Speeding License

[Matthew N. Wright]

I propose a movement to lobby local governments to allow for speed limit exemptions for those carrying a special speed license given to those who a) pass appropriate tests including physical reflex tests, b) receive special speed driver's training from a government mandated agency, or c) those who have experience professionally racing cars and can demonstrate their skill.

Speeding laws are created to protect the majority from an unskilled minority it would seem, but just as air traffic is heavily controlled but still allowed through requiring a special pilot's license to travel the speed of sound, potentially endangering thousand of people in the process, and even more difficult licenses for commercial jet flight which can potentially endanger tens of thousands of people's lives anywhere in the world at any time, and just as firearms require a license to carry and shoot in public places that would otherwise prove competance to carry an otherwise deadly weapon on ones person, it seems this could easily be carried over to roadway vehicles as well (with exception for certain larger makes/types of course).

The government has long called for exceptions to emergency vehicles, especially police in pursuit, but now ask for such exemptions^{1 2} for non-emergency vehicles as well, showing that human beings when given authority and responsibility of the state do not lack the necessary skills to control vehicles on roadway while speeding.

If such a license were possible, I think speeding would no longer be much of an issue, and like with most things, the relevant education would cause less accidents and allow people to respect the roads much more, thanks to their new training, fully knowing the risks involved.

In a DailyPaul debate about speed limits and the need for vehicle licenses, some interesting comments were made, including this one:

I drove the autobahn a total of twice and I was amazed at how safe I felt going 110 + on that highway. There's only 2 lanes most places and the trucks are going 55 - 70 in the slow lane and big black Mercedes (and others) are going 140+ in the fast lane. I looked carefully at the guardrails and the greenery along the highway for signs of the huge burn marks that must exist from the fireballs resulting from the high speed crashes but I saw NONE!. The guardrails were straight and true and the pavement was flat and smooth (real smooth). What I noticed very quickly was the way people drove on that highway. NO ONE ever switched into the "fast" lane until right on the bumper of the car they were overcoming. After lane signals, a very brisk lane change to the fast lane was taken and IMMEDIATELY after passing the slower vehicle another brisk lane change back into the slow lane. It was like watching a ballet. Every car moving in a predictable fashion. These rules were not enforced by "police". They were "enforced" by common sense. Traveling at high speeds requires extra caution and skill and if you aren't up to it, you stay in the slow lane. Before I learned this "rule" I thought I was pretty hot driving 110 and stayed in the fast lane for a while since I did not see any other traffic coming. I was quite surprised when I looked in my mirror to see a black Mercedes behind me with his left blinker on (a signal to get out of his way) and I quickly moved over and let him zip on by at what I estimate was about 130mph.

No, you don't need slow speed to keep you safe, you need drivers who exercise common sense. When you keep people "restricted" to the lowest common denominator, then "common sense" is a casualty. People stop exercising it and soon it withers and dies...

CASE #1: "The use of the highway for the purpose of travel and transportation is not a mere privilege, but a common fundamental right of which the public and individuals cannot rightfully be deprived." Chicago Motor Coach v. Chicago, 169 NE 221.

CASE #2: "The right of the citizen to travel upon the public highways and to transport his property thereon, either by carriage or by automobile, is not a mere privilege which a city may prohibit or permit at will, but a common law right which he has under the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." Thompson v. Smith, 154 SE 579.

It could not be stated more directly or conclusively that citizens of the states have a common law right to travel, without approval or restriction (license), and that this right is protected under the U.S Constitution.

CASE #3: "The right to travel is a part of the liberty of which the citizen cannot be deprived without due process of law under the Fifth Amendment." Kent v. Dulles, 357 US 116, 125.

CASE #4: "The right to travel is a well-established common right that does not owe its existence to the federal government. It is recognized by the courts as a natural right." Schactman v. Dulles 96 App DC 287, 225 F2d 938, at 941.

There is also an article on Motorists.org that talks about the myths of speeding vs. safety.

Myth #1 - Speed Is a Major Cause of Accidents and Fatalities. NHTSA says 30% of fatal accidents are "speed related," meaning at least one vehicle was "assumed" to be exceeding the posted limit or traveling too fast for conditions. But such assumptions are meaningless when most traffic is 5-10 mph over limits set unnecessarily low.

A decade ago, authorities in Florida commissioned research to determine where best to concentrate enforcement resources to maximize their safety benefit. Statewide, this 1993 study found "Speed Too Fast" placed a distant fifth on the list of accident causes at just 2.2 percent. A 1994 follow-up study in Dade, Broward, and Palm Beach counties found 1.5 percent of accidents and seven percent of fatalities "caused by speed." Of nearly 23,000 accidents investigated in Palm Beach Country, approximately 13,000 were attributed to "careless driving," 7,000 to "failure to yield," 2,000 to "improper lane changes," and only 650 to "speed."

