to receive for a PBA card.
They might get you out of a minor ticket, in the state/area it's from, and that's less likely if you can't articulate why you have it/how you know the officer it was given to to distribute. (to my knowledge, they're only a particularly widespread thing in the NYC metro area, as well).
They're not likely to get you out of a ticket for the kinds of offenses Cannonball Run participants are committing, IMO.
They might get you out of a minor ticket, in the state/area it's from, and that's less likely if you can't articulate why you have it/how you know the officer it was given to to distribute. (to my knowledge, they're only a particularly widespread thing in the NYC metro area, as well).
They're not likely to get you out of a ticket for the kinds of offenses Cannonball Run participants are committing, IMO.
Agreed. PBA card holders are usually given a professional courtesy but it’s at the officers discretion to honor it or not. For the offenses committed in the Cannonball Run it won’t work very well. It’s also geographically limited to mostly the NY, and NJ area.
If you buy in to intersectionalism then everything becomes an intersectional issue and everyone is a group you aren't in.
Its actually just social engineering.
Its actually just social engineering.
> Reading the article, you might think they're lucky not to get pulled over. But they do get pulled over.
But if you get pulled over, can you still beat the current record? The recent record-breaking account that I read seemed to imply they did not get pulled over.
But if you get pulled over, can you still beat the current record? The recent record-breaking account that I read seemed to imply they did not get pulled over.
Yeah a pull-over, as I understand it, is a run ending event. They try their hardest not to get pulled over.
run-ending but not life or bank-account -ending
I thought this was Hacker News?
The essence of hacking is seeing the world how it is to accomplish exceptional things. Yes American police are corrupt, as has been thoroughly covered in its own right pretty much everywhere. You can still appreciate the focused result while not condoning the adjacent culture of corruption.
"Proud, unapologetic criminals who get away with it because they're in the right clique" is more appropriate to describe the corrupt police themselves. The public fallout from a Cannonball is the possibility of a car crash that seemingly hasn't happened, whereas the fallout from the police corruption is (among other things) the routine murder of innocent people. The latter is infuriating, but dumping that anger onto adjacent topics is not a way to build consensus.
The essence of hacking is seeing the world how it is to accomplish exceptional things. Yes American police are corrupt, as has been thoroughly covered in its own right pretty much everywhere. You can still appreciate the focused result while not condoning the adjacent culture of corruption.
"Proud, unapologetic criminals who get away with it because they're in the right clique" is more appropriate to describe the corrupt police themselves. The public fallout from a Cannonball is the possibility of a car crash that seemingly hasn't happened, whereas the fallout from the police corruption is (among other things) the routine murder of innocent people. The latter is infuriating, but dumping that anger onto adjacent topics is not a way to build consensus.
> The public fallout from a Cannonball is the possibility of a car crash that hasn't happened
Do you have anything to support this? This isn't an officially monitored sport and participants aren't going to own up to getting non a participants injured or killed.
I've been spending a lot of time on highways this year and I've seen lots of near accidents caused by people driving way to fast. While some speeding doesn't automatically make you an dangerous criminal, this kind of of reckless speeding absolutely is quite dangerous, reprehensible, and should lead to criminal charges for anyone who has admitted to participating.
Do you have anything to support this? This isn't an officially monitored sport and participants aren't going to own up to getting non a participants injured or killed.
I've been spending a lot of time on highways this year and I've seen lots of near accidents caused by people driving way to fast. While some speeding doesn't automatically make you an dangerous criminal, this kind of of reckless speeding absolutely is quite dangerous, reprehensible, and should lead to criminal charges for anyone who has admitted to participating.
I later added the word "seemingly" because I agree, there is a strong disincentive to admit details that would tie a crash to a speed run.
I personally see more near accidents caused by inattentive drivers than by speeding. Someone changing lanes without checking their mirror is dangerous even with a 10mph speed differential. It is also my understanding that while Cannonball drivers are doing 120mph+ in open stretches, they slow down when they hit traffic. You're not going to make it 3000 miles weaving between lanes with a high speed differential.
I'd imagine their behavior is similar to what what I routinely see from state police, who will come up on a bunch of traffic going 110+, and then slow down / tailgate until people in the left lane pull over and let them through (there's that culture of corruption again). I also generally see much more of this than of non-police speeding, so once again it feels a bit myopic to focus on a small contingent of people flouting social norms rather than routine harmful norms.
I personally see more near accidents caused by inattentive drivers than by speeding. Someone changing lanes without checking their mirror is dangerous even with a 10mph speed differential. It is also my understanding that while Cannonball drivers are doing 120mph+ in open stretches, they slow down when they hit traffic. You're not going to make it 3000 miles weaving between lanes with a high speed differential.
I'd imagine their behavior is similar to what what I routinely see from state police, who will come up on a bunch of traffic going 110+, and then slow down / tailgate until people in the left lane pull over and let them through (there's that culture of corruption again). I also generally see much more of this than of non-police speeding, so once again it feels a bit myopic to focus on a small contingent of people flouting social norms rather than routine harmful norms.
The most dangerous driver I saw recently was a a driver who passed me on the shoulder of a divided 4 lane freeway with a 20+ mph speed differential because they couldn't be bothered to wait for a semi in the left lane to finish passing. This is exactly the sort of antics I would expect from a significant portion of drivers who are trying to set time records in crossing the country. Especially since these racers use spotters and other tech specifically to know when they can get away with driving recklessly.
> I also generally see much more of this than of non-police speeding,
Ummm... This is a laughably false claim that leads me doubt all your other observations. I have driven all over the USA and in every single place there are more non-cop speeders than cop speeders, simply because there are far more non-cops than cops.
While I do agree that there are significant problems with police corruption, that in no way excuses these cannonball racers from engaging in this activity with reckless disregard for the safety of other road users.
You seem quite happy to excuse this behavior based on nothing more than your assumptions about how cautions people trying to set competive records are without any evidence to back up those assumptions.
> I also generally see much more of this than of non-police speeding,
Ummm... This is a laughably false claim that leads me doubt all your other observations. I have driven all over the USA and in every single place there are more non-cop speeders than cop speeders, simply because there are far more non-cops than cops.
While I do agree that there are significant problems with police corruption, that in no way excuses these cannonball racers from engaging in this activity with reckless disregard for the safety of other road users.
You seem quite happy to excuse this behavior based on nothing more than your assumptions about how cautions people trying to set competive records are without any evidence to back up those assumptions.
> driver who passed me on the shoulder ... with a 20+ mph speed differential ... is exactly the sort of antics I would expect from a significant portion of drivers who are trying to set time records in crossing the country
Your guess is as a good as mine. I would expect that for a 2800 mile journey, the priority is avoiding interruptions - eg crashes or getting pulled over because you've attracted determined police attention from other motorists calling you in. Reading about it, the whole thing seems like a game of coordinated logistics rather than extreme piloting.
> every single place there are more non-cop speeders than cop speeders, simply because there are far more non-cops than cops.
I'm sure we're defining speeding differently. On a road with average traffic of 75mph, I would only consider significantly over 80mph to be speeding in its own right. I see very few non-cops doing these speeds, whereas every moving state cop I see is cruising at 110mph+ or tailgating waiting to pass. You can tell based on how quickly they close distance from way behind you to passing you.
> You seem quite happy to excuse this behavior
It's literally the only way to have an interesting conversation about it. If cannonball run attempts become common enough where they create a statistical danger, then I'll be concerned about it. Until then, I'll stay concerned with the mundane-and-bad rather than getting worked up about the exceptional.
Your guess is as a good as mine. I would expect that for a 2800 mile journey, the priority is avoiding interruptions - eg crashes or getting pulled over because you've attracted determined police attention from other motorists calling you in. Reading about it, the whole thing seems like a game of coordinated logistics rather than extreme piloting.
> every single place there are more non-cop speeders than cop speeders, simply because there are far more non-cops than cops.
I'm sure we're defining speeding differently. On a road with average traffic of 75mph, I would only consider significantly over 80mph to be speeding in its own right. I see very few non-cops doing these speeds, whereas every moving state cop I see is cruising at 110mph+ or tailgating waiting to pass. You can tell based on how quickly they close distance from way behind you to passing you.
> You seem quite happy to excuse this behavior
It's literally the only way to have an interesting conversation about it. If cannonball run attempts become common enough where they create a statistical danger, then I'll be concerned about it. Until then, I'll stay concerned with the mundane-and-bad rather than getting worked up about the exceptional.
Indeed, nobody announces that they're setting out to do a cannonball run. This is a classical case of survivorship bias.
Well, they do. Modern cannonball as far as I understand it to be is a team sport. You have spotters, decoys (they speed past speed traps ahead of you to occupy the only cop in the area), even helpers at the fuel stops to help you fuel.
This all has to be coordinated ahead of time. I think the runs are also planned out so you don’t go through areas of high traffic. 150+ on an empty desert road is relatively safe.
This all has to be coordinated ahead of time. I think the runs are also planned out so you don’t go through areas of high traffic. 150+ on an empty desert road is relatively safe.
Even still, if somebody dies, the whole team is legally a conspiracy. Not the kind of thing you want to talk about in public.
Yeah, the Canonball run stuff is epic. Very much in the spirit of what everyone told me hackers were.
Not sure I’d call bootlicking hacking in any sense, quite the opposite. Especially because some people aren’t capable of doing it just by the nature of how they look.
Hacking inherently involves engaging with a system, and empathizing with it more deeply than even those who believe in it. The bootlicking itself is not hacking, rather it's a step in furtherance of the hacking.
And I'm really struggling to come up with a definition of hacking that would imply everyone should be able to do the same hack? Hacking is individualistic and mutually-exclusive by its very nature. Once enough people start doing something, it's just called routine.
And I'm really struggling to come up with a definition of hacking that would imply everyone should be able to do the same hack? Hacking is individualistic and mutually-exclusive by its very nature. Once enough people start doing something, it's just called routine.
>Sometimes they race in cars that are deliberately made to look like foreign police cars: technically legal but the intention is clear
In California, there was a spate of people who decorated their cars to look like PLA military police. At least one of them got arrested for "impersonating an officer" and "misusing a public seal". It was somewhat novel because those laws hadn't been used to "protect" the symbols of foreign institutions before.
In California, there was a spate of people who decorated their cars to look like PLA military police. At least one of them got arrested for "impersonating an officer" and "misusing a public seal". It was somewhat novel because those laws hadn't been used to "protect" the symbols of foreign institutions before.
Interesting this aspect wasn't included in the article
I wonder how much 'privilege' the average Joe can exercise.
