On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:34:41PM -0800, Eric G. Miller wrote: | On Thu, Feb 21, 2002 at 08:03:10PM -0800, ben wrote: | > On Thursday 21 February 2002 06:54 pm, Mark S. Reglewski wrote: | > > about speed enforcement around here. | > | > yeah, like who's running the show there? the nazi party? 55 sucks. | > 65 sucks, for that matter, but, allegedly, it's the national | > standard wherever local authorities haven't funded the highway | > system. the worst of this year's models still rate themselves from | > 0 to 60. dman, screw chicago--head for california, the last | > enduring stronghold of the pretence that we are free. | | Illinois does have comparitively lower speed limits. But the 55 mph | limit is their own doing these days (has been for several years). It's | not the Fed's keeping the limit down.
The area around Rochester is 55 also. In the city it is 45 (though I don't drive downtown much). If you take i390 south beyond the suburbs it is 65. | Besides, most of the interstates around Chicago are toll roads (ick, | hopefully that don't catch on out West). Tolls are no fun. Oh well. | Note: supposedly trucker's are still limited to 55 mph in CA, a bad idea | IMHO. Better to have the trucks moving with the flow of traffic rather | than holding it up. I guess the idea is they can slow down a little | quicker, but whether they're doing 55 or 65, if they're heavy, they | ain't gonna be able to slow down quick enough if some dipshit does a | stupid maneuver in front of them. The other silly rule is the right | two lane law -- most states don't have that. Sure, lets line up all | the trucks right next to merging traffic! Yeah, that does sound really good! -D -- "He is no fool who gives up what he cannot keep to gain what he cannot lose." --Jim Elliot