Topic: 55 - 60
started by: Spidey
Posted by Spidey on Mar. 28 2004,9:19 am
Bill would raise speed limit on some highways Publishing date: 03-26-2004 3:57 PM
(St. Paul-AP) -- A bill passed by the House today would raise the speed limit from 55 to 60 miles-per-hour on some two-lane highways.
If the Senate and Governor Pawlenty go along, the Transportation Department would be free to boost the limit after conducting a safety study. The bill passed easily, 109-to-22
Representative Marty Seifert of Marshall says many people aren't abiding by the lower limit in the first place. But Representative Alice Hausman says the bill sends the wrong message and could lead to more accidents and fatalities..
Do we really have this need for another five mpr? I didn't even know that "we" wanted this. Did anyone else? Where did this come from?
If it's just because no one is following the 55 mph law ... that's just stupid ... people won't follow the 60 mph law either.
Posted by Grinning_Dragon on Mar. 28 2004,11:54 am
Spidey-Recently I asked a Hwy Trooper on what he considers an infraction on MN Hwys & freeways, and I was told that most of the time if he clocks someone at 60-65 on a 55mph he just lets em go, and the same for 75-80 on the interstate. Now I am not saying all Hwy Troopers are like this, but there are a few that just let motorists be. Most of time when he pulls someone over its for driving like they are driving in a Brickyard500.
So back to the question you asked. When the PTB see and hear that the avg speed on the Hwy is 60mph, yeah the will debate it, and those against the raising the speed limit always cry out and fore-tell the red stained hwy's and the increased accidents when after a few years it remains the same as it did when it was at the lower speed limit. They whinned when the speed limit was raised to 70 on the freeway. I think freeways should be @80-85Mph and Hwy's @ 70-75Mph.
Todays drivers and the technology in cars is more than capable of these speeds. And most motorists need to get somewhere fast and don't have time to sight see. I myself hate driving, wish we could have transporters like they do in Star Trek™ now thats traveling.
Posted by minnow on Mar. 28 2004,1:42 pm
OK Spidey..since you insist apon being as anal as you can be on this issue, how about 45 mph. If 55 is good, of course 45 must be better. How about us removing ALL risk and make traffic illegal. Makes sense to me. People are basically cheaters so we must make it 25 so they stay under 55. It's just part of our, we will make this the most anal place to live in the whole world plan. Count me in!
Posted by Hanna on Mar. 28 2004,1:50 pm
What would we do with all those speedometers that have 55 highlighted? 
Personally, I couldn't care less either way, 5 mph isn't going to change my driving habits or my lifestyle either way.
Maybe they are doing it to balance out the .08 alcohol limit. That would mean they have a little less reason to pull you over to check you out.
Posted by Spidey on Mar. 28 2004,2:58 pm
Your right ... there isn't much difference between 55 and 60, so why change it? To be honest with you ... I couldn't care less, I was just wondering if this was an issue with the people or not ... I haven't heard anything.| Quote |
| OK Spidey..since you insist apon being as anal as you can be on this issue |
Not sure where you got that from ... and don't know why your temp has risen over this post, but I'm not anal about the five miles added on to the speed limit. You sure can read into things minnow ... are you always on the defense?
| Quote |
| we will make this the must anal place to live in the whole world plan. Count me in! |
Now who's being anal ... your on your own with this one. I don't think most people would want to live in your world.
I think you need to lay off the sugar ... your a bit sensitive and hyper there minnow!
Grinning_Dragon ... I know the cops don't pull you over for going five to ten over the speed limit. Most people are driving 60 in the 50 anyway ... so raising it will only make them do 65 ... 70?
One thought on being able to drive 85 or more ... have you ever been to a country where they have no laws on speeding? My brother used to live in Saudi Arabia for four years and he said it was absolute nuts.
Posted by minnow on Mar. 28 2004,3:19 pm
BS Spidey...that was the worst brain fart I've seen from you so far. 
