Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Would higher speed limits be safer?

Some seem to think so according to this article. They say the police are against it for reasons of reduced revenue. No surprise there.
Some states have absurdly low speed limits...like Oregon. They limit it to 65 on freeways and 55 on other roads. OR has some of the best maintained roads I've ever been on and their limits are ridiculous..and usually ignored.


Higher Speed Limits Seen As Safer And Desirable

Higher Speed Limits Seen As Safer And Desirable
Some states raising speed limits for safety sake
AOL Original Content Posted: Sep 04, 2013
| By: David Kiley | AOL Autos

How does driving 80 mph, legally, sound?

For the last few years, as budget-pressured states and municipalities have pressed law-enforcement to write more speeding and traffic tickets, employed speed cameras and battled in court against drivers who warn other drivers about speed traps, there are voices, including those of some police departments, saying higher speed limits would be safer and contribute to our quality of life.

Take Michigan State Senator Rick Jones, a Republican from Grand Ledge, Mich., and a former police officer, who has proposed that state speed limits be raised to as high as 80 mph, up from the upper limit of 70 mph. The Detroit News recently supported Jones' measure with an editorial.

Jones knows local police forces may fight the proposal until they figure out how to replace lost ticket revenue.

"All good police officers oppose speed traps," Jones says. "Speeds should be posted scientifically and properly for the safest speed and then the officers will catch the big violators. We don't need to get the average Joe getting to work." Jones also said the higher limits would afford police the ability to focus on other enforcement areas such as impaired, distracted or careless driving, and restraint (seat-belt) enforcement.

There is support at the state level.

"With artificially low speed limits we put police in a position of actually ticketing safe drivers," said Lt. Gary Megge of the Michigan State Police Traffic Services. He's pushing for Jones' bill.

Illinois has recently upped its speed limits on rural highways from 65 mph to 70 mph. And there is support in Wisconsin's state house for similarly increasing the speed limit from 65 mph to 70 mph, a measure that has support from some of the state's newspapers.

AAA generally opposes higher speed limits. The organization said in its opposition to Illinois' measure that nearly half of the state's traffic fatalities involve speeding, with that percentage on the rise. But let's look behind the numbers. There were 1,248 fatal car accidents on Illinois highways in 2007 and 918 in 2011. The percentage of accidents involving speeding was 42% in 2007 and 47% in 2011. Not only are the numbers and percentages close, but drawing a straight line between higher speed limits and more traffic fatal accidents is not valid. Unknowns, for example, in those statistics are how many accidents may have been caused by motorists suddenly adjusting speed at the sight of a police speed trap, the number impacted by impaired drivers or influenced by road construction.

Why and what is the theory behind higher speed limits being safer for drivers? The National Motorists Association argues that higher speed limits make roads safer, endorsing research that supports the idea that setting speed limits around the speed that 85 percent of drivers travel.

"We're supportive of the 85th percentile rule," Michigan Dept. of Transportation DOT spokesman Jeff Cranson told The Detroit News. "There's a misconception that speed alone kills. It really depends on road conditions. If it means increasing the speed limit to make some roads safer, then it should be done."

There are a lot of variances in speed limits in the U.S. as anyone driving cross country can attest. The highest speed limits are for the most part 75 mph in western states and 70 mph in eastern states. Northeast states have 65 mph limits. A small portion of the Texas and Utah road networks have higher limits of 80 mph and even 85 mph.

Remember when speed limits kept drivers to a hair-pulling 55 mph? Between 1974 and 1987, the lower highway speed limit was a result of policy that said the lower speed limit would save gas. During World War II, the speed limit was set at 35 mph for the same reason. While it is generally true that most vehicles will use less gas if their speed is set between 55 and 65 in highway driving, proof that the national policy saved energy on the whole is debatable at best. The National Maximum Speed law was repealed in 1995 and speed limits were given back to the states to set.

Will higher speed limits make us less safe? After New York raised the limit on its highway traffic to 65 mph in 1995, the state's total crash rate dropped by 4 percent. In 2000, the Automobile Club of Southern California determined that higher speed limits in that state did not increase the rate of statewide accidents over a period of five years. Additionally, traffic fatalities as a percentage of miles traveled dropped sharply after the repeal of the 55 mph rule.

Speed, however, does have a direct effect on how serious an accident can be. Physics dictates that the force of impact increases with speed. But research in this area can be quickly out-dated as carmakers have added technology to new cars-multiple airbags, seatbelt minders that chime until the belts are buckled, electronic stability control. These features are all found standard on every new car. Even more technology, such as sophisticated collision-avoidance systems, are being phased into cars, albeit mostly luxury cars for now.

In case you are wondering when speed limits were first set, it was in Colonial times. In 1757, in Boston, the board of selectmen set the speed limit for wagons, carriages, horses, etc. on Sunday was set at "a walking pace." Anyone exceeding this limit would be fined 10 shillings.

