Meanwhile Ireland:

I'm going 10 miles above the limit on this incredibly wide and straight and flat road with high curbs and perfect visibility

This is the reason why people speed. If you want people to drive more slowly, you have to design the road/street in a way that discourages higher speeds. Do this, and you won’t need any invasive speed cameras or pay traffic cops to enforce.

On highways I suspect no one gives a shit. If it feels natural to drive 10 mph above the speed limit, it’s probably safe. But raising the speed limit would probably lead some people to speeding even more, with fewer options for punishing them (in my country at least, the fine is dependent on how much above the limit you were going).

Why does everyone drive 10-15 miles above the speed limit?

This isn't really unique to the US. In my country people also consider it their right to drive above the speed limit and hate the police for telling them they can't do it...

Why don't we raise the speed limit if that's how fast everyone wants to go?

Because then everyone would drive above that new limit instead. It's a psychology thing. It's not that everyone would rather go speed y than speed x, being above the speed limit is the very point to it. Otherwise you'd see different behaviors with different speed limits, but at least here, every speed limit sees the same behavior of people not respecting it by the same amount.

1. Because the average American believes speed limits aren't meant for the especially skilled drivers like themselves.

2. If the speed limit is raised, then people will drive 10-15 MPH over the new limit. Natch.

3. Traffic enforcement cameras have been routinely abused by the government and so have to be regularly taken away from them like the naughty children they are.

4. People will assure you that civil planning has done their job and everything is already working like a well-oiled machine. I don't know why people keep saying this when it's obviously not true. It's astounding.

Mostly politics and grafting. There is a piece of highway in Florida where there is a nonsensical low speed limit. The stretch is "owned" by a little village with a police force nearly as big as the population in total, and the police is basically generating a good income by speed trapping on the highway 24/7.

I think the dissonance about speed limits is why there are so many awful drivers, at least in my neck of the woods. You go through drivers ed and you're trained to go exactly the speed limit in all circumstances, and then you get let loose and find out on some highways, driving under the speed limit is so slow compared to the actual rate of traffic that doing so would be dangerous. People learn that and figure that all of the rules of the road are stupid and bad and you have a country of awful drivers

it doesn't help that, as another commenter mentioned, you can be ticketed for not moving with the flow of traffic. follow the law, and you're still breaking the law! plus all the asshole drivers who will get right up on your rear bumper if they decide you aren't going fast enough. damned if you do, damned if you don't! although ultimately, going slower is almost always the better choice from a safety standpoint because of that whole "physics" thing

The short answer to all your questions is that America specializes in stupid in all kinds of ways. This is one of them.

Cops want it that way.

In the USA, you can follow the average driver on a 10 minute drive and they'll technically commit at least 1 infraction. My FIL got a $90 ticket last month for not coming to a complete stop at a stop sign.

The rules of the road are so anally technical so that cops have a valid reason to pull you over whenever they desire. That's it.

Why does everyone drive 10-15 miles above the speed limit?

Because speed limits are not strictly enforced

Why don’t we raise the speed limit if that’s how fast everyone wants to go?

Because if that happens that any per-textual stop the police want to do needs an another actual crime being committed before they can stop you.

Why is traffic enforcement given to very expensive and ineffective police instead of cheaper and more automated traffic cameras?

I reject the premise. Traffic enforcement isn't very ineffective because the majority of people aren't driving 50+ MPH over the speed limit. Also, its not that expensive because your premise suggests that if we had cameras, we'd need fewer police. I don't think that's the case. When an emergency response is needed we need X number of police to respond. Therefore X number need to be employed and on shift at all times. If we have the expense of traffic cameras, its not going to reduce headcount below X, and we now have the additional expense of purchase, install, and maintenance of all those traffic cameras. The cameras have an headcount overhead of staff of their own.

Traffic cameras also introduce mistakes of their own including misreading plates, or thieves using stolen/copied plates, which would otherwise ensnare innocent citizens.

It’s a serious confusion I have about how society is supposed to operate because it seems like a complete and total breakdown of logic and sense.

I think you're looking at the rules and assuming the logical outcome is the desired result. Change your mindset. The desired result is what happens when human society is given a set of rules and reacts to them. The reaction is the actual desired result. The set of rules is simply one step to get there. In short, humans aren't 100% logical nor are they 100% rule following, knowing that, you establish a set of rules that you know will have some violation and you account for that in rules.