Bruce Springsteen (he of the mighty virtue signaling) showed how it was done last year, making a DUI vanish into thin air.
Bruce Springsteen (he of the mighty virtue signaling) showed how it was done last year, making a DUI vanish into thin air.
^^^ All of this is true.
Cannonball Run participants are behaving like sociopaths. It's a gross activity.
Cannonball Run participants are behaving like sociopaths. It's a gross activity.
[deleted]
Perhaps it's better for the US Cannonball to end this way than the way it ended in Australia with the deaths of 4 people.
https://www.whichcar.com.au/features/how-the-cannonball-crum...
https://www.whichcar.com.au/features/how-the-cannonball-crum...
That's just motorsport being motorsport. Note all victims were part of the competition - two racers and two officials.
Formula1 used to have one or two victims almost every year, now thankfully it's more one every 15-20 years - the last one was Jules Bianchi in 2015.
Formula1 used to have one or two victims almost every year, now thankfully it's more one every 15-20 years - the last one was Jules Bianchi in 2015.
Ironic that it was a sanctioned event with officials, spectators, etc.
Eliminating all danger from the world is not a good thing. It is a cowardly and servile thing.
Motorsport is motorsport, and men risk the uncertain prospect of death for the uncertain prospect of glory, not because they are mad, but because they are men. Let it be.
Motorsport is motorsport, and men risk the uncertain prospect of death for the uncertain prospect of glory, not because they are mad, but because they are men. Let it be.
I'm totally cool with people base jumping, batsuit parachuting from space, mountain unicycling, etc. The problem with races on public roads is that it's bystanders who get killed.
I wonder if the Cannonball Run has led to any injuries or deaths of non-participants in its history. It certainly seems like something that recklessly endangers life and limb of the public, but I've never heard of any accidents attributed to it. I suppose you wouldn't admit to attempting a run in the aftermath of a serious accident.
Not in the NY to LA “race” but I’m pretty sure people have died or been seriously hurt in the cannonball runs in Europe where a bunch of rich guys with tricked out super cars rally together.
I think the Ed Bolin guy, mentioned in the article, has been pulled over but the cops thought they were drug mules. When they realized they were trying to go cross country he let them go. Not 100% sure if that was Ed or another guy.
I think the Ed Bolin guy, mentioned in the article, has been pulled over but the cops thought they were drug mules. When they realized they were trying to go cross country he let them go. Not 100% sure if that was Ed or another guy.
>Bolin
You can't even spell the mans name right.
You can't even spell the mans name right.
I had hot cars (mostly German) and drove fast habitually for a long time -- really, through my late 30s -- but almost exclusively on highways. I did it as safely as such a thing COULD be done, in terms of both physical risk to myself and others, and also fiscal risk to me in terms of fines or what have you. I got very few tickets, because if you're careful you can get away with speed most of the time. (I also got pulled over and got no ticket a few times, which I absolutely recognize is an aspect of my white guy privilege.)
But I don't really speed anymore. I don't even own a radar detector. It wasn't a big choice or come-to-Jesus moment; rather, it was the fact that the pace I would drive at on an open highway (a max of 85 - 90 MPH, conditions permitting) was VERY illegal in 1995, when the highway limit was still 55 in some places, has become only BARELY illegal.
I still drive at 80ish on an Interstate, but speed limits now are 70 or 75 or higher. The world changed around me, while my habits only moderated slightly.
But I don't really speed anymore. I don't even own a radar detector. It wasn't a big choice or come-to-Jesus moment; rather, it was the fact that the pace I would drive at on an open highway (a max of 85 - 90 MPH, conditions permitting) was VERY illegal in 1995, when the highway limit was still 55 in some places, has become only BARELY illegal.
I still drive at 80ish on an Interstate, but speed limits now are 70 or 75 or higher. The world changed around me, while my habits only moderated slightly.
Very much the same, here. One thing people may not realize is that 90mph in a 1980's Porsche feels a lot different than, say, 90mph in any car built today. A few months ago I got one of my old porsches back on the road. Feeling confident it was finally running ok, I punched it when a light turned green. The noise, vibration, smell and feeling from that vintage V8 was unreal. I felt like I was flying but I look over and a mom in a minivan, driving normally, was right alongside me.
Modern cars are safe, clean, and amazing.
Modern cars are safe, clean, and amazing.
So a 928 is the minivan of Porsches?
Got it.
Got it.
A very, very expensive to own minivan.
They're lovely, and it's the only V8 I ever really wanted (that sound!), but it was a fairly brief moment for Porsche and not terribly many were made vs. the other two engine platforms of the era: the 911, obviously, and the series of front-engine 4-cylinder cars (924/944/968).
They're lovely, and it's the only V8 I ever really wanted (that sound!), but it was a fairly brief moment for Porsche and not terribly many were made vs. the other two engine platforms of the era: the 911, obviously, and the series of front-engine 4-cylinder cars (924/944/968).
I got to drive a '77 911S once and it was pretty much the same except with more rattles and the noise was coming from the back. Fun car, but still no match for a 2022 Kia.
I think people don't appreciate this, but back then 165hp -- the rating on a '77 911S -- was nothing to sneeze at. Even into the 80s, sports cars had horsepower figures that are today pretty quotidian; the first gen Nissan 300zx had only about 170hp in the normally-aspirated version.
A 2022 Kia Optima -- ie, a fairly bland sedan -- his more horsepower than that.
By the 90s the numbers were getting higher. The Porsche I had the longest was a base model 1995 911 (so a 993; last version of the air-cooled cars). It had something like 270hp, which was reasonably serious for the era.
The current base-model 911 is something like 380hp if I'm not mistaken.
My car was loud, rattly, and smelled like oil much of the time. The interior "domestication" that eventually came to the car was still a generation away, so my car was more like a VW Bug inside than a modern luxury sports car. Driving it was a MUCH more visceral experience than driving a newer car, though. I stopped driving it regularly and ended up selling it when I realized what it was worth (damn near what I paid for it), but it was a great car.
The new owner put some money into it and is having some success at autocross. I get visitation rights. :)
A 2022 Kia Optima -- ie, a fairly bland sedan -- his more horsepower than that.
By the 90s the numbers were getting higher. The Porsche I had the longest was a base model 1995 911 (so a 993; last version of the air-cooled cars). It had something like 270hp, which was reasonably serious for the era.
The current base-model 911 is something like 380hp if I'm not mistaken.
My car was loud, rattly, and smelled like oil much of the time. The interior "domestication" that eventually came to the car was still a generation away, so my car was more like a VW Bug inside than a modern luxury sports car. Driving it was a MUCH more visceral experience than driving a newer car, though. I stopped driving it regularly and ended up selling it when I realized what it was worth (damn near what I paid for it), but it was a great car.
The new owner put some money into it and is having some success at autocross. I get visitation rights. :)
It's amazing how refined, shock-absorbed, and quiet modern cars are, compared to the '70s and '80s zoom-zooms. You take a 4 year old BMW up to, say, 120-140 miles per hour, and yea you're going fast, but it's a very muted fast. You can't really even tell unless you're looking at the speedometer.
When I took my old '86 944 Turbo up to that speed, the visceral vibration and sound feedback, barebones interior, and visible lack of airbags, made it impossible to forget the reality that you were taking your life into your own hands. Not something to do on public roads.
When I took my old '86 944 Turbo up to that speed, the visceral vibration and sound feedback, barebones interior, and visible lack of airbags, made it impossible to forget the reality that you were taking your life into your own hands. Not something to do on public roads.
Here's the thing about taking a 944 up to 120mph... the sound changes. Everything under 110 seems normal, but you get to a point and the aero changes and you know you're in an envelope some German engineers conjured up 35 years ago. That's when I lift. freaks me out.
It's amazing how powerful engines have become in the last 20 years.
Driving my Lotus Elise... I'd regularly get my ass handed to me by a V6 Camry or Odyssey.
It's not even just engines anymore. A Camry will probably not just be faster in a straight line due to power, but it's probably also going to smoke a good number of vintage sports cars around a track. All that tech really has trickled down into regular cars.
Driving my Lotus Elise... I'd regularly get my ass handed to me by a V6 Camry or Odyssey.
It's not even just engines anymore. A Camry will probably not just be faster in a straight line due to power, but it's probably also going to smoke a good number of vintage sports cars around a track. All that tech really has trickled down into regular cars.
Amusing - How Americans consider driving at 90 mph as fast!
In the UK that's average on the motorway - when traffic is not too heavy.
I used to regularly travel at 120-130 for many years and have experienced 160 mph (won't say who was driving)
In Germany speeds are even higher.
Amusing - The statistics from your Department for Transport seem to suggest that you are either an extreme outlier or just entirely wrong[1]! Or maybe this can be attributed to you having some lingering difficulties with kph vs mph?
Hopefully we've both satisfied the urge to be obnoxiously condescending for no reason. Moving right along...
Assuming SPE0111 is what I should be looking at, UK motorway speeds seem very similar to what I've experienced on US interstates.
------------
1. SPE0111 and the "Average free flow speed (mph)" for motorways, from the following:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/vehicle-...
Hopefully we've both satisfied the urge to be obnoxiously condescending for no reason. Moving right along...
Assuming SPE0111 is what I should be looking at, UK motorway speeds seem very similar to what I've experienced on US interstates.
------------
1. SPE0111 and the "Average free flow speed (mph)" for motorways, from the following:
https://www.gov.uk/government/statistical-data-sets/vehicle-...
That's odd. I drove from Manchester into the Lake District, and across to Northumberland, and didn't find the speed limits or active speeds especially higher than interstates in the US (observed speeds 75ish).
You regularly see news reports on TV with headlines saying how the driver was "Exceeding 100mph!" OMG 100MPH!
Any shitbox car made in the last 30 years can do 100mph.
Any shitbox car made in the last 30 years can do 100mph.
> I still drive at 80ish on an Interstate, but speed limits now are 70 or 75 or higher.
Be careful in Virginia, where 85 is reckless driving, regardless of the posted speed limit. (Reckless driving is also 20+ over the posted speed limit, if you're driving less than 65.)
Be careful in Virginia, where 85 is reckless driving, regardless of the posted speed limit. (Reckless driving is also 20+ over the posted speed limit, if you're driving less than 65.)
I drive slower now than I did 30 years ago, not just because of advancing age and increased sense / reduced stupidity; but because the roads just ain't is as good shape as they used to be. A nasty pothole at 65mph is a wheel destroyer at 120mph. There's more around now than there used to be and they hang out longer and get a chance to grow and have families.
I stopped speeding about 12 years ago when I got my first (and hopefully last) speeding ticket.