Your logic is perfectly unsound and It's made me form a solid opinion of your views, that probably won't ever change. And that view isn't very favorable I'm sorry to say. This posts really cements the fact, in my mind, that your opinions are basically worthless. Sorry, I jus call em' as I see em'.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 28 2004,3:50 pm
| Quote |
| have you ever been to a country where they have no laws on speeding? My brother used to live in Saudi Arabia for four years and he said it was absolute nuts. |
When you get to the SOUTH side of the Alps, however, it DOES become chaotic. In Italy, the Autostrada, modeled after the Autobahn, is a real nightmare. Every Fiat driver pretents he is driving a Ferrari.
Drivers don't segregate speed by lane--slow drivers in the left lane, fast drivers tailgating in the right lane, nobody signals turns. Traffic moves at nearly 100 mph, then comes to a stop. In the cities, it may be marked as 3 lanes of traffic, but there may actually be 5 lanes wide--coming into one of the big "roundabouts"!Same road design--different attitude by the drivers--big difference. If drivers can handle 60, why shouldn't they be allowed? Don't forget, we USED to have 65 mph speed limits on those same roads, until the Federal Government decided to take over.
Posted by Spidey on Mar. 28 2004,4:10 pm
jimhanson ... I don't have a problem with 60. Just wondering why if everyone is doing it anyway. Changing the law requires money and don't forget the lunch meetings by our bigwigs. Hardly seems worth the cost.minnow ... your comments and your thoughts about me are meaningless. Your shorts are always in such a bind all of the time you must have skid marks a mile long! Most of what you post are insults and dictatorship comments, and I've never really taken you seriousely anyway. Reading your posts is like reading the comics in the newspaper ... usually it's good for a laugh or two
Posted by MrTarzan on Mar. 28 2004,4:13 pm
I too have driven on many foriegn roads, and I must say we have the safest in the world by far. Also some of the slowest for road and weather. 
I believe that the legislation was trying to be changed by the counties to the west of us, from the south to as far north the Red River and Canada borders. Why? Because that is very flat open country with almost no trees, where a long flat stretch of highway that is only 55 mph is flat out stupid. Those people in those counties, or any county for that matter, should be able to assign speed limits as high as they deem safe. The county is ultimate decision maker on new road construction and other items conscerning the majority of roads in the country. Why does the Federal Government have anything to say about the speed limit off of Federal Interstate Highways? Why should the State have anything to say about anything besides State Highways? Decentralization of the rules is what this country needs. The only exception is fairness against things that might violate civil rights. The speed limit, should be each counties descretion. They are the ones that see the accidents and clean-up. They know if the speed limit should be lower. If they have a twenty mile long flat stretch with no trees that has never had an accident period, they should feel free to crank it up. Liberty. You know, the word most often ignored in the U.S., yet the most tangible thing to affect all of our lives.
Posted by Truth on Mar. 28 2004,11:01 pm
States have control over the money they direct to the county level for maitenance of major county roads hence the title County State Aid Highway. The same is true of federal moneys provided to the states to subsidize road maintenance of U.S. Trunk Highways and other roads coverd by said programs.Your doing it again. Liberty and the Bill of Rights do not give you a right to a car. You find the language in the constitution where it says that the states and or the federal government shall be restrained form controlling the use of large selfpropelled conveyances in close proximity to other persons at speeds sufficient to render human flesh unrecognizable in the event of a crash. When you find it post it.................................
With that said 60MPH is fine with me. There's nothing to say that police will automatically leave you alone if you're traveling at 70MPH instead of 65MPH; some officers will just get more strict about speed enforcement.
Maybe if you ask nice the officer will give you tissue to cry into when you're upset about getting a ticket for breaking the law.
Posted by minnow on Mar. 29 2004,12:32 am
You talk a lot about law and order for a low down criminal and liar. You're just a hateful wannabe who wanted to become a cop to satisfy your ego. Your thirst for some kind of power and authority you would otherwise never have in your wildest fantasies.I'm not fooled. Your IQ is to low to be a professional of any kind and your ego is to big to work and McDonalds. So you became a cop and hang out at McDonalds...LOL
What's your obsession with this breaking the law business. We're talking about changing the law. If the law is changed, then they wouldn't be law breakers. See how that works?