You had me in the first half, NGL

More state-sponsored surveillance is never the answer.

I find it frustrating that in the US at least, people can't do the simple math. Unless it's a very long trip, speeding doesn't save you very much time at all. A couple of minutes at the most for a typical commute.

On countless occasions I've seen some some reckless moron nearly take other vehicles' bumpers off to 'get around' traffic. And then you're right behind that same moron at the next red light.

They are risking everything for little to no time savings.

If your raise the speed limit 10-15 people will go 10-15 mph above that

Because we are very weird about our collective/individual sense of entitlement.

You really wanna start digging into that? it’s fucking bananas.

85th Percentile Rule (where applicable): In many states, a common engineering principle is to set the speed limit near the speed at which the majority of drivers travel under free-flow conditions. Some states adapt or supplement this approach with safety-oriented judgments.

https://thelegalguide.org/who-decides-speed-limits-federal-state-local-roads/

I'll one up this.

In Australia we occasionally have signs: "40 (kh/h) when children as present"

Okay but doesn't that defeat the purpose? If I see the cunts then I'm not gonna hit them, no matter how fast I'm going.

The problem arises when i don't see the little shits.

1. Why does everyone drive 10-15 miles above the speed limit?

Because speed limits are designed for the largest, clunkiest vehicles on the road (semi trucks, specifically). If they can't handle the road at a certain speed, then the speed limit is dropped to a level that can be comfortably driven by them.

This means that the average car can drive comfortably 10-15 MPH faster than the posted limit. And a lot of drivers feel that desire to drive faster.

Also, I don't know if it's still a thing, but in my childhood (roughly the '90s), cops wouldn't pull you over for speeding unless you were going at least 10 MPH over the limit. The reason being, the speed detector equipment they used had about a 10 MPH margin of error. If they pulled you over for driving 7 MPH over the limit, you could argue in court that their equipment was faulty and you were being unfairly assessed. You could sew seeds of doubt and get the traffic ticket stricken down. So cops just didn't bother unless you could be positively identified, without a doubt, as speeding.

I don't know if the accuracy of their equipment has improved since then, but the mentality back in the day was that you had some leeway with how fast you were driving, leading to people driving faster than the limit in most places.

2. Why don't we raise the speed limit if that's how fast everyone wants to go?

Because it risks all vehicles - including semis, RVs, delivery trucks, etc. - driving too fast for their large, heavy, awkward bodies to handle. Then they become a hazard on the road. You ever see a semi tip over because it took a corner too fast? If you're in a car next to it, you're pretty much toast.

It's like queueing in line. Sure, it would be faster to crowd toward the front, but you're pushing people out of the way; people who may have been there first and deserve a turn before you. And depending on how aggressively they're crowded out, it may become hazardous for some people.

In the interest of fairness, everyone queues and respects the line, so the system stays safe and orderly. Same with speed limits. Everyone is expected to stick to the limit so ALL traffic on roads are safe and orderly. But sometimes, people are people and will do whatever they want, even at the expense of their fellow human beings.

3. Why is traffic enforcement given to very expensive and ineffective police instead of cheaper and more automated traffic cameras?

This is a discussion that's been going on for decades now. I know traffic cams are set up in some European countries and work pretty well, but here in America, historically, we've had a thing against being recorded publicly. Traffic cams haven't taken off here because the idea of a small camera recording data about our cars without our knowledge freaks us out.

Heck, we had to create entrapment laws to prevent cops from hiding while checking speed limits. If you watch old cop movies, they'll sit behind billboards and catch speeders who fly by. That's illegal in the US nowadays; cops have to be out in the open and visible if they're going to watch traffic for speeding. It gives a fair chance for drivers to check their speed and adjust before the cop records them speeding and gives them a ticket.

But most people will miss a camera in the wild. There's no chance to argue a speeding incident in the moment. You get a ticket in the mail a few days later, then need to think back to that day and try to remember where you were and what speed you were going. You can fight it in court, but good luck having any evidence to counter a camera, unless you were recording the interior of your vehicle that day.

With all that said, Flock cameras sprouted practically overnight here in the US and have set off distopian levels of surveillance paranoia. Especially since their setup was so fast that no laws or safety measures have been respected in their usage and the system is already being abused to watch and track people in unprofessional capacities. We kind of skipped the whole traffic cam issue and went straight to 1984 levels of public surveillance. So we'll see how that plays out over the next few years.