I've since discovered that it's actually a lot less stressful, you use less petrol and I don't seem to get places that much slower. I'm also happier with cars with cars with much smaller engines - which saves even more money.
I've since discovered that it's actually a lot less stressful, you use less petrol and I don't seem to get places that much slower. I'm also happier with cars with cars with much smaller engines - which saves even more money.
Driving into Toronto, some car is zipping by. Watching it weave in & out. An hour later we're in Toronto traffic.. that car has since gotten ahead by a dozen cars, which in traffic now translates to less than a hundred meters
Amdahl's Law can be applied to stretches of road
Amdahl's Law can be applied to stretches of road
My frequent remark watching so many reckless drivers from my car:
RACING TO NOWHERE!
RACING TO NOWHERE!
It's really easy to sit on your high horse and say "oh you only gained a hundred meters" but those hundred meters (I prefer to think of it in terms of number of cars) potentially convert to a lot of time.
I have the "which lane you want to be in and when" thing absolutely dialed for my commute. On a light by light basis I only move up a few slots as a result of picking the lanes that people will get out of as they make rights or move into dedicated left lanes approaching a light. That inevitably converts into getting through the lights in less cycles than if I had just picked a lane and stuck to it. Over the course of my commute that adds up to 20+min, close to 25%, difference.
While I don't necessarily agree with their methodology I think the weaving through traffic people are on to something.
I have the "which lane you want to be in and when" thing absolutely dialed for my commute. On a light by light basis I only move up a few slots as a result of picking the lanes that people will get out of as they make rights or move into dedicated left lanes approaching a light. That inevitably converts into getting through the lights in less cycles than if I had just picked a lane and stuck to it. Over the course of my commute that adds up to 20+min, close to 25%, difference.
While I don't necessarily agree with their methodology I think the weaving through traffic people are on to something.
To save 20 minutes on a not quite hour-long commute by beating lights, you'd need to beat almost 20 lights. The average traffic light waiting time is 60-90 seconds. Even doubling that and taking the high end of the range (3 minutes), you'd need to beat 7 lights on your hour-long commute.
On the highway, if you are leaving 2 seconds following distance, and everyone else does too (obviously more than reality), every car you pass on the highway buys you a grand total of: 2 seconds.
Not impossible for you to save 20 minutes if you have a peculiar commute, but I have a competing theory: beating a light or getting in front of a couple of cars is the way you game-ify your commute. You get a dopamine rush from it, and you aren't flipping a coin in the morning to A/B test your behavior and using a stopwatch to verify the results.
Nothing wrong with that, but just try to be safe about it.
On the highway, if you are leaving 2 seconds following distance, and everyone else does too (obviously more than reality), every car you pass on the highway buys you a grand total of: 2 seconds.
Not impossible for you to save 20 minutes if you have a peculiar commute, but I have a competing theory: beating a light or getting in front of a couple of cars is the way you game-ify your commute. You get a dopamine rush from it, and you aren't flipping a coin in the morning to A/B test your behavior and using a stopwatch to verify the results.
Nothing wrong with that, but just try to be safe about it.
I commute during the leading edge of rush hour. My commute is 50-70min assuming no backups. I'm not "beating" the lights. I'm picking my lane coming up to the light based on how much of that traffic is likely to exit the lane into a left or right turn lane. Getting through them in less cycles than I would otherwise has a compounding effect because the luckier I get early on the less traffic/congestion there is later in my commute (because I have arrived at those points earlier in time). The portion with the lights is a "would be a limited access highway if it weren't for NIMBYs" type of road and speeds reflect this. A minute or more to wait for a light is more than the time it takes to get to the next light. There are six lights. The bulk of the highway is after this portion of my commute so a few minutes at the lights may very well mean I get past the problem points on the highway before they become problems. There's no lane advantage at the first light but getting lucky and not waiting on the first light pretty much always translates to 1-2 less cycles waiting at the second. There is a massive lane advantage there so choosing the proper lane means you wait ~2 cycles less. The last light is the worst and +/-5min arrival time can easily have a ~10min influence (the difference between being several cycles back vs getting right up to it and only. I've been doing this same commute and leaving at the same time for years. There's definitely a gambling aspect to it but there is also quite a bit of improvement to be had if you know where to be.
>On the highway, if you are leaving 2 seconds following distance, and everyone else does too (obviously more than reality), every car you pass on the highway buys you a grand total of: 2 seconds.
Right, but now imagine that working you ass off to pass dozens of cars means four less cars in front of you at the end of your really crappy exit ramp that takes ~30sec/car because of cross traffic. You've just saved two minutes.
>On the highway, if you are leaving 2 seconds following distance, and everyone else does too (obviously more than reality), every car you pass on the highway buys you a grand total of: 2 seconds.
Right, but now imagine that working you ass off to pass dozens of cars means four less cars in front of you at the end of your really crappy exit ramp that takes ~30sec/car because of cross traffic. You've just saved two minutes.
You maybe ahead of 12 cars on your offramp, but you've also caught up to 12 cars that haven't had a chance to get off the offramp, yet. The amount of traffic on said ramp is only going to vary based on the time of day and some dumb luck.
You are probably right about weavers getting ahead by a few minutes. I've seen a lot of these people in a form of denial when it comes to their driving. That their bad habit is in fact a GOOD habit because in the prisoners dilemma game they won by betraying. Meanwhile the rest of the people are suffering because of their actions. That those other people are in fact BAD drivers because they aren't driving recklessly too. That if only everyone drove recklessly like them then the road would be safer somehow.
It's utter insanity out there.
It's utter insanity out there.
Butting ahead of people in line at the bank doesn't make the line go faster. It may work on a highway without congestion, but if your route is going to enter congestion you're only getting in front of someone who would otherwise be where you are at that very moment
It's a statistical play. Sometimes it gets you through a light that would have caught you, or ahead of a wreck or obstruction, or past some knot of cars. Sometimes it doesn't.
Something that's helped me to reduce speeding is real time GPS/map info. I don't drive half as much as I did a few years ago, and much of that was 'around town' (a... 30-40 mile radius for various events). There's not a lot of places to 'speed' in the 'really fast' sense, but 45 in a 35 zone - that's still 'speeding', and can get you a ticket I know, I've had some over the years!)
Having a map with real time info when I'm going someplace helps me ... calm down some. I can see if there's a known accident, I can get automatically rerouted if I take a wrong turn or miss an exit, and if I know I'm going to be vastly late, I just call or message the party I'm meeting. I understand that some of that may contribute to 'distracted' driving, but when I used to miss turns or get delayed 20 years ago, I was still 'distracted', and probably just as much a danger, because of the anxiety/stress. Overall, I think it's been a net win for me - less speeding and no tickets in years, a bit less stress while driving, less fuel consumption, etc.
Having a map with real time info when I'm going someplace helps me ... calm down some. I can see if there's a known accident, I can get automatically rerouted if I take a wrong turn or miss an exit, and if I know I'm going to be vastly late, I just call or message the party I'm meeting. I understand that some of that may contribute to 'distracted' driving, but when I used to miss turns or get delayed 20 years ago, I was still 'distracted', and probably just as much a danger, because of the anxiety/stress. Overall, I think it's been a net win for me - less speeding and no tickets in years, a bit less stress while driving, less fuel consumption, etc.
I don't even remember speeding (and I really did speed a lot) for any particular reason - certainly not for appointments.
Maybe buying an expensive fast car makes you want to speed - could easily be something as daft as that.
Now I am perfectly happy with my 1L 3-cylinder Skoda :-)
Maybe buying an expensive fast car makes you want to speed - could easily be something as daft as that.
Now I am perfectly happy with my 1L 3-cylinder Skoda :-)
My first ticket was being late for school. I grew up in an environment where being 'late' or 'rushed' seemed to be a default mode - young parents with 3 young kids, everything probably did stress them out more than it should have, and... I just grew up feeling 'late' and 'rushed' for everything all the time. It manifested in many ways, but speeding was one. I've had a few tickets over the years. I think... probably 4 or 5 over... 30 years? So.. perhaps somewhat habitual and just lucky I've not been caught more. But the last few years - per the comment above - real time info has had a bit of a calming effect. Probably age a bit too, but I don't think so.
Interesting that you neglected to mention that it's IMMENSELY SAFER for you and everyone else on the road. This is the worst part about driving - everyone thinks they're great at it and accidents don't happen. But they do, and the faster you're driving when an accident happens, the more likely it is for someone to die.
I used to budget for one speeding ticket a year. Tickets felt a lot less stressful after I started treating them as merely part of the cost of transportation, like insurance premiums and registration fees.
The rate at which I collect speeding tickets has definitely diminished over time, though my driving speed certainly hasn't; I'm not sure whether that's because enforcement activity has been reduced where I live, or because advancing age and different choice of vehicles have made me a less appealing target. (I actually had a cop thank me for letting him pull me over once, when I was out on my bike; he knew perfectly well I could have outrun his cruiser...)
The rate at which I collect speeding tickets has definitely diminished over time, though my driving speed certainly hasn't; I'm not sure whether that's because enforcement activity has been reduced where I live, or because advancing age and different choice of vehicles have made me a less appealing target. (I actually had a cop thank me for letting him pull me over once, when I was out on my bike; he knew perfectly well I could have outrun his cruiser...)
I found driving as a speeder easier than trying to keep close to the speed limit (I haven't done more than about 5 over on purpose in many years, mind you, except on a handful of technically-55-but-you'll-be-a-hazard-if-you-do-under-65 stretches of highway in my city).
You still had to keep an eye out for even faster cars coming up, but it's much easier to mentally keep track of the "state" of the road around you when you're passing everything.
It's also far easier to stay awake & alert driving at night, when speeding.
You still had to keep an eye out for even faster cars coming up, but it's much easier to mentally keep track of the "state" of the road around you when you're passing everything.
It's also far easier to stay awake & alert driving at night, when speeding.
I hope you mean speeding relative to the prevailing traffic speed.
If you are the slow guy the area in front of you is the area in which everybody elects to make their move. You get cut off 100x (pulled that number out of my ass) as much as if you're just doing what everyone else is doing. If you are going really slow then cars are cutting each other off to get out from behind you all the time. The whole situation benefits nobody and is just as stressful as trying be the fast guy.
Source: spent way too much time in the cab of equipment that was only "highway capable" in the context of the sales brochure.
If you are the slow guy the area in front of you is the area in which everybody elects to make their move. You get cut off 100x (pulled that number out of my ass) as much as if you're just doing what everyone else is doing. If you are going really slow then cars are cutting each other off to get out from behind you all the time. The whole situation benefits nobody and is just as stressful as trying be the fast guy.