This was not welcome news to Florida enforcers, who (like everyone else) continue to focus resources on "speeding" because radar makes it easy and because (as Clyde Barrow once said about banks), that's where the money is. Those other far more significant causes are more difficult to witness, ticket, and prove in court. This is why such studies are seldom undertaken and even more rarely released, which leads us to Myth #2.

Myth #2 - Speed Enforcement Increases Safety. In 1995, the Feds gave Connecticut nearly $750,000 to intensify speed enforcement on 55-mph highways. Over that Memorial Day weekend, scores of extra troopers, airplanes, and unmarked cars armed with radar and laser were dispatched with the stated objective of reducing accidents and fatalities. Compared to the previous Labor Day weekend, speeding tickets were up an impressive 33 percent, seatbelt tickets were up a dramatic 51 percent and DWI (driving while intoxicated) tickets increased 22 percent. Yet accidents on those targeted highways increased a breathtaking 66 percent, proving (again) that there is no correlation between enforcement effort (numbers of tickets) and actual highway safety.

Research shows that if authorities truly want to reduce average speeds, the most effective way is through highly visible police presence. People naturally drive more safely and pay more attention to their speed when the enforcement is easily seen. Conversely, "stealth" enforcement (unmarked and hidden cars, airplanes, instant-on radar) is highly effective at generating tickets and revenue but not at decreasing speeds or accidents.

Myth # 3 - Slower Is Always Safer. Despite the oft-repeated mantra that "Speed Kills," Federal and state studies consistently have shown that the drivers most likely to get into accidents in traffic are those traveling significantly below the average speed. Compared to keeping with the prevailing "pace," those driving 10 mph slower are statistically six times as likely--and those 20 mph slower are ten times as likely--to be involved in an accident. They get hit from behind or caught up in collisions caused by faster-moving vehicles suddenly braking and swerving to get around.

Since freeway "pace" is often well above posted limits, drivers are faced with the uncomfortable choice of legal speed or the higher, yet safer, prevailing speed. Actually, the drivers statistically least likely to be involved in accidents-perhaps because they are more alert--are those traveling 5-10 mph above the prevailing speed. Guess who gets the tickets.

Myth #4 - Use of Radar Detectors Increases Speeds and Accidents. Every time someone sets out to prove this popular presumption - and there have been many, many studies by enforcement authorities and others with a vested interest in banning detectors--they end up disproving it. One respected 1988 Yankelovich Clancy Shulman study showed that detector users actually had 23 percent fewer accidents per mile than nonusers.

What do detector users do when their dashboard defenders sound off? They quickly check and (if necessary) adjust their speed and increase their awareness. Scanning for police, they may instead see a dangerous condition or impending accident in time to avoid it. This is why police and (unmanned) "drone" radar senders are often used at accident, construction, and reduced visibility (dust, fog, snow) sites -- because traffic speeds and accidents decrease when detector users slow and pay closer attention, influencing others to do the same.

Myth #5 - The Federal 55-mph Limit Saved Thousands of Lives. Because it was established during the 1973 fuel crisis, people naturally drove less and slower to preserve precious fuel, which caused a brief downward blip in fatalities. Once fuel availability returned to normal, so did driving miles and speeds. And the highway death rate quickly snapped back to its (already downward) trend line.

Myth #6 - Speed Enforcement is Driven by Safety Concern. Though vigorously pursued in the name of safety to assure public and media support, it's been mostly about money for almost three decades. A recent feature in my local paper stated this clearly: "Citations rise to 6-year high," trumpeted the subhead. "The tickets are expected to pump a much-needed $1.5 million into the city's general fund." While public safety was the stated reason, no data was offered to show that our streets and highways are any safer as a result.

Myth #7 - Lower Speed Limits Reduce Average Speeds and Accidents. Multiple studies have shown that drivers adjust their speeds primarily to road, weather and traffic conditions. Setting limits at the "85th percentile" speed, where 85 percent are at or below (and only about 5 percent are significantly above), always results in maximum compliance and fewest accidents. Posting limits well below this 85th percentile speed (common practice) naturally increases the number of speeders -- and therefore potential ticket revenue -- but does not slow traffic any more than posting speeds well above it makes everyone drive too fast.