4. Why do we refuse to ever use ANY traffic calming measures?

What kind of traffic calming measures do you have in mind? You mentioned the flashing speed limit signs, but that's not going to stop some people. Speeders are gonna speed. It's just human nature. The system we have is ineffective in a grand scale, but it works as a mental deterrent for most people. The fear of being pulled over by a cop for speeding keeps a lot of drivers in line.

I once drove in the small African country of Djibouti, where the government had to post signs every mile to remind drivers which side of the road they should be driving on. Driving education was available, but most people just hopped in a car and took off; no license or training. There were accidents every couple miles. Trucks flipped over and abandoned on almost every sharp corner. Potholes so big you might lose a car in them.

The system in America isn't perfect, but it's a whole lot better than it could be. You're never going to stop people from speeding, even if we did set up cameras everywhere.

My final thought on the whole matter is that speeding tickets should be based on a percentage of annual income. Say, 5% or so. Because a flat rate for speeding is just a punishment for poor people. Rich folks can afford to pay a fine with what amounts to pocket change for them, so there's no incentive for them to correct the behavior. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe it was Steve Jobs who refused to get a driver's license or plates for his car or something? Every time he got pulled over, he just paid the fine and continued on with what he was doing. Meanwhile, someone living paycheck to paycheck is going to have their life ruined by a fine. If you ask me, making fines a flat percentage rate is the first step to curbing bad driving practices. Punish people fairly across the board.

And, yes, I know there’s some thing people did long ago to set the speed limit at some percentile of what people were already traveling at, but that’s obviously a stupid way to do it and we did it anyway. So why?

I'm going to disagree about that being a stupid way to do it, for two reasons.

First, there was a time traffic engineering was not a well-developed field. There was no expert who could combine science and best practices to get a good answer about how fast it's safe to drive on a particular road because humanity had not yet learned that skill. Measuring what most drivers do, then reducing it if people crash a lot in a particular place is far from the worst approach.

Second, it's bad to make laws that most people will only obey with heavy enforcement. It's bad for a society to make lawbreakers out of most of its members, and to create pretexts for police to stop people without other evidence of wrongdoing. If there's a reason to make most people drive a particular road much slower than they actually do, any reduction in speed limit should also be accompanied by changes to the road design (traffic calming).

1. Idk human nature or some such
2. Because then people will go 10-15 mph faster than that. Believe it or not, speed limits are actually chosen with the understanding that people will go 10-15 over. Thats why going 10-15 over is almost never enforced and driving the exact speed limit is seen as an act of aggression.

Because much of your country doesn't enforce speed limits, large portions of your country's population don't believe the Constitution allows speed limit enforcement without reckless driving

Genuine answers from what I've heard regarding laws at least in CA:

1. There is a precedent that you should be going with the flow of traffic, which is technically safer than going the speed limit when everyone else is faster-- but mostly only on freeways; I rarely the flow going that fast on streets, so the rule doesn't apply to that one jackass going 60 in a 40 zone. And yes, you'll just get to the red faster (good cities time popular traffic lights to the speed limit so it's even stupider to speed).

2. I'm pretty sure they also set the limit to what older vehicles can pull off safely (assuming you don't tailgate, anyway). They have upped the limit in some areas, however, which I found upsetting. Like, 70mph up from 55mph over a few decades, which feels fast.

3. Traffic cameras are used, but there's an interesting issue on legality. If you don't acknowledge them, they can't actually say you got the ticket (they come in the mail). I forget the details, but something about seeing your accuser? LA itself more or less decriminalized them, but your mileage may vary based on local government.

4. Places do, in the form of speed bumps, stop signs and curved roads. Not using those is probably more a mix of old roads and poverty-- new suburbs use windy, wide roads. Wealthy neighborhoods install speed bumps and add tons of stop signs. I don't see it in my neighborhood because "it'll hurt business" which feels like code for "you don't matter enough for safety," hence I think it's a wealth inequality issue like most things in this country.

Anyway, that's the best of my knowledge as a CA resident. Honestly, the bigger danger to me are people who tailgate, road rage, drive on sidewalks, and do stupid things to get to an offramp. That last one? Just last Wednesday I saw a guy, car totaled, who tried to hit an offramp they missed by sharp turning into it, going up a 55 degree slope, and getting t-boned by another guy going up the normal way.

Idiots, I swear...