Source: spent way too much time in the cab of equipment that was only "highway capable" in the context of the sales brochure.
LA is plagued with drivers who will not (or in many cases cannot) keep up with the flow of traffic and it’s one of the most dangerous things I ever encounter as a driver.
45 in a 70 with the lane on your left and right barreling down at you at 75 is a nightmare scenario. Driving too slow is just as dangerous as driving too fast.
I wish US had stricter license requirements (like Germany) and car upkeep requirements (like Japan). Would keep the roads to people who knew what they were doing and cars that could do what they needed to do.
In fact, the “cannot” category is worse. I cannot fault the driver for being only able to afford a 1989 Previa with a engine held together by duct tape to get to their minimum wage job. So now I’m in a dangerous situation of no one’s fault and pray that my decision to get a sportier car will let me get out safely.
45 in a 70 with the lane on your left and right barreling down at you at 75 is a nightmare scenario. Driving too slow is just as dangerous as driving too fast.
I wish US had stricter license requirements (like Germany) and car upkeep requirements (like Japan). Would keep the roads to people who knew what they were doing and cars that could do what they needed to do.
In fact, the “cannot” category is worse. I cannot fault the driver for being only able to afford a 1989 Previa with a engine held together by duct tape to get to their minimum wage job. So now I’m in a dangerous situation of no one’s fault and pray that my decision to get a sportier car will let me get out safely.
This really depends on where you live, in plenty of places the speed limit is heavily enforced and that is actually the speed people expect you to go. Driving faster than the speed limit makes you the one causing the speed differential.
It is weird to place the blame of the speed differential on the people not breaking the law, but I get the feeling it's a practical reality of US highways that everyone speeds.
It is weird to place the blame of the speed differential on the people not breaking the law, but I get the feeling it's a practical reality of US highways that everyone speeds.
Varies by state. In New York you can be cited and fined for impeding traffic.
In California, a car on a two-lane road with five or more vehicles behind it is required to pull into a designated turnout area to alleviate the jam. Failure to do so can result in a citation and fine.
In California, a car on a two-lane road with five or more vehicles behind it is required to pull into a designated turnout area to alleviate the jam. Failure to do so can result in a citation and fine.
Sadly, those kinds of laws rarely get enforced.
I'm in the UK and I pretty much drive at the speed limit - so at 20 somewhere like central Edinburgh, up to 60 on normal roads and up to 70 on motorways and similar.
I'd estimate at those speeds I am about average - I overtake some traffic and get overtaken by others.
We now have average speed cameras on some roads I drive on a lot (such as the notoriously dangerous A9) so speeding really isn't a good idea.
I'd estimate at those speeds I am about average - I overtake some traffic and get overtaken by others.
We now have average speed cameras on some roads I drive on a lot (such as the notoriously dangerous A9) so speeding really isn't a good idea.
Where were you driving 120mph like it’s no big deal in the US?
120 is on the high side, but on big empty roads with light traffic and great visibility, e.g. eastern Washington, I've seen packs of cars pushing 100 pretty regularly. Modern cars, modern tires, it's probably a good bit safer than going 55 was in the 70s.
Have you driven between big cities in Texas? There are some awfully straight stretches of road with absolutely nothing at all as far as the eye can see. Now you're supposed to be doing like, 80mph posted, but if nobody is around to see it... I've encountered packs of cars keeping up with each other doing 100mph+ and someone in a big truck breaking 120 just for fun wouldn't surprise me. Illegal? Oh yes. Doesn't matter if nobody is there to enforce it.
Well, it depends on which big cities.
The East Texas set of DFW / SA / Austin / Houston is mostly connected by highways that stay busy. 45 between Houston and DFW is thinner, but I-10 is almost urban levels of busy from the Louisiana state line until you get well past San Antonio.
West of San Antonio or DFW? Oh yeah, it gets thin FAST.
The East Texas set of DFW / SA / Austin / Houston is mostly connected by highways that stay busy. 45 between Houston and DFW is thinner, but I-10 is almost urban levels of busy from the Louisiana state line until you get well past San Antonio.
West of San Antonio or DFW? Oh yeah, it gets thin FAST.
Between cities? Even on SH130 on the east side of Austin doing the speed limit is often nerve wracking because so many drivers are attempting to drive 100 mph or faster.
120 is a big deal anywhere in the US, but there are absolutely stretches of the west where you can be very, very alone on long, straight stretches of road.
Margin of error vanishes at speeds like that, but yeah, you could do 120 fairly safely in a well-maintained car on good tires in those places.
Margin of error vanishes at speeds like that, but yeah, you could do 120 fairly safely in a well-maintained car on good tires in those places.
One time I was driving on the I-5 a ways north of Seattle late at night. There was a stretch of freeway with virtually no lighting, surrounded by trees, and there were no cars in sight in either direction. I completely lost any sense of speed, and when I looked down at my speedometer I was going about 120 MPH. Fortunately I had the presence of mind to not slam on the brakes and to let the car slow down naturally, but it was scary to realize how dangerous my speed was, and I was lucky a deer didn't tumble out of the woods.
Depending on the vehicle, you don't need a lot of room to get going that fast. No, your typical passenger vehicle is probably geared to not go much faster than 100mph, and a lot of cars have a rev-limiter at 115 or 120. But, for example, my Mazda CX-5--which I wouldn't call particularly powerful at "only" 225hp--can do it quite easily just on the on-ramp for the 395 express way to DC.
I don't drive more than 80, usually, but, I mean, you gotta open it up at least once.
I don't drive more than 80, usually, but, I mean, you gotta open it up at least once.
Here in Maine we have I-95 up north. From about Bangor to Houlton, you have 180 miles of two lane, usually very well maintained highway, with nearly zero cops, and almost zero traffic on the average day. There's a solid hour and a half of driving highway speed with about five actual exits. I used to make that trek at least twice a month.
I may have tested a couple cars to limits up there.
I may have tested a couple cars to limits up there.
Anywhere in the West and parts of the South have large stretches of empty begging to be driven at 100+. Plenty of freeways posted at 80 (one place in Texas at 85,) so you're not more than double the speed limit at 120 like you were in the 55 mph days.
In southern Colorado, speeds will often reach that. I got passed by a Honda minivan once down there. Looked down at my speedometer and saw I was doing 117, and this minivan was just casually pulling ahead.
I take my sports car to the west Texas desert. Think the Big Bend Marfa area.
Long, empty, straight roads with great clarity thanks to no hills.
Long, empty, straight roads with great clarity thanks to no hills.
I was going to post this before I saw your reply. Fastest I've ever been on the ground was in my cousin's car coming back from Big Bend. Hit 155MPH. He did ask if we were OK with him opening it up to see what it could do.
It's probably about as good a place as possible to do it on public roads (at least anywhere close to my part of the country) - long straightaway through the desert with miles of visibility. He got it out of his system and got back down to saner speeds for the rest of the trip.
It's probably about as good a place as possible to do it on public roads (at least anywhere close to my part of the country) - long straightaway through the desert with miles of visibility. He got it out of his system and got back down to saner speeds for the rest of the trip.
I heard a story of a dude getting a ticket down there. Had to be the unluckiest guy in the desert that day. There is nothing there (except a cop on this day).
Agreed, most places along Highway 90 are usually dead.
You just have to watch out around Del Rio and such because Border Patrol and a bunch of other Federal LE enjoy hanging around random places and hassling people.
You just have to watch out around Del Rio and such because Border Patrol and a bunch of other Federal LE enjoy hanging around random places and hassling people.
Nevada Highway 50 is one place you could.
Midstate IL (I 57), and the "Purchase Parkway" in KY, both had sections I used to run hard on. I wont say "no big deal."
As others have mentioned there's long stretches of many roads out west that can be run at those speeds.
Edit to brag: I have done 100mph+ down Lake Shore Drive at least once, but that was special circumstances and an extra helping of st00pit.
As others have mentioned there's long stretches of many roads out west that can be run at those speeds.
Edit to brag: I have done 100mph+ down Lake Shore Drive at least once, but that was special circumstances and an extra helping of st00pit.
That's whitetail country. 120 MPH around dusk, come up on a dozen deer in the lanes, and it turns into a bloody mess. It can be done, but be aware in your risk assessment that there are cars on the shoulder, animals crossing the lanes, semis passing each other, and all sorts of other factors besides you and the road.
> but because the roads just ain't is as good shape as they used to be
Wow, key infrastructure declining like that must be depressing. Is this a widespread thing or just in your area?
Wow, key infrastructure declining like that must be depressing. Is this a widespread thing or just in your area?
A ton of places in the US built a bunch of civil infrastructure (primarily roads, water, sewer) to support suburban sprawl that is simply not sustainable given the level of property-taxes-per-square-area and the cost-per-mile to keep it in good working order.
Lots and lots of suburban decay is scheduled for the next 2-3 decades. This stuff has a working lifetime and with no money to replace it it's just going to sit there and rust.
Lots and lots of suburban decay is scheduled for the next 2-3 decades. This stuff has a working lifetime and with no money to replace it it's just going to sit there and rust.
widespread - here in Michigan the Governor ran on a campaign of "fix the damn roads"
>but because the roads just ain't is as good shape as they used to be.
Fundamental core functions of government is roads, borders, preventing of violence(military and police), justice, and refereeing the economy.
Roads as you say are in disrepair.
Borders are wide open.
Military has been at war for how many decades? War exhaustion can't be higher.
Violent crime is vastly under reported. Police brutality seems to be at historic highs. Victim of violent crime? Dont call the police because when they show up, the situation gets worse. Antifa is burning cities down, in part due to police brutality.
Where's the justice? If your car or property is stolen, there's a ~90% chance you never see it again and nobody is caught. Arson is worse than that. Murder is the only violent crime which has a clearance rate above 50% but only barely. There is no justice.
Ref for economy? If financial crisis proved anything, they clearly dont.
The core function of government is clearly failed. Lets say we form the HN political party and we're going to fix this. We can't. Government debt to GDP is over 100%. The budget isn't in balance. The central bank is bankrupt; https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/central-bank-bala...
Fundamental core functions of government is roads, borders, preventing of violence(military and police), justice, and refereeing the economy.
Roads as you say are in disrepair.
Borders are wide open.
Military has been at war for how many decades? War exhaustion can't be higher.
Violent crime is vastly under reported. Police brutality seems to be at historic highs. Victim of violent crime? Dont call the police because when they show up, the situation gets worse. Antifa is burning cities down, in part due to police brutality.
Where's the justice? If your car or property is stolen, there's a ~90% chance you never see it again and nobody is caught. Arson is worse than that. Murder is the only violent crime which has a clearance rate above 50% but only barely. There is no justice.