Sheesh...want a Gimp...
Posted by Mamma on Mar. 29 2004,7:16 am
Minnow, why all the contempt for law enforcement? I do agree some of them have ego problems, but some night when someone comes creeping around your house wanting a piece of your illegal stash they might come in handy. I have come to realize that most people that are cop haters have done something in their lives that put them in a position where they were caught doing something illegal. Blame the police for catching you instead of taking a good hard look at your own life. You have this thing about people getting arrested for sale and distribution of weed and then turn it into an argument about alcohol and cigarettes. Why can't you see that until they are made illegal or your pot is made legal , it is an old tired argument? Maybe we are all using our drugs...alcohol and cigarettes like you use your drug, pot. So see?....cigarettes help me relax....and the same for alcohol....they're like medicine. Just like your medicine Minnow. Only mine is legal.
Posted by cwolff on Mar. 29 2004,7:30 am
Truth, the Feds will not just hand over the funds for roads, but what they do is act like a dictatorship with those funds. The Feds tell the States that you have the right to set your own DUI limits, but if you want your tax money back for roads, then you must set your DUI limit to .08 or you do not get the money back.
Posted by hoosier on Mar. 29 2004,8:39 am
Doesnt really matter to me, but just to try to answer Spideys question, "Where did this come from?" Same place it always comes from, a guy named Dave Bishop I believe is his name. Powerful politician from Rochester, he drives back and forth to the cities and wants the speed limit changed.
I had the oppurtunity to see first hand one night how politics, and politicians work, it bout made me sick. The wife and I were at a nice dinner in Rochester for the MOA. All the local politicians were there. They were all required to stand up and give a couple minute speech, for their free meal. But this guy who represents Winona stands up and is talking about how the college campus there is in need of some new buildings but that he cant get Bishop and his party to help him with it.
Bishop stands up and in front of everyone says, "You vote to raise the speed limit between Rochester and the cities and I will see that you get your buildings.
Now some might say thats how its supposed to work, I dont think so. If the college needed new buildings or repairs, that should be all that matters, it shouldnt. depend on politicians using what doesnt belong to them as bribes to get what they want. Thats politics as usual, sorry bout the rant, LOL. But if it gets passed, check and see if Winona got any new buildings, my bet is they did!
Posted by minnow on Mar. 29 2004,1:09 pm
We live in a Tony Soprano world...LOL Now...get oudda here...
Posted by repdan on Mar. 29 2004,1:32 pm
Bishop no longer serves in the House, he retired last year.
Posted by Truth on Mar. 29 2004,5:36 pm
The federal government should be able to set requirements for the subsidies it provides the states to maitain infrastructure. What else would they do?If Minnesota gets help from Washington, how in the world could the state (receiver) expect to dictate to Washington (giver) what they will do with it? Granted there are nogotiations, but you don't take grants and then dictate terms of its use to those providing the grant.
Posted by Montyman on Mar. 29 2004,7:28 pm
repdan---is there something in the speed bill about the transportation commissioner interpreting medical cost to set speed limits?
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 29 2004,8:26 pm
| Quote |
| f Minnesota gets help from Washington, how in the world could the state (receiver) expect to dictate to Washington (giver) what they will do with it? |
Why in the world would anyone think it is a good idea to send money to Washington, and then PLEAD to get it back--AFTER the Feds have taken their cut? Kind of like paying "protection" money to the mob!
If THAT isn't bad enough, the Feds put restrictions on what we can do with the money--"put our speed restrictions on, or we won't give you your allowance". Change your DWI laws to .08, or we won't give you your money back. At least "Luigi the loan shark" would leave you alone after he took your money--the government wants to tell you how to spend what they've LEFT us.