[1715014884]

1715014884

[1715014884]

1715014884

[1715014884]

1715014884

[1715014884]

1715014884

[Littleshop]

I propose a movement to lobby local governments to allow for speed limit exemptions for those carrying a special speed license given to those who a) pass appropriate tests including physical reflex tests, b) receive special speed driver's training from a government mandated agency, or c) those who have experience professionally racing cars and can demonstrate their skill.

Skill is important, but so is equipment.  Speed rated tires and a vehicle in great condition are essential at speeds over 100 mph.  While many roads are ready for higher speeds,  most are not.  Finally (I know this is not just a USA based post) most drivers in the USA do not stay right.   Higher speeds can not happen safely unless drivers keep right except to pass or at least keep the left most lane clear. 

In Germany, most cars are in good shape, the high speed roads are maintained and people do keep right.

[Jobe7]

I propose a movement to lobby local governments to allow for speed limit exemptions for those carrying a special speed license given to those who a) pass appropriate tests including physical reflex tests, b) receive special speed driver's training from a government mandated agency, or c) those who have experience professionally racing cars and can demonstrate their skill.

Skill is important, but so is equipment.  Speed rated tires and a vehicle in great condition are essential at speeds over 100 mph.  While many roads are ready for higher speeds,  most are not.  Finally (I know this is not just a USA based post) most drivers in the USA do not stay right.   Higher speeds can not happen safely unless drivers keep right except to pass or at least keep the left most lane clear. 

In Germany, most cars are in good shape, the high speed roads are maintained and people do keep right.

Attitude. I think it heavily depends on a person/societies attitude.

For instance, in Germany it works. Here in the UK ... I seriously wouldn't trust people with a full out 'no speed limits', there are just WAY too many retarded people in the UK (not just the drivers, but careless r'tards that don't watch the roads).

[420]

we should post our top speeds driven hehe

[domob]

I'm absolutely happy with the limit we have in Austria (130 km/h), and don't think anyone should really go any faster.  In my opinion, the costs and risks outweigh the benefits by far.  It also burns a lot more fuel to go faster than that, which in itself is a reason for me to be not too fast.  (But I guess opinions differ on that matter.)

[hammz]

most people on the roads equate to mindless farm animals....monkey see monkey do idiocy, and have very little spatial awareness, and a competent idea of what their car can, and cannot do... then there are road, and weather conditions to contend with on top of that.

I upgrade the entire suspension, struts, springs, all the bushings, swaybars, and brakes on every car I own so that they handle far beyond stock, (a little hobby of mine) and it simply amazes me how many idiots think their bone stock SUV, or mini van, etc... is a ferrari....

I can do a tight 90deg turn at reasonable speed, perfectly flat, controlled, 100% stable, and you would be amazed how many people try to do the same maneuver behind you, and end up creating a safety issue because stock suspension on 90% of all cars on the road are complete shitsville from a performance perspective.

These ding dongs end up causing almost all of the accident statistics aside from young kids, and text a holics.

totally clueless on what their car can do, but they see it, and try to do it anyways...

same thing will happen for the speed issue...it's a recipe for disaster.

[Matthew N. Wright]

most people on the roads equate to mindless farm animals....monkey see monkey do idiocy, and have very little spatial awareness, and a competent idea of what their car can, and cannot do... then there are road, and weather conditions to contend with on top of that.

I upgrade the entire suspension, struts, springs, all the bushings, swaybars, and brakes on every car I own so that they handle far beyond stock, (a little hobby of mine) and it simply amazes me how many idiots think their bone stock SUV, or mini van, etc... is a ferrari....

I can do a tight 90deg turn at reasonable speed, perfectly flat, controlled, 100% stable, and you would be amazed how many people try to do the same maneuver behind you, and end up creating a safety issue because stock suspension on 90% of all cars on the road are complete shitsville from a performance perspective.

These ding dongs end up causing almost all of the accident statistics aside from young kids, and text a holics.

totally clueless on what their car can do, but they see it, and try to do it anyways...

same thing will happen for the speed issue...it's a recipe for disaster.

Interesting theory, but wouldn't that also be true for karate, jet piloting, racism, rape, movie violence (and even video game violence!) and at the very least, parkour?

I don't think if such a license existed, and was publicized, that it would be as big of an occurrence as you think it would. People would strive to take the courses and tests to be able to "do it legally".

[hammz]

most people on the roads equate to mindless farm animals....monkey see monkey do idiocy, and have very little spatial awareness, and a competent idea of what their car can, and cannot do... then there are road, and weather conditions to contend with on top of that.

I upgrade the entire suspension, struts, springs, all the bushings, swaybars, and brakes on every car I own so that they handle far beyond stock, (a little hobby of mine) and it simply amazes me how many idiots think their bone stock SUV, or mini van, etc... is a ferrari....