Ref for economy? If financial crisis proved anything, they clearly dont.
The core function of government is clearly failed. Lets say we form the HN political party and we're going to fix this. We can't. Government debt to GDP is over 100%. The budget isn't in balance. The central bank is bankrupt; https://tradingeconomics.com/united-states/central-bank-bala...
I'm sorry you're having a hard time.
I think you might want to moderate and adjust your media consumption. I don't think the information you're getting is benefiting you.
I think you might want to moderate and adjust your media consumption. I don't think the information you're getting is benefiting you.
>I'm sorry you're having a hard time.
Hmm? What makes you say that?
>I think you might want to moderate and adjust your media consumption. I don't think the information you're getting is benefiting you.
Is there something you disagree with?
Hmm? What makes you say that?
>I think you might want to moderate and adjust your media consumption. I don't think the information you're getting is benefiting you.
Is there something you disagree with?
> Borders are wide open.
Talk to anybody working in this space and you'll learn this is simply not true. CBP is still chasing people down and turning them away. ICE is still deporting people by the planeful.
Talk to anybody working in this space and you'll learn this is simply not true. CBP is still chasing people down and turning them away. ICE is still deporting people by the planeful.
CBP is still chasing people down and turning them away.
If you make it into this country it becomes mostly catch and release.
And then comical stuff like this happens: TSA reveals illegal migrants flying without proper ID can use an ARREST WARRANT as identification
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10418877/TSA-reveal...
If you make it into this country it becomes mostly catch and release.
And then comical stuff like this happens: TSA reveals illegal migrants flying without proper ID can use an ARREST WARRANT as identification
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10418877/TSA-reveal...
Your comment manages to be innacurate and terribly unhelpful at the same time. Good job!
>Talk to anybody working in this space and you'll learn this is simply not true. CBP is still chasing people down and turning them away. ICE is still deporting people by the planeful.
"Anybody working in this space' seems vague. Let's look for a more official position.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/30/immigration-us-will-no-longe...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/06/politics/immigration-arrests-...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/new-biden-rules-for-...
Quite clear borders are wide open.
The better discussion, why?
https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/workforce-cris...
Baby boomers will have retired by 2030, there is simply not enough people to replace the boomers. Birth rates were too low for decades. This shortage is set in stone unless we drop the whole 'child labour laws' which will never happen.
There is no denying the borders are wide open, it seems clear to me why they are doing it.
"Anybody working in this space' seems vague. Let's look for a more official position.
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/09/30/immigration-us-will-no-longe...
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/06/politics/immigration-arrests-...
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/new-biden-rules-for-...
Quite clear borders are wide open.
The better discussion, why?
https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/workforce-cris...
Baby boomers will have retired by 2030, there is simply not enough people to replace the boomers. Birth rates were too low for decades. This shortage is set in stone unless we drop the whole 'child labour laws' which will never happen.
There is no denying the borders are wide open, it seems clear to me why they are doing it.
Its all fun and games until somebody runs over a kid.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munkkivuori#Huopalahdentie_acc...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Munkkivuori#Huopalahdentie_acc...
They should omit or classify covid records as a new category. I think everyone can agree it’s unfair to those that worked so hard in normal circumstances
They being who? This is an informal event
Early in the pandemic Ed Bolian posed the question of whether these records should have an asterisk next to them. To some extent, I think they should.
Speed limits also vary, cars and technology gets better and even minor things like weather can absolutely affect times. Sure, COVID changed the circumstances, but this is an highly unregulated race with very varying circumstances anyway.
That's true as well. Every competitor is making due with the set of circumstances they were given, so why should COVID be a unique circumstance? It's just another tactical decision, to do the run at that time.
Either way, I'm interested to see where it goes from here.
Either way, I'm interested to see where it goes from here.
Our start and finish points were the Beverly Hills Hotel and Pepe's Pizza in New Haven. I don't recall the drive times, but I was roughly 20 and enjoyed the diversions of meeting amazing people, finding new places, and of course, food. After the a few trips, it was more about how long could we take. Collecting the stories of the road became much more important. Since my cars have needed tail wind and downhills to get anything near triple digit speeds, it was less Cannonballing, and more candle pin bowling. Either way, I do love a road trip!
Dash cams these days could easily verify a cannonball run that never exceeds posted speed limits.
For anyone interested, I highly recommend Brock Yates's book about the beginning of Canonball.
https://smile.amazon.com/Cannonball-Americas-Greatest-Outlaw...
Yates was a writer at Car and Driver (my favorite automotive magazine), and the idea for Cannonball was a protest of speed limits. Yates's argument is that the speed you're allowed to drive should not be generalized, as a great driver in a great auto can safely do far greater speeds.
I don't agree with his argument - individual enforcement of rules doesn't scale to society, but it is a very good read.
https://smile.amazon.com/Cannonball-Americas-Greatest-Outlaw...
Yates was a writer at Car and Driver (my favorite automotive magazine), and the idea for Cannonball was a protest of speed limits. Yates's argument is that the speed you're allowed to drive should not be generalized, as a great driver in a great auto can safely do far greater speeds.
I don't agree with his argument - individual enforcement of rules doesn't scale to society, but it is a very good read.
Oh, I came here because I thought Burt Reynolds and Dom Delouise were back at it.
That'd be really interesting if they were, considering both are dead.
Wait a minute. Is that why Jojo's Bizarre Adventure Part 7 is named Stell Ball Run? I never put too much thought about the title. Not American too so I have no idea if Steel Ball Run is a popular term.
The Gumball Rally (1976) was an earlier and better movie than The Canonball Run (1981). At least better to this pre-teen. We would set the alarm to watch it in the wee hours of the morning on the super-late show, before video stores. I still think of the race as the Gumball Rally, and think of the Canonball Run movie as a ripoff/remake.
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074597
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0074597
Flipping through IMDB, we have:
1. Death Race 2000 (1975), same director & lead actor as #3
2. The Gumball Rally (1976)
3. Cannonball (1976)
4. Smokey and the Bandit (1977), same director and lead actor as #5
5. The Cannonball Run (1981)
1. Death Race 2000 (1975), same director & lead actor as #3
2. The Gumball Rally (1976)
3. Cannonball (1976)
4. Smokey and the Bandit (1977), same director and lead actor as #5
5. The Cannonball Run (1981)
The next innovation will be a VTOL vehicle.
When being pursued by law enforcement or encountering traffic, elevate to 100 feet for a few miles, then land again and carry on ones way after the threat has been eliminated
Something like this.
https://www.yankodesign.com/2019/01/15/this-car-sized-two-se...
When being pursued by law enforcement or encountering traffic, elevate to 100 feet for a few miles, then land again and carry on ones way after the threat has been eliminated
Something like this.
https://www.yankodesign.com/2019/01/15/this-car-sized-two-se...
The interesting thing these days is the EV category. As charging infrastructure improves, it will be interesting to see how times approach those of traditional ICE cars.
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/rented-tesla-model-s-sets...
https://www.autoevolution.com/news/rented-tesla-model-s-sets...
When it mentioned the race being partly inspired by a movie, I was thinking Death Race 2000.
Now that's a ridiculous movie.
Now that's a ridiculous movie.
I'm surprised corruption hasn't overtaken the endeavor. A thousand dollars in police bribes for every mile, and you could have the entire route protected for less than $3,000,000.
Well, you only need one honest police officer to get wind of it and you'll be in a very bad situation. Plus, you still need good conditions etc..
If you're going for that kind of money, it probably makes more sense to make the race "official", close the roads down for a few hours and cross-finance it with viewership and sponsors.
If you're going for that kind of money, it probably makes more sense to make the race "official", close the roads down for a few hours and cross-finance it with viewership and sponsors.
$50,000 to the Podunk County Policeman's Ball Fund could have the same benefits for a legal donation.
Participation should be encouraged by offering appropriate prizes. I propose a well-balanced package:
- six months of community service at hospital emergency services
- confiscation of vehicle
- confiscation of other vehicles owned if legally possible
- financial fine that hurts, Finnish style, according to income/net worth
- driving license repeal
- heavy discount on insurance policies at any and all insurance companies - a heavy negative one
Any more ideas?
- six months of community service at hospital emergency services
- confiscation of vehicle
- confiscation of other vehicles owned if legally possible
- financial fine that hurts, Finnish style, according to income/net worth
- driving license repeal
- heavy discount on insurance policies at any and all insurance companies - a heavy negative one
Any more ideas?
Prison time. If you shoot into a crowd and miss, you don’t get away with community service
No, the electric cannon ball run is where the real interesting progress is being made these days.
This sort of thing will never end. The rush comes from finding ways to circumvent law enforcement.
Only an hour and a half from doing it in under 24 hours? It sounds like it is technically doable.
Betteridge's law of headlines is an adage that states: "Any headline that ends in a question mark can be answered by the word no."
It applies here.
It applies here.
Hopefully.
> Now, on the expansive flat, straight—and empty, thanks to the pandemic—highways of the Midwest, the Audi was able to reach 175 miles per hour in spots.
And this, in a nutshell, is the reason why the traffic accidents and deaths statistics didn't really improve during the pandemic, despite reduced traffic.
And this, in a nutshell, is the reason why the traffic accidents and deaths statistics didn't really improve during the pandemic, despite reduced traffic.
Strangely, that seems to be highly linked to the country
> While Americans drove less in 2020 due to the pandemic, NHTSA’s early estimates show that an estimated 38,680 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes—the largest projected number of fatalities since 2007. This represents an increase of about 7.2 percent as compared to the 36,096 fatalities reported in 2019.
> 2,780 people died in 2020 on French roads, in mainland France or overseas territories. This figure, 21% lower than in 2019, is historically low. This evolution is largely explained by the effects of the global epidemic of Covid-19. Accidents are down -19% and injuries are down -20%.
+7% in the US, -20% in France. I wonder what is driving this large difference
https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-show... https://www.onisr.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/en/road-safety-p...
> While Americans drove less in 2020 due to the pandemic, NHTSA’s early estimates show that an estimated 38,680 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes—the largest projected number of fatalities since 2007. This represents an increase of about 7.2 percent as compared to the 36,096 fatalities reported in 2019.
> 2,780 people died in 2020 on French roads, in mainland France or overseas territories. This figure, 21% lower than in 2019, is historically low. This evolution is largely explained by the effects of the global epidemic of Covid-19. Accidents are down -19% and injuries are down -20%.
+7% in the US, -20% in France. I wonder what is driving this large difference
https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-show... https://www.onisr.securite-routiere.gouv.fr/en/road-safety-p...