Today's vehicles have a lot more horsepower. And it could just be safer to let them run

Speed limits are for revenue, not safety. Look up the highway death toll data on the DOT website, the death rate took a dramatic drop after the 55 mph national speed limit was repealed. The reason was that you no longer had half the drivers doing 55 and the other half doing 75-80. If you set a reasonable speed limit instead of ridiculously low limits then traffic can flow at it's natural, safer speed.

I think having a truck limit lower than the car limit is a hazard. You get several trucks piled up with cars trying to get around them at 70. It's asking for trouble.

ever notice that left to their own devices, folks on the Interstate seem to settle down around the same speed? 75 or 80 around here.

IIRC the number of severe wrecks went down when Montana's was "reasonable and prudent".....vehicles werent bunched up as bad so when a wreck happened it generally only involved a single or two vehicles depending on circumstances was the conclusions so numbers of deaths went down.....

There is a whole lot of accurate data neded to make that decision. I do not believe such date exists.

I felt safer driving for hours at 100 MPH + on the autobahn in Germany than I do on our interstates. The primary factor for this has to do with 2 things - driving to right unless you are passing and strict adherence to traffic laws which leads to predictable behavior and driving patterns. Rarely saw an accident.

The average accident happens at 35MPH, that's why I drive at least 70MPH wherever I am. It doubles my chances of not having an accident.

I thought we were supposed to be trying to lower our dependence on foreign oil.

If so, why are we increasing speeds which usually increases gas consumption?

As a society, we suck as drivers. I spend a lot of time on the road with my job. Paying attention in the car is second to everything else. Ie phone , kids , finishing their make-up. Etc etc.

Only because the government doesn't want it to.

That's why in just about every state in the union speed limits are based on an engineering study of the 85th Percentile speed of the free flowing traffic.

At least they are suppose to be. Unfortunately, there are other factors that get involved like say POLITICS for instance that really throw a wrench in the works....

And that's all I'm sayin'!!!!!

I always remember being told to walk with a purpose instead of just strolling along. That has always carried over to my driving as well... I drive with a purpose.

In N.C. The DOT recommends a speed limit but for it to be legally enforced it has to be legislated, the legislature rarely passes the same speed limit that it recommended.

I'm not sure about increasing speed limits. Where I drive the Texans cross into Louisiana and continue to drive like they're in Texas. They're usually doing 80-85, tail gateing, passing on the right, or changing lanes without signaling. Maybe they think Drive Friendly only applies to Texas. One passed me last week and we were in the SAME lane.

Come on Tex, I know it takes a looooooong time to drive all the way across the state but if your east bound, slow down once your pass Dallas.



And yes, I've done things driving that seemed alright at the time that in retrospect might have been a poor decision.

Just my experience. Flame me.

drive down the interstate in North Dakota where you can see for miles and both ahead of you and in your rear view you can count the vehicles you see on your fingers and have several left over and ask yourself if its not safe to run at 100 there....i know there are alot of places where its a bad idea and not safe but there are alot of places where it is as safe as driving 65

No doubt about it. My reference is to moderate traffic.

I don't know what my tires are speed rated at but I doubt its 100 MPH.

I grew up in wild wild wild Montana, with no speed limits. And then I got a street bike and raced it for a while when I was living in the Bay Area. Bottom line is, if you drive fast enough it takes all your attention. If the speed limit is too low, your attention starts to wander.
I have gotten in more trouble on stupidly slow roads than any time I was tooting right along.
Nonetheless, I have never, ever gotten a speeding ticket or been in a car wreck (bikes don't count). I have been pulled over and weaseled out of every one. Basically, the cop asks me, I say Yep, I know exactly how fast I was going, and ask him or her what the radar or laser says. And it usually goes well from there, and even if it doesn't, the worst has been a non-points equipment ding.

It depends. I thought the 55 MPH limit was a joke. But all the interstates I drive on now have 70-75 mph limits with 65 in some urban areas. Considering almost all LE will give you 10 MPH most of us can drive 75-80 anyway. That is as fast as I want to go and puts me sligtly ahead of the flow in most places.

In Georgia (with a few exceptions ) most LE are required by law to give you 10 over the limit. That law was put in place to limit speed traps. The exceptions are school zones, construction zones and Georgia State Troopers. Local LE cannot write a ticket unless you are 10+ over the limit. While GSP can technically write you for 1 mph over, I've never known of a GSP officer to write a ticket that was not deserved.

My gripe is with small town cops who are only employed to generate revenue. There are at least 3 tiny communities between Atlanta and Chattanooga with 1 patrol car departments, not a single traffic light and 4-5 miles off the interstate. Yet that 1 patrol car is always on the side of I-75 instead of preventing crime in their small towns.

Then mandate smaller, more fuel efficient vehicles and diesel engines. Get rid of the crazy diesel emissions standards and use the European standards which will open up our market to lots of new vehicles with great fuel mileage. Don't try and sell us lower speed limits under the guise of safety when it's really about revenue generation.