One of the reasons old people (like me!)
are thought of as cranky and crochety is because we've SEEN what life USED to be like. Forty years ago, people wouldn't have stood for this centralized government control--today they accept it as normal. By accepting these government controls, it goes to prove the old adage that "there is more to fear from the enemy within than without".The only way we get rid on "One size fits all, PC approved government controls" is to QUIT FEEDING THE BEAST!
Posted by minnow on Mar. 29 2004,8:38 pm
But don't you see... he is the beast. He likes when everyone puts in the kitty and he gets to control the kitty...It's not your money. It's his money and he'll use it to incarcerate all you ingrates and druggies, that's what he'll do darn it!
Ya, that's the ticket. Matter of fact we need more of your money for machine guns. You wouldn't want the cops to face a bunch of miswestern farmers without the proper lethal fire power now would you?
Posted by Truth on Mar. 29 2004,11:37 pm
Ok Jim you fix the roads, get busy on 770 Ave north out of Albert Lea, it's pretty rough last weeks patches aren't enough. Oh and the 750 Ave. project I have some suggestions about the new alignment. Also, when you get around to checking the bridges this spring pay special attention to the Turtle Creek crossing on 230 St. Maybe you could get Fletcher to help out he's rich. He could afford the equipment and the payroll to maintain the highway system.P.S. I would like to talk to you about the potetial for law suites in regard to the last traffic crash we had at the intersection of 750 Ave. and 150 St. There have been some complaints about visibility for eastbound traffic there.
Once you two armchair politicians get done planning how it ought to be, get busy and do something about it.
Hey Fletcher, not everyone within the county is a benign farmer. If you can muster the guts come check it out sometime. You'd be surprised judging from your head in the sand attitude.
Posted by iowegian on Mar. 29 2004,11:43 pm
| Quote (repdan @ Mar. 29 2004,1:32:pm) |
| Bishop no longer serves in the House, he retired last year. |
Yeh and he moved his business to Northwood
Posted by hoosier on Mar. 30 2004,8:03 am
Repdan, thanks for the info on Bishop. I am glad he is gone, he was the poster boy for what is wrong in politics today.
Posted by repdan on Mar. 30 2004,12:36 pm
The bill allows the dot to do a study on safety. On some roads the limit can and should be increased, but not on others.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 30 2004,1:39 pm
From "Truth"| Quote |
| Ok Jim you fix the roads, get busy on 770 Ave north out of Albert Lea, it's pretty rough last weeks patches aren't enough. Oh and the 750 Ave. project I have some suggestions about the new alignment. Also, when you get around to checking the bridges this spring pay special attention to the Turtle Creek crossing on 230 St. Maybe you could get Fletcher to help out he's rich. He could afford the equipment and the payroll to maintain the highway system. |
I take it that this diatribe is in response to my advocating NOT sending money to Washington, so they have no say in State road matters? Is it your point that we should take care of our own local roads, instead of waiting for Washington to do it? If so, I agree. You say you have some suggestions about the new alignment--and about potential blind spots? That's GOOD--that's just the kind of LOCAL CONTROL we need, instead of taking the design that "Big Daddy" Washington forces on us, as well as his "one size fits all" restrictions.
Let the Federal Government set standards and funding for the Interstate highways (they haven't done a very good job of THAT, have they)
and let the States and local areas take care of their own areas. After all, who knows our OWN needs better than LOCAL people.Now, all we have to do is to get more people into OUR line of thinking--QUIT SENDING MONEY TO WASHINGTON SO WE HAVE TO BEG THEM TO GET OUR OWN MONEY BACK.