I've been out to France. Nice country. Legal all over to have those radar-actuated speed cameras, illegal for the folks who live there to have radar detectors. The way I figure, that translates to more people abiding by the speed laws. Lower speeds, less shenanigans, less road deaths. Simple.
Those sorts of laws in the USA vary a lot. Out West, especially on the long flats, speed limits end up more a suggestion than a hard-and-fast. USA's got more distance between places, makes sense. Plus it's no secret that the car's a way of life in the USA a bit more than over in Europe, and comparatively we hand our licenses out like child's candy and we're a bit more hesitant to revoke 'em for misbehavior that doesn't involve the bottle.
Not saying one way of life is better or anything, don't think that's a thing I'd be qualified to say, but there's plenty to suggest why things are different in one place compared to the other.
Those sorts of laws in the USA vary a lot. Out West, especially on the long flats, speed limits end up more a suggestion than a hard-and-fast. USA's got more distance between places, makes sense. Plus it's no secret that the car's a way of life in the USA a bit more than over in Europe, and comparatively we hand our licenses out like child's candy and we're a bit more hesitant to revoke 'em for misbehavior that doesn't involve the bottle.
Not saying one way of life is better or anything, don't think that's a thing I'd be qualified to say, but there's plenty to suggest why things are different in one place compared to the other.
> illegal for the folks who live there to have radar detectors
I can't get over the idea that its illegal possess devices sensitive to certain types of RF like radar detectors. I don't use radar detectors, I don't see the logic of paying hundreds to attempt to avoid paying a ticket instead of just following speed limits and save hundreds overall. However, the basic concept of outlawing a machine sensitive to certain EM waves seems absurd. Imagine if IR cameras were made illegal or it was illegal to own a SDR.
I can't get over the idea that its illegal possess devices sensitive to certain types of RF like radar detectors. I don't use radar detectors, I don't see the logic of paying hundreds to attempt to avoid paying a ticket instead of just following speed limits and save hundreds overall. However, the basic concept of outlawing a machine sensitive to certain EM waves seems absurd. Imagine if IR cameras were made illegal or it was illegal to own a SDR.
"have" and "own" aren't always the same thing, especially in intent-based legal systems.
I can own a blue flashing light. I can operate it in my house. I can't operate it attached to my vehicle on a public road. There is a very high chance this is also true in your country/state. Context is king.
I can own a blue flashing light. I can operate it in my house. I can't operate it attached to my vehicle on a public road. There is a very high chance this is also true in your country/state. Context is king.
Still, outlawing the operation of such a detector in a vehicle seems a bit of a stretch to me.
Operating a blue flashing light on a car on a public road is partially impersonating an emergency vehicle or police officer. You're directly affecting the people around you with that.
A radar detector is a fancy radio receiver that beeps when it sees certain wavelengths. Its not directly affecting anyone else. I do agree things like radar jammers should be illegal to operate in public spaces, which they are already separate from anything about attaching them to your car, as that's directly affecting other people especially with modern car safety features utilizing radar and laser systems. Public radar jammer operation is illegal though under FCC rules, so there's already things in place to punish those operating such equipment.
FWIW in Virginia and D.C. it really is illegal to possess a radar detector. The police will confiscate them. I imagine there are other places in the world which have similar rules.
Operating a blue flashing light on a car on a public road is partially impersonating an emergency vehicle or police officer. You're directly affecting the people around you with that.
A radar detector is a fancy radio receiver that beeps when it sees certain wavelengths. Its not directly affecting anyone else. I do agree things like radar jammers should be illegal to operate in public spaces, which they are already separate from anything about attaching them to your car, as that's directly affecting other people especially with modern car safety features utilizing radar and laser systems. Public radar jammer operation is illegal though under FCC rules, so there's already things in place to punish those operating such equipment.
FWIW in Virginia and D.C. it really is illegal to possess a radar detector. The police will confiscate them. I imagine there are other places in the world which have similar rules.
Of course there's a legal distinction, otherwise the state wouldn't be able to make such laws. The question is whether such laws are logically reasonable to have.
Your blue flashing light example makes sense to prohibit because it is misleading other people. Whereas a radar detector is increasing your own senses. Should there be aspects of your personal physical reality that you are legally prohibited from finding out?
Or alternatively, what basic tort would using a radar detector be similar to?
Your blue flashing light example makes sense to prohibit because it is misleading other people. Whereas a radar detector is increasing your own senses. Should there be aspects of your personal physical reality that you are legally prohibited from finding out?
Or alternatively, what basic tort would using a radar detector be similar to?
In Virginia, it's legal to own a radar detector; but, you just can't use it.
You can actually have it in your vehicle, as long as it's not accessible to the driver/passengers and not connected to a power source. They cannot be sold in Virginia.
You can actually have it in your vehicle, as long as it's not accessible to the driver/passengers and not connected to a power source. They cannot be sold in Virginia.
The vast majority of radio frequencies are illegal for private use in Japan, but that doesn't mean that radios are illegal, or that people don't use radios, or that anyone even checks for compliance.
Illegal to transmit on, or illegal to listen on? I agree with the government determining who has rights to transmit on which frequency ranges. If it was entirely a free for all, it would be hard to operate the kinds of wireless networks we all enjoy.
In Germany it's the latter – you're allowed to listen to amateur radio, plus any public broadcasts like radio, TV, CB radio, weather satellites, maybe a few other things, but nothing else that's only intended for a limited target audience.
So while e.g. in Switzerland listening to air traffic control is legal and Zurich airport's official plane spotter info page even provides a direct link to liveatc.net, in Germany it's officially illegal unless you're a pilot (and even then it might possibly be technically illegal if you're listening in not directly in conjunction with flying, i.e. while not wearing your pilot hat figuratively speaking).
So while e.g. in Switzerland listening to air traffic control is legal and Zurich airport's official plane spotter info page even provides a direct link to liveatc.net, in Germany it's officially illegal unless you're a pilot (and even then it might possibly be technically illegal if you're listening in not directly in conjunction with flying, i.e. while not wearing your pilot hat figuratively speaking).
That sounds terrible to me. If I'm being irradiated with energy I should be able to analyze it without the law preventing me from looking at it. If the communications are supposed to be private it should be on those parties involved to secure it or limit it from reaching me, not just outlawing listening to verboten frequencies.
Would operating a general SDR would be illegal in Germany? How would they even begin to know you're listening to those frequencies as opposed to something else? I've got a hand-held amateur radio which easily tunes into the air bands, would such a radio be illegal to operate in Germany?
FWIW, this is one place in US laws which is like this. There's a section of frequency ranges which analog cell phones operated on, and supposedly radios which are designed to tune to those frequencies aren't allowed. I'm not entirely sure how SDRs work in such a legal system, but they seem generally legal despite physically being able to tune in to those frequencies easily. Its kind of a moot law these days anyways, there are no analog radios susceptible to this basic "attack".
Would operating a general SDR would be illegal in Germany? How would they even begin to know you're listening to those frequencies as opposed to something else? I've got a hand-held amateur radio which easily tunes into the air bands, would such a radio be illegal to operate in Germany?
FWIW, this is one place in US laws which is like this. There's a section of frequency ranges which analog cell phones operated on, and supposedly radios which are designed to tune to those frequencies aren't allowed. I'm not entirely sure how SDRs work in such a legal system, but they seem generally legal despite physically being able to tune in to those frequencies easily. Its kind of a moot law these days anyways, there are no analog radios susceptible to this basic "attack".
Operating scanners or amateur radios or a SDR is fine, you're just not allowed to intentionally tune it to any non-public frequencies, and if you're just idly browsing through the spectrum then as soon as you realise that a transmission isn't public you need to stop listening immediately and forget anything you have received so far.
> How would they even begin to know you're listening to those frequencies as opposed to something else?
Or course the can't know that – what it effectively means is you can't do in public and shouldn't talk about it too loudly (hence e.g. liveatc.net doesn't have any coverage in Germany).
> How would they even begin to know you're listening to those frequencies as opposed to something else?
Or course the can't know that – what it effectively means is you can't do in public and shouldn't talk about it too loudly (hence e.g. liveatc.net doesn't have any coverage in Germany).
You know what else France has? 70-80mph speed limits on some of the narrowest highways I have ever seen. 60mph speed limits on narrow, rural 2-lane country roads. Americans would absolutely shit their pants to drive there. People in France drive fast and aggressive. Sitting in the left lane at 80mph in my Fiat, got people up my ass, lights flashing at me. There is no tolerance for holding people up and being inconsiderate. People pay attention and drive, and don't act like entitled assholes or road vigilantes. They just get up and go. Horns are used to let people know where you are, and nobody gets offended or road raged because of it. Their mirrors are all convexed and they don't have blind spots. Motorcycles and scooters filter up at lights and are gone before cars even get through the intersection.
Here in the US, people are too busy doing everything but driving. Mind wandering, waiting for their Wall-e chairs to be developed to take them to McDonalds. Surfing Facebook, reading their iPads car wandering all over the lane, bouncing off the lane reflectors. People in the US can't even be bothered to use their turn signals for fucks sake. We have the absolute shittiest driving habits in the world, the worlds slowest, least attentive drivers. The driving exams are a joke in every state. We let anybody behind the wheel.
Here in the US, people are too busy doing everything but driving. Mind wandering, waiting for their Wall-e chairs to be developed to take them to McDonalds. Surfing Facebook, reading their iPads car wandering all over the lane, bouncing off the lane reflectors. People in the US can't even be bothered to use their turn signals for fucks sake. We have the absolute shittiest driving habits in the world, the worlds slowest, least attentive drivers. The driving exams are a joke in every state. We let anybody behind the wheel.
Some data; traffic-related deaths per 100,000 population:
US (2018 figures): 12.4
France: (2019): 5
Of course this neglects many confounding variables, but a factor of nearly 2.5 is quite large.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
US (2018 figures): 12.4
France: (2019): 5
Of course this neglects many confounding variables, but a factor of nearly 2.5 is quite large.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_traffic-r...
You'd probably be better off comparing the deaths per billion vehicle-km (7.3 for the states and 5.8 for the French).
Figure that it's the bit about traveling in the vehicle that bears the risk, not just being a person in the country.
Figure that it's the bit about traveling in the vehicle that bears the risk, not just being a person in the country.
Are there any average speed cameras in the US, taking two photos with cameras far apart from each other and checking the time between them is possible within the speed limits?
Few, if any. They are a really good idea in so many ways, but Americans regard speed cameras of all sorts as unsporting and invasive.
I used to feel the same way, until some combination of experience with traffic cameras in other countries and maturity changed my mind.