I can do a tight 90deg turn at reasonable speed, perfectly flat, controlled, 100% stable, and you would be amazed how many people try to do the same maneuver behind you, and end up creating a safety issue because stock suspension on 90% of all cars on the road are complete shitsville from a performance perspective.

These ding dongs end up causing almost all of the accident statistics aside from young kids, and text a holics.

totally clueless on what their car can do, but they see it, and try to do it anyways...

same thing will happen for the speed issue...it's a recipe for disaster.

Interesting theory, but wouldn't that also be true for karate, jet piloting, racism, rape, movie violence (and even video game violence!) and at the very least, parkour?

I don't think if such a license existed, and was publicized, that it would be as big of an occurrence as you think it would. People would strive to take the courses and tests to be able to "do it legally".

not necessarily.  A lot of people that drive think they are an awesome driver, not everyone does karate, parkour etc, but those that do always try to push the limits because they think they can become awesome at it, or they already are...proof positive is endless youtube videos of people wiping out, or nearly neutering themselves with a pair of numchucks, or trying a maneuver because they saw it on youtube, tv, etc...


people drive all the time, and they think their car is awesome because it's xyz ,and they paid a lot of money for it...the sad part is those types usually suck at driving, but don't realize it's more about the driver than the car....all they have to do is move their right foot an inch or so..that's another factor...super simple to get there, but much harder to deal with it once there.


I would be the first in line to get an advanced license, but I doubt anyone would ceate a double standard on the roadways, as the people that would cause the problem could not handle the reality of it.   sad to say but true from my observations.

[Matthew N. Wright]

most people on the roads equate to mindless farm animals....monkey see monkey do idiocy, and have very little spatial awareness, and a competent idea of what their car can, and cannot do... then there are road, and weather conditions to contend with on top of that.

I upgrade the entire suspension, struts, springs, all the bushings, swaybars, and brakes on every car I own so that they handle far beyond stock, (a little hobby of mine) and it simply amazes me how many idiots think their bone stock SUV, or mini van, etc... is a ferrari....

I can do a tight 90deg turn at reasonable speed, perfectly flat, controlled, 100% stable, and you would be amazed how many people try to do the same maneuver behind you, and end up creating a safety issue because stock suspension on 90% of all cars on the road are complete shitsville from a performance perspective.

These ding dongs end up causing almost all of the accident statistics aside from young kids, and text a holics.

totally clueless on what their car can do, but they see it, and try to do it anyways...

same thing will happen for the speed issue...it's a recipe for disaster.

Interesting theory, but wouldn't that also be true for karate, jet piloting, racism, rape, movie violence (and even video game violence!) and at the very least, parkour?

I don't think if such a license existed, and was publicized, that it would be as big of an occurrence as you think it would. People would strive to take the courses and tests to be able to "do it legally".

not necessarily.  A lot of people that drive think they are an awesome driver, not everyone does karate, parkour etc, but those that do always try to push the limits because they think they can become awesome at it, or they already are...proof positive is endless youtube videos of people wiping out, or nearly neutering themselves with a pair of numchucks, or trying a maneuver because they saw it on youtube, tv, etc...


people drive all the time, and they think their car is awesome because it's xyz ,and they paid a lot of money for it...the sad part is those types usually suck at driving, but don't realize it's more about the driver than the car....all they have to do is move their right foot an inch or so..that's another factor...super simple to get there, but much harder to deal with it once there.


I would be the first in line to get an advanced license, but I doubt anyone would ceate a double standard on the roadways, as the people that would cause the problem could not handle the reality of it.   sad to say but true from my observations.

The point here is that there is already a double standard, but it's time those of us who deserve it benefit from it.

[Mike Christ]

First thing that comes to mind is, how would an officer know who has the speeding license and who doesn't?  If he has to pull everyone over who speeds to make sure they're doing right, it would defeat the purpose of the license; would the one with the speeding license need a custom license plate?  If so, how might we secure these plates so that people without proper training wouldn't steal them?  Or perhaps steal them and sell them to make a profit.  And even then, it's difficult to read them when you're going fast.

Perhaps a speeding-only lane would be more appropriate, where there is a minimum speed limit; maybe something like the autobahn.  But I don't think that'd ever happen in America, as tickets of any sort are a great source of income for any city.  Just the other day I paid off a ticket of 350$ for expired inspection and failure to produce my DL, and I have no idea how expensive speeding tickets are but I'm certain they're nothing to fuck around with.  When you make money by imposing a set of rules, it's hard to reason against it, even if it's better for people to not have the rule.  When you're in the business of waiting for people to fuck up, you generally like to keep that business going strong, preferably by imposing as many laws as you'll get away with.  Not saying something like this wouldn't be possible, but, unless there's money to be made, it's pointless.