Posted by Truth on Mar. 30 2004,4:23 pm
We could not afford to make all the necessary repairs on our own. If we lost federal assistance for road maintenance our roads would be horrible or if we kept up on them we may have to eliminate human services and public health, (The Truth stops and thinks......) wait a minute no DHS and Public Health to suck my pockets dry....OK yeah Jim, lets stop paying taxes and we'll fix our own roads. Also, while we're at it, could we set up our own toll boths at the county lines to extract profits from the travelers. Then we could afford our own military and we could secede from the union. We'll use the money from the toll roads and raids on U.S. shipments of goods trespassing on our new nation's soil to strengthen our forces so that we can defend ourselves when the U.S. forces come. We will stop their attempts to enforce the constitution and lay claim to what they arrogantly view as American soil. Sh*t Jim I'm not flip floping, I hate taxes more than the average American, however, there are certain things we as a nation can do better than as a divided people. We don't need government intrusion into our personal lives and decisions as free people living in a democracy, that can not be denied. However, in this case we are talking about infrastucture. My point was, if you think we shouldn't follow the federal government's rules on highway safety and maintenance than ante up, because without that help our roads are gonna suck and sure don't think we are going to maintain the U.S. Trunk Highways and Interstates for them are we?
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 30 2004,4:44 pm
| Quote |
| However, in this case we are talking about infrastucture. My point was, if you think we shouldn't follow the federal government's rules on highway safety and maintenance than ante up, because without that help our roads are gonna suck and sure don't think we are going to maintain the U.S. Trunk Highways and Interstates for them are we? |
| Quote |
| there are certain things we as a nation can do better than as a divided people. |
| Quote |
| We could not afford to make all the necessary repairs on our own |
Who do you suppose PAYS for Federal involvement in roads and infrastructure? Answer: WE ALL DO.
Is there an "economy of scale" in having the Feds TAKE OUR MONEY, "PLAN" WHAT THEY THINK WE SHOULD HAVE, then have us BEG TO GET OUR OWN MONEY BACK--WITH Federal Restrictions? Answer: NO, just keep the money and fix your own roads.
Just WHY is it better to let the Federal government dictate to us? Wouldn't it be nice to tell the Feds "No thanks, we won't take your money, and we won't send any to you, either--we will set our own speed limits, alcohol tolerances, etc."
I'm not advocating a revolution (but I can DREAM!)
--Just that we have to get away from the idea that the Federal Government is the "Big Daddy", doling out allowances. This is a major "sea change" in the last 40 years--looking to the government for help rather than within. The difference between Europeans and Americans USED to be that in America, you could do anything that wasn't illegal--but in Europe, people always looked to the KING for PERMISSION before starting any project. How did it come to be that Americans let the GOVERNMENT BE KING?Will Rogers had a great saying--"The genius of government is MAKING PEOPLE THINK THE OTHER GUY IS GOING TO PAY! SOMETIMES, YOU CAN'T AFFORD TO TAKE "FREE" MONEY!
Posted by Truth on Mar. 30 2004,6:09 pm
I can't recall the feds helping to plan our county roads, except of coarse that they conform to safety standards; that's what our engineers do. We just have to follow federal requirements to get aid. If you would rather drive on sh*t roads then get involved.
Posted by jimhanson on Mar. 30 2004,7:08 pm
| Quote |
| We just have to follow federal requirements to get aid |
Your "income shift" reminds me of the old Abbott and Costello joke--"Loan me $10, but only give me $5--that way, I'll owe you $5, and you'll owe ME $5, and we'll be even!
No more money was created by sending OUR money to Washington--let's skip the comedy routine, and handle our own finances.It appears you have been on the government payroll so long that you have become "institutionalized".
Posted by Truth on Apr. 05 2004,2:16 pm
What did railroads look like before the creation of the USRA?Was it as cost effective to ship by rail before or after the imposition of standards?
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 05 2004,6:26 pm
You have to be careful when you use acronyms. A Google search of USRA showed a LOT of USRAs--University Space Research Assn., USA Raquetball Assn., United Slot Racers Assn., Undergrad Student Research Award....." Assuming you meant railroad, there are at least two USRAs--both US Railroad Assn. Do you mean the 1917 association of PRIVATE FIRMS, to standardize equipment and come up with better railroad engines? Do you mean the 1973 organization of the same name, that was organized as an alternative to avoid nationalization of smaller railroads following the collapse of the Penn Central--a quasi-governmental/private ownership organization?