Traffic-stops are dangerous for all concerned, expensive, don't scale, and are rife with the opportunity for profiling/abuse.
To the extent that we can agree on speed limits that delineate the difference between safe and unsafe behavior, average-speed cameras are a great way to ensure that those limits aren't radically exceeded.
There are places, like Highway 20 in Washington State, where the privacy risk is limited. If you pass through Newhalem, you're either going to the mountains or you're going to Mazama, 60 miles away. On that stretch of road, if a car arrives >10% earlier than can possibly be safe, why can't we fine the car's owner?
I used to feel the same way, until some combination of experience with traffic cameras in other countries and maturity changed my mind.
Traffic-stops are dangerous for all concerned, expensive, don't scale, and are rife with the opportunity for profiling/abuse.
To the extent that we can agree on speed limits that delineate the difference between safe and unsafe behavior, average-speed cameras are a great way to ensure that those limits aren't radically exceeded.
There are places, like Highway 20 in Washington State, where the privacy risk is limited. If you pass through Newhalem, you're either going to the mountains or you're going to Mazama, 60 miles away. On that stretch of road, if a car arrives >10% earlier than can possibly be safe, why can't we fine the car's owner?
Speed cameras would be fine if we fixed some major problems. For example, the revenue goes to the local government so they have a vested interest in using them to generate as much income as possible. For another, American speed limits are often nonsensical and having nothing to do with the actual road conditions. I've been on tiny twisting roads with a limit of 65mph and I've been on giant thoroughfares that were 45 and seemed designed to tempt drivers into getting tickets.
> why can't we fine the car's owner?
That's the rub, in many places. You can't fine the owner unless you can prove that the owner was in control of the vehicle. I know some identical twins, one was driving a car and got caught by a red light camera with a clear picture of the driver. Both twins show up to court, claim that they share the car, and the photo can't distinguish between them. They got out of the ticket.
Personally, I'd be in favor of turning speed camera pings into an "excessive use fee" on the car's registration (pay on renewal, or no renewal).
Edit: the notion of moving speed infractions to an administrative fee does have some issues -- in cases of dangerously excessive speeding, it seems like a good idea for a cop to intervene. A sloppy implementation would result in double-jeopardy. If a car is stolen and used to commit a crime, but the thief isn't identified, that could result in significant legal difficulty for the owner.
That's the rub, in many places. You can't fine the owner unless you can prove that the owner was in control of the vehicle. I know some identical twins, one was driving a car and got caught by a red light camera with a clear picture of the driver. Both twins show up to court, claim that they share the car, and the photo can't distinguish between them. They got out of the ticket.
Personally, I'd be in favor of turning speed camera pings into an "excessive use fee" on the car's registration (pay on renewal, or no renewal).
Edit: the notion of moving speed infractions to an administrative fee does have some issues -- in cases of dangerously excessive speeding, it seems like a good idea for a cop to intervene. A sloppy implementation would result in double-jeopardy. If a car is stolen and used to commit a crime, but the thief isn't identified, that could result in significant legal difficulty for the owner.
You'd probably just see a large uptick in people obfuscating their plates (which is much easier with US-style plates than European-style ones).
That's what's happened in NYC. All the drivers who go out intending to blatantly violate the law just started making it so their plates can't be read (or are outright missing) and don't care about the cameras at all.
As someone much further north, unless I just came out of the car wash, my plates are basically illegible 4-6 months a year because of the heavy level of salt/sand/crap on the road in winter.
I don't think you're getting away from requiring a high level of traffic stops to influence driver behavior significantly.
That's what's happened in NYC. All the drivers who go out intending to blatantly violate the law just started making it so their plates can't be read (or are outright missing) and don't care about the cameras at all.
As someone much further north, unless I just came out of the car wash, my plates are basically illegible 4-6 months a year because of the heavy level of salt/sand/crap on the road in winter.
I don't think you're getting away from requiring a high level of traffic stops to influence driver behavior significantly.
When have traffic stops ever influenced driving behavior? If that really worked, then there should be no more speeding. Millions upon millions of speeding tickets have been written, and people still speed. Cops can patrol an area, and as soon as they leave, people go back to speeding.
All the camera operators here in the US are totally corrupt. They have been caught all across the country lobbying and bribing politicians. They all take a large percentage of the ticketing revenue, and thus are incentivized to get as many tickets as possible. Camera operators have repeatedly been caught making roads less safe in order to maximize ticketing and revenue.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/former-redflex-ceo-liai... https://ww2.motorists.org/blog/6-cities-that-were-caught-sho...
I mean, I could literally find 100000 links to various stories. These were just the first two that came up with a quick search.
https://www.justice.gov/usao-ndil/pr/former-redflex-ceo-liai... https://ww2.motorists.org/blog/6-cities-that-were-caught-sho...
I mean, I could literally find 100000 links to various stories. These were just the first two that came up with a quick search.
> To the extent that we can agree on speed limits that delineate the difference between safe and unsafe behavior
That can’t be the case though? If the posted limit is the boundary between safe and unsafe, drivers will be close to the limit all the time, and really in danger should they exceed it. The limits have to be set well away from that boundary, and the boundary itself has to assume the lowest common denominator of driver and vehicle.
I think that's why average speed cameras feel especially unsporting. A reasonable driver in a modern car could beat a posted limit by 10% while remaining so far inside their safety envelope they wouldn't even notice.
That can’t be the case though? If the posted limit is the boundary between safe and unsafe, drivers will be close to the limit all the time, and really in danger should they exceed it. The limits have to be set well away from that boundary, and the boundary itself has to assume the lowest common denominator of driver and vehicle.
I think that's why average speed cameras feel especially unsporting. A reasonable driver in a modern car could beat a posted limit by 10% while remaining so far inside their safety envelope they wouldn't even notice.
There is a big difference between "the car can handle it" and unsafe.
For an extreme example, see: School Zones.
For an extreme example, see: School Zones.
The Turnpikes were like this back in the day. You got a timestamped slip of paper when you got on, and you paid based on mileage driven when you go off. And if the times showed your average speed was too high, you would get ticketed also at the exit.
I knew of this back in the day on the Indiana Toll Road, but do they still do it these days? I haven't had reason to use it in well over a decade. Key difficulty: it's now privately-operated.
I'm honestly surprised this hasn't been done in more places with electronic tolls. If my state was greedy enough they probably could retroactively go through my toll history and mail me a sizable ticket.
I do find it funny seeing speeders slow down when approaching toll bridges. If they really cared about your speeding they'd obviously know based on how fast you went from the last bridge, slowing down to the speed limit just before the bridge isn't going to change your time.
Most toll bridges where I am have parking spots specifically for the police. You also have people changing lanes stupidly at the toll plazas.
Only vaguely related, but there used to be a 17 mile long stretch of highway in South Carolina that went through the grounds of the Savannah River Site. In the cold war days, that's where they produced nuclear material for bombs.
The highway was open to the public, but you had to check in at both ends as you entered and left the site. You were given a pass with time written on it, and if you took too long to pass through the site, you could be subject to additional interrogations and searches.
As far as I know, it was the only highway where taking to long to cover distance could get you into trouble.
The highway was open to the public, but you had to check in at both ends as you entered and left the site. You were given a pass with time written on it, and if you took too long to pass through the site, you could be subject to additional interrogations and searches.
As far as I know, it was the only highway where taking to long to cover distance could get you into trouble.
There are; to my understanding the state of Oklahoma uses a system similar to this on their toll roads.
It was highly linked to me (I'm in the US.) And I'm on a motorcycle, so it was like 10x as dangerous. I really had to check myself. I chalked it up to being so used to stealing a little speed between traffic clogs to make up for said traffic clogs that when there were no traffic, I hadn't mentally adjusted.
One thing I noticed— it seemed like people were running red lights with an abandon that I'd never witnessed before.
It was like they just didn't care anymore.
Anecdotally, whenever I'd mention this to someone they would say they noticed the very same thing, although I realize that data point could be meaningless.
Still, let me know if you noticed it where you are too.
It was like they just didn't care anymore.
Anecdotally, whenever I'd mention this to someone they would say they noticed the very same thing, although I realize that data point could be meaningless.
Still, let me know if you noticed it where you are too.
This must be a regional thing.
You pretty much[1] NEVER see anyone just blow a light in the northeast. Ignore a no right on red sign or squeak a few extra cars through as a yellow turns red, sure. But I've never seen anybody ever just barrel through an established red like a truck that's lost its brakes in a Russian dash-cam video. Not during the pandemic, not ever.
[1] By "pretty much" I mean "literally, but I'm covering my ass lest everyone chime in with that anecdote from a police chase in downtown Boston that you saw on the news in 1998".
You pretty much[1] NEVER see anyone just blow a light in the northeast. Ignore a no right on red sign or squeak a few extra cars through as a yellow turns red, sure. But I've never seen anybody ever just barrel through an established red like a truck that's lost its brakes in a Russian dash-cam video. Not during the pandemic, not ever.
[1] By "pretty much" I mean "literally, but I'm covering my ass lest everyone chime in with that anecdote from a police chase in downtown Boston that you saw on the news in 1998".
I'm in the Northeast (Fairfield County, CT) and see red light blowing on an almost daily basis. Even during rush hour after 2020. I mean people even anticipate it. At least twice a month I'll see a clear intersection and a light that has been green for 2-3 seconds and cars are still waiting because some idiot is just barreling along in broad daylight with no intention of stopping coming the opposite way.
Here in the Midwest, I see plenty of people stretching yellow into orange, particularly on left-turn arrows. It's very rare for me to see someone just charge through a light that's been red for any significant length of time, but sometimes it comes up in the news headlines.
> It's very rare for me to see someone just charge through a light that's been red for any significant length of time
I'm in southern Mississippi, and that's the socially accepted way to go through an intersection. I'm only partially joking.
I'm in southern Mississippi, and that's the socially accepted way to go through an intersection. I'm only partially joking.
>squeak a few extra cars through as a yellow turns red, sure.
For one thing, this counts as blowing through a red light. Secondly, I've seen plenty of this in Philly - people blowing blowing through stop lights and stop signs
For one thing, this counts as blowing through a red light. Secondly, I've seen plenty of this in Philly - people blowing blowing through stop lights and stop signs
Live in Salt Lake City now. Blowing red lights is like a sport here it seems.
I’ve seen it in Brooklyn on multiple occasions, always late night.
> One thing I noticed— it seemed like people were running red lights with an abandon that I'd never witnessed before.
