Faster is not always better: why the case for higher speed limits is fatally flawed. - eviltoast
  • SkyeStarfall@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 months ago

    Speed limits are not bs. The energy of kinetic motion increases with the square of the velocity. Double the speed, quadruple the amount of energy. That matters.

      • FireRetardant@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        15
        ·
        edit-2
        2 months ago

        The limit should be the enforceable and safe speed for the road, the road design should reflect the desired speedlimit.

        My area recently built highway bypasses around town. One section is built exactly like a freeway but they slapped a 60 km/h sign on it. Nobody does 60 km/h because the road feels like, and is designed for, 100 km/h. This is the wrong way to do it. If a road is a 60 km/h zone, the lanes should be more narrow and the banking on the turns should not allow average drivers to feel safe at 120 km/h.

        • Cryophilia@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          I think you’re thinking about this backwards. Instead of ripping up and replacing the ENTIRE ROAD, just replace the 60 km/h sign with a 100 km/h sign.

    • Ookami38@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      Speed limits are arbitrary factors set in place that don’t make sense for the roads they’re on. They do nothing for safety, and often become a speed target. If you want to reduce speed of cars (which I agree is a good thing) the best way to do so is to make traveling above a certain speed feel dangerous to the driver. Chicanes, medians, and narrow lanes encourage that. Speed limits do not.

      Speed limits are bs.