Only had to read that first paragraph that was posted to know it was a Sun opinion article or editorial, yowza. I don't disagree with the underlying argument but just by the wording you can tell it's more opinion and editorializing, than rational argument. Also it's not so much 'science' as it is statistics, and probably carefully picked ones to boot.
I'm all for higher limits where safe, and for more onus put on slow drivers to shape up, but there's a lot of hop skip and jumping going on in that article to arrive to a conclusion you can tell they were aiming for.
As has been mentioned, we probably shouldn't increase the limits too much till we put in better driver training programs and pay more attention to vehicle maintenance.
Yes slow drivers can be dangerous, I don't disagree. But so are the asshats who tailgate them, the people who are in a rush because they haven't planned ahead or budgetted their time correctly, and the idiots who are constantly switching lanes to try and get ahead. I'd wager the type of driver who speeds is just as dangerous as the one who always go below the limit. There's bad drivers in both groups. Just because one thinks they're Mario Andretti, doesn't mean they're as good as he.
The only thing is, when there is a collision, a faster vehicle is going to do a heck of a lot more damage than a slower one.
|