I don't know that it happens more often here now, because it wasn't enforced to begin with. I saw someone run a red light to make a left turn, in front of a police car who had a green light and had to slam on the brakes to let the guy run the red light in front of him. The police officer simply continued down the road afterwards. That kind of stuff happens all the time here. There's a few police that might give you a speeding ticket but mostly they only care if you have drugs, alcohol, or cash.
I don't know that it happens more often here now, because it wasn't enforced to begin with. I saw someone run a red light to make a left turn, in front of a police car who had a green light and had to slam on the brakes to let the guy run the red light in front of him. The police officer simply continued down the road afterwards. That kind of stuff happens all the time here. There's a few police that might give you a speeding ticket but mostly they only care if you have drugs, alcohol, or cash.
I've noticed it too. And it isn't just running it "by a little" where someone could theoretically talk their way out of a ticket by saying they mistimed the light. But I'm talking about really egregious examples where if the guy going the other way had been inattentive they would have gotten tboned.
I think part of it is that we've just gone through about two years of nationwide, massive, consequence-free civil disobedience campaigns, watched people ignore public health mandates with impunity, and read reports of a handful of regions decriminalizing certain petty crimes. People take in this input and, somewhat accurately, determine that nobody is home at the police station and anything goes now.
There are probably multiple causes, malaise due to covid messing with our way of life, as you said unrest and civil disobedience. When the authorities have bigger fish to fry you can get away with a lot of small things. I get the sense of a general discontent with how things are going in general. And that feeds back into this.
This is a key part of it that I left out actually, the egregious nature of it. Interesting to hear you say this too.
> I wonder what is driving this large difference
I'd bet good money that a huge part of the equation is booze or pills. As a former paramedic, booze or drugs accounted for like 80% of accidents I dealt with. Why so high compared to official stats? I think because I live in a relatively rural area whereas most people live in high density cities. Also, sometimes booze doesn't get counted in the official accident statistics if people don't get charged for whatever reason. People don't generally crash unless they're drunk, high, inexperienced, or something unexpected happens like they hit a deer or something.
In this case, I'd venture to guess there's less demand to drive in France, and they have a better safety net, and we probably had a lot more drunks.
I'd bet good money that a huge part of the equation is booze or pills. As a former paramedic, booze or drugs accounted for like 80% of accidents I dealt with. Why so high compared to official stats? I think because I live in a relatively rural area whereas most people live in high density cities. Also, sometimes booze doesn't get counted in the official accident statistics if people don't get charged for whatever reason. People don't generally crash unless they're drunk, high, inexperienced, or something unexpected happens like they hit a deer or something.
In this case, I'd venture to guess there's less demand to drive in France, and they have a better safety net, and we probably had a lot more drunks.
I think you would need to look at how much less each nation drove, I have a suspicion that the drop in driving in the US is much less pronounced than in France.
US has a much higher driving culture, and we also had much less restrictions in most of the nation, so I suspect the reduction in number of miles driven in the US was not really that much outside the say CA and NY
US has a much higher driving culture, and we also had much less restrictions in most of the nation, so I suspect the reduction in number of miles driven in the US was not really that much outside the say CA and NY
The US has roads that are unsafe at the posted speed limit ("stroads"), heavy traffic normally lowers the effective speed to less lethal levels.
If you’re going to compile this kind of data you might want to include data on Germany which has many roads that have no speed limit.
France also had a very strict lockdown with 100,000 police enforcing the no travel laws between March 17th and April 1st had 5.8 million controls and issued 359,000 fines. The US never had a real lockdown.
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1110584/fines-controls-o...
[1] https://www.statista.com/statistics/1110584/fines-controls-o...
The pandemic was a boon for any car nerd with a lead foot. During the "2 weeks to slow the spread" period when we were all locked inside, all my friends with fast cars were out enjoying the roads. One the one hand, it's incredibly dangerous some of the stuff they did. On other other hand though, you're not getting this chance again so go have fun and try not to kill yourself.
What about the other people that you kill while having fun?
From the post I don't see any evidence that they killed or even injured anybody.
If someone shoots into a crowd the fact that they missed doesn’t somehow make the action less evil.
You know many people go out to roads that there aren’t many people on, right? They went out and did this because they knew people wouldn’t be out there. Thus why they did this when everyone was locked up inside… it lowered risk for everyone.
[deleted]
Those were a blissful couple of weeks, for sure. Took my Camaro SS out for enjoyable drives both in the city and out in the sticks. Didn't do anything too crazy, but it sure was a refreshing experience. Makes me want to move somewhere farther from the city traffic.
It's also the one time I went by a cop and got a "slow down" gesture instead of a ticket. Just the local speed trap, so it wasn't crazy fast, like 65 in a 45. For a highway, with ramps! Don't ask me why the speed limit is 45. I'm sure if I had been going legitimately fast he'd have overcome his desire to avoid the covid plague.
It's also the one time I went by a cop and got a "slow down" gesture instead of a ticket. Just the local speed trap, so it wasn't crazy fast, like 65 in a 45. For a highway, with ramps! Don't ask me why the speed limit is 45. I'm sure if I had been going legitimately fast he'd have overcome his desire to avoid the covid plague.
I a lot of areas cops weren't allowed to stop people due to the plague. Only took a few days for that message to reach the general public. Great fun
Traffic moved very fast then. When my partner and I realized day care was about to close but we would still have to work we drove our daughter ten hours to my in-laws' house... mostly on rural southern interstates, speed limit 70, traffic might go 80-82 in normal times. I was hitting 90 quite often. And still getting passed.
Weird, I'm a huge car nerd, and I stayed inside during the times when I was supposed to and attended HPDE and other track events when it became possible again. Like many other folks, I used the extra time at home to order parts online and upgrade my car in my garage during my free time. I don't know anyone that used this opportunity to go out on the public roads and do anything dangerous, and I find that suspect, but it could be regional differences (or socioeconomic differences) between different groups of car people.
"Risk compensation is a theory which suggests that people typically adjust their behavior in response to perceived levels of risk, becoming more careful where they sense greater risk and less careful if they feel more protected. Although usually small in comparison to the fundamental benefits of safety interventions, it may result in a lower net benefit than expected or even higher risks."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Risk_compensation
I don't know what happened in your side of the world, but the police literally stopped policing over on this side. When they did police, they did a pretty terrible job of it.
There were some protests about it, if you didn't notice.
There were some protests about it, if you didn't notice.
At least in the USA, root cause is the poor driving ability of an average driver. At medium to high congestion levels, it's less of a factor because the roads are so congested anyway. Once congestion drops below a certain threshold, in the USA you have these phalanxes of slow moving cars that other (also incompetent) fast moving cars are desperate to get around. Anecdotally, I personally found that the driving experience got much worse due to this effect. Whereas in Europe, people drive right and pass left. In the USA you're actually taught (if taught at all) to avoid lane changes.
Now if you tell me that accident counts went up in EU as well, then ok my reasoning is wrong.
OK I found https://wjes.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13017-021-0... which breaks it down. I didn't read it in detail but most of the increase (but not the single greatest increase) was in the US. For the rest of world, for the most part things got better with reduced traffic.
> Overall, the number of annual road death dropped significantly in most countries. However, few had the opposite. There was an overall reduction in the annual absolute number of road deaths in most of the 27 European countries by 17% [24], six Balkan countries by 11% [117], in Saudi Arabia by 20% [118], and in Japan by 12% [119, 120]. In contrast, the absolute number of road deaths increased in some countries like Luxembourg by18%, Ireland by 6%, Finland by 4%, and Switzerland by 21% [24, 117]. Similarly, it generally increased in the USA by 7% [110] with major variations in different states [121].
The study is detailed and they go more into it than just "deaths". Although I very much doubt that they get into studying driver skill.
Now if you tell me that accident counts went up in EU as well, then ok my reasoning is wrong.
OK I found https://wjes.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s13017-021-0... which breaks it down. I didn't read it in detail but most of the increase (but not the single greatest increase) was in the US. For the rest of world, for the most part things got better with reduced traffic.
> Overall, the number of annual road death dropped significantly in most countries. However, few had the opposite. There was an overall reduction in the annual absolute number of road deaths in most of the 27 European countries by 17% [24], six Balkan countries by 11% [117], in Saudi Arabia by 20% [118], and in Japan by 12% [119, 120]. In contrast, the absolute number of road deaths increased in some countries like Luxembourg by18%, Ireland by 6%, Finland by 4%, and Switzerland by 21% [24, 117]. Similarly, it generally increased in the USA by 7% [110] with major variations in different states [121].
The study is detailed and they go more into it than just "deaths". Although I very much doubt that they get into studying driver skill.
germany has no speed limits on many of its highways, and people do take advantage of it. yet they have half the deaths than us highways.
speed isn’t the sole problem imo.
speed isn’t the sole problem imo.
>And this, in a nutshell, is the reason why the traffic accidents and deaths statistics didn't really improve during the pandemic, despite reduced traffic.
This is like a batting practice pitch straight over home plate for the biases of HN.
I propose a different theory: All the older and statistically safer white collar workers were at home leaving the younger, poorer, "monster energy is my sleep" essential workers crowd on the roads.
This is like a batting practice pitch straight over home plate for the biases of HN.
I propose a different theory: All the older and statistically safer white collar workers were at home leaving the younger, poorer, "monster energy is my sleep" essential workers crowd on the roads.
Or to line it up more squarely with the point of staying home: those who make decisions in large part based on risk assessment stayed home (due to covid).
That left risk takers on the road with no "safe driver" buffers between them.
That left risk takers on the road with no "safe driver" buffers between them.
Idk, in your theory if people dont change their behavior and you remove the safer drivers, then maybe accidents per driver are up but overall accidents should be down. But no, overall accidents went up which shows people changed their behavior. Correlate that with overall levels of "disfuction" in society like more airline passanger problems, more grocery store customer incidents i think the other theory makes more sense.
Most of these people share their stories on the youtube channel for Vinwiki. One of the record holders, Doug Tabbutt, has gone on record on that channel as saying he carries a PBA 'get out of jail free' card: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-42780382
Reading the article, you might think they're lucky not to get pulled over. But they do get pulled over. They're lucky because they get away with it. There are multiple stories from this group of people on that youtube channel where they explain how.
Sometimes they cover the cars with pro-police political nods. Sometimes they race in cars that are deliberately made to look like foreign police cars: technically legal but the intention is clear. Sometimes, they participate in slower, legal rallies to raise money for police charities, which give away clothing that is convenient to wear for their illegal races.
The Cannonball Run is an exercise in using bias and privilege to avoid retribution for deadly crimes. These people are proud, unapologetic criminals who get away with it because they're in the right clique.
Another one of these people is Alex Roy. He works as a director for Argo AI, where they make autonomous vehicle technology.