I fail to see how this is analogous to roads. If the analogy is about sending money into Washington--it makes no sense for the 1917 example (it was an association of private firms), and if the analogy was about the second example--it is a poor one--think AMTRAK.
If this is meant as a goal we should aspire to--I don't think it is a good one--USRA isn't exactly famous for its success. Are you advocating private/government partnerships for roads--nationalizing roads or railroads? More information is needed.
Posted by Truth on Apr. 05 2004,9:35 pm
"University Space Research Assn., USA Raquetball Assn., United Slot Racers Assn., Undergrad Student Research Award....." Assuming you meant railroad, there are at least two USRAs--both US Railroad Assn." Yeah, those first three have a great deal in common with our discussiion don't they. You would make an excellent politician, unable to stay on task or just an elitist smart Azz.
My point is the issue of standardization.
Without a central authority to govern the standards by which roads are constructed travel and commerce could be severly slowed by an inconsistent physical plant and inconsistent laws governing the use of the roads.
Hell, we might just decide we aint build'n no dang old freeway through this here county. So all them transients can just go round ya hear. How do we make sure I don't get a big fine for running a stop sign that was a bright purple square with no wording on its face, when I go driving in a neighboring clans area.
If not the federal government than who. What body will have a centrally recognized authority, sufficient to keep some order on our roads? If there is one thing that holds true in this country from coast to coast, its the ability to disagree.
Posted by Daisy Duke on Apr. 06 2004,1:15 am
Does it really matter what the speed is anyway, I am always speeding on the interstates!! J/KEven the autobahn has rules??!!
Posted by jimhanson on Apr. 06 2004,8:50 am
| Quote |
| "University Space Research Assn., USA Raquetball Assn., United Slot Racers Assn., Undergrad Student Research Award....." Assuming you meant railroad, there are at least two USRAs--both US Railroad Assn." Yeah, those first three have a great deal in common with our discussiion don't they. |
| Quote |
| Without a central authority to govern the standards by which roads are constructed travel and commerce could be severly slowed by an inconsistent physical plant and inconsistent laws governing the use of the roads. |
| Quote |
| Hell, we might just decide we aint build'n no dang old freeway through this here county. So all them transients can just go round ya hear. |
| Quote |
| Look back at the previous post--the Federal Government SHOULD maintain the Interstates--that's part of the INTERSTATE COMMERCE portion of the Constitution. |
Posted by Truth on Apr. 07 2004,12:23 am
So what is the problem?
Posted by Truth on Apr. 07 2004,12:52 am
I am a student of "Publius" and I know full well the need for a federal authority. The states were reserved certain rights by the interpretations of the language of the Tenth Amendment however, the original intent and scope of the Tenth Amendment provision included debate stating that it was not conceived to be a scale to weigh the powers given to the Federal Government or reserved to the States. It has been likened to a simple truism, despite its long history with the courts.The tenth amendment serves to reserve powers to the states that are not given over to federal authority. I do not know of any reason that federal regulation of road standards should impair Minnesota's ability to function effectively within the federal system.
Posted by kid dyn-o-mite on Apr. 07 2004,1:59 am
Who is "Publius"? A google search turns up nothing.
Posted by BDV on Apr. 07 2004,9:46 am
Publius was a famous space explorer who circled around Uranus looking for Klingons. Lighten up you guys. Truth and jimhanson you are both wrong the subject was not railroads or roads, it was speed limits, DUH.
I for one want to go faster and faster and faster and faster and faster, (well you can see my position now can't you?) and faster and faster and faster.
Posted by Truth on Apr. 09 2004,2:37 pm
What do speed limits pertain to BDV? I think they are a set limit to the speed of traffic operating over a given route or traffic way.The authority to set those limits was the subject of Jim's and my debate. It is always the case thus far, between Jim and I, that we disagree over the federal role in establishing standards on our local roads. Jim contends that our local roads should not be subject to federal regulation and federal funding. I hold that our local roads are an important part of the national transportation system and therby fall under federal standards control through the commerce clause argument.