So that would mean, if we figured out how we can get these speed licenses to work, that the classes you'd take and the fees you'd pay to get a speed license add up to, say, a year's worth of speeding tickets.  To ensure this revenue, you would impose a law that stated, "You must renew your speed license yearly" or however long you want, and then charge a premium for renewing, which would be a quick and speedy process, with the added bonus of being much more expensive than is actually required to renew the license.

[Matthew N. Wright]

First thing that comes to mind is, how would an officer know who has the speeding license and who doesn't?

How do you know when someone is a real cop and when not?

Why not a radar detector gun that also checks for a HighPass box like we have in Korea that detects (and deducts funds from us) our accounts for the toll roads. Technology seems the answer to that.



Can the device be stolen? Yes, but it's worthless without the card that is inserted into it (which you carry in your wallet like a credit card).

Not saying something like this wouldn't be possible, but, unless there's money to be made, it's pointless.

See above comment for solution (pay to speed).

[Mike Christ]

snip

Hmm, that's a good point.  What you could do is setup checkpoints on a highway which scanned both the speed of vehicles and asked to see if they had one of those things.  If someone passes the checkpoint at a high speed and does not have one, police would know someone is speeding without the license.  Further, if those with speeder licenses didn't mind being tracked, the checkpoints could also count how many times a single rider passed in the day, which could determine the fee to bill the speeder, if that's how revenue would be earned.

Only bit that'll bother people is being watched on the road as to whether or not they're speeding.  But I don't personally care; people get what they asked for, and they keep asking for government, so poo poo.

[Matthew N. Wright]

snip

Hmm, that's a good point.  What you could do is setup checkpoints on a highway which scanned both the speed of vehicles and asked to see if they had one of those things.  If someone passes the checkpoint at a high speed and does not have one, police would know someone is speeding without the license.  Further, if those with speeder licenses didn't mind being tracked, the checkpoints could also count how many times a single rider passed in the day, which could determine the fee to bill the speeder, if that's how revenue would be earned.

Only bit that'll bother people is being watched on the road as to whether or not they're speeding.  But I don't personally care; people get what they asked for, and they keep asking for government, so poo poo.

In Korea, there is a speed camera ever 2km anyway. Being "watched" is a daily part of life. It'd be better to be watched to make sure you're paying your dues than to fine you for driving WELL imo.

[Mike Christ]

In Korea, there is a speed camera ever 2km anyway. Being "watched" is a daily part of life. It'd be better to be watched to make sure you're paying your dues than to fine you for driving WELL imo.

Sounds like you're all set to get this thing under way then   I don't have any hope of this happening soon in America but you could pull it off.

[wdmw]

All you need is one of these.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LzEOHNmfa_0

[malevolent]

One must first ask whether it is necessary for having a government regulate that. People still need insurance and without government the insurance companies would want to have some way of assessing an individual's driving skills. Now someone without a license pays more for insurance than someone without one (at least in my country). Getting a driving license doesn't require much skill in most countries, if insurance companies would deal with assessing the drivers' skills without current government regulation (maybe in cooperation with some of the better companies that now give driving lessons) they could do so in a more rigorous manner than the government does with their 'driving' licensure and better adjust the insurance rates depending on a driver's actual skills.

[FoBoT]

no free human should need to ask permission of a government

[Elwar]

Entertaining the whole shuffling of chairs on the titanic seems fairly pointless. Should kids in government schools be allowed to do X or Y, should public libraries ban this or that, should speed limits on government roads be raised or lowered...

When is the last time there was any great debate whether or not McDonalds should bring back the McRib or whether Starbucks should call their large drinks a large?

Privatize the roads. QED

[TheButterZone]

"Speeding" is an arbitrary and capricious infraction. If someone's going to drive recklessly, they will. If their recklessness causes actual injury, there are immediate and long-term remedies for that.

[crumbs]

Why should there be a licence in the first place?  Regulating the speed i drive reeks of pre-crime measures.  The rationale behind enforcing the speed limit goes something like this:  By driving faster than the set limit, you are endangering others. You may have never hurt anyone or damaged their property, but statistically, there is a chance that you will.  Therefore you must be stopped &/or punished.    This isn't much different from saying "Statistically, black men are more likely to commit violent crime & must be stopped &/or punished."
Of course, +1 to everyone pointing out that this debate is as practical as arguing for the moon to be remade from cream cheese -- decide what you want, it'll never happen.