In Canada, its kph, but theres a sign when entering Ontario from Manitoba, where the speed limit is 90 kph, "fines starting at 100 kph" and it lists how much the fine is for doing 100, how much for 110. So the Ontario gov basically sanctions doing 99 in the 90 zone, just dont do 100.

I always drive at the speed limit, even if it gets me honked at. People are just impatient these days

I don't speed.

I mean I do, but only if I'm not paying attention. I naturally want to go fast. If there were no cars on the road, I'd be going as fast as I want. During the pandemic, when no one else was on the road and cops weren't pulling people over, I was getting to work in 30 minutes. Normally it takes no less than 45, and usually more like an hour and a half.

However, I don't speed because there are other cars on the road.

I'll drive at the speed limit if I can. I used to drive about 5 mph above the speed limit, but the last time I was doing that, I stopped for a school bus dropping off kids, and the guy behind me didn't even stop looking at his phone (I assume). And it occurred to me that he was going 5mph faster than he would have been because I let him.

So now I try (again, fighting my nature) to never go above the speed limit. I also never drive closer than 4 seconds to the car in front of me. I also very slowly decrease my speed down to 10 mph below the speed limit if someone is tailgating me.

Prior to the pandemic, people would be annoyed, and they'd aggressively pass me when it was safe to do so. Since the pandemic people just cross the double yellow line into oncoming traffic to pass.

They've made it much harder than it used to be to get your license in PA, but it's still too easy to get and keep your driver's license. Every driver should have to repeat a driving test every five years.

My wife has health problems, and voluntarily stopped driving about 15 years ago when she noticed she was developing muscle weakness. The only time she's driven a car since was an early Sunday morning when I took her to the empty high school parking lot and had her drive our civic around so she could just see what it felt like.

My dad drove him and my mom to church on the day he died. He had been having increasing number of car accidents, but no one could stop him from driving. My wife and I refused to ride in a car with him driving. I think the last accident he had was with a light pole in a parking lot because "the sun was in his eyes."

If his heart had given out on the highway on the way instead of in church, my siblings and I would have had to bury both parents.

People will always drive at the speed that feels safe and comfortable, which, because we made roads safe and comfortable for cars, is higher than the posted speed limits almost everywhere.

So say a road here is 35 because there are crosswalks, pedestrians on sidewalks, businesses with cars pulling out. Unless the city makes it feel like a 35 mph road, that's not gonna happen. Speed bumps, narrower lanes, things like that work better. Usually cops don't ticket for 5 over unless it's a school zone at school beginning or end time.

It's not just speed limits. Pay toilets never worked here because people who paid, would jam the lock so the next person didn't have to. We just aren't the most rule-following place in general.

Wow, such wrong info and opinon here. I swear, Lemmy might be worse than Facebook to find out real info.

1. Because most devices that measure the speed of cars on a road have an error rate. They need to be calibrated regularly or they might be off by a few miles an hour. Calibration takes time, which means it's expensive.

https://schwartzcohenlaw.com/how-often-do-radar-guns-need-to-be-calibrated/

Meaning that there's little assurance that your speedometer and a radar gun will agree exactly. They might be up to 5-7 mph off. So if someone is going up to 10mph above the limit, it's legally not guaranteed that a radar gun reading their speed accurately will result in a fine.

Also, 10-15 over is about how far you can go that if you see a cop far off, you can slow down in time.

https://fightyourspeedingticket.com/types-speed-measurement-devices/radar-and-laser-calibration-issues-in-the-state-of-florida/

On top of this, fines are usually proportional to speed above the limit. So the fine itself is usually not worth the time or hassle to a cop if it's just over the limit. They prefer easy, slam dunk cases, like someone doing 35 in a 15, or 65 in a 45.

2. In the US, speed limits are based on road engineering, sort of guessed tolerances for the shittiest cars on the road, and (way back when) fuel economy. So it's a patchwork of things unevenly applied over decades. Not all these standards change in every state regularly. Not every state is in a rush to check if 1970s standards for car tolerances for grade on a curve are still helpful. Often not until someone has a reason to lobby state government to change them.

3. Until only very recently, a human had to weild the radar gun. Physically and legally. Most States didn't allow automated tickets until they saw how easily fines could be collected with them. Those systems are expensive to buy and very unpopular, so not every local government wants to be the people that put up surveillance state infrastructure - and made taxpayers pay for the thing that now gives them tickets.

4. Those are both expensive as well, and the if you did that, people would get less tickets. Which means lower local government budgets.

You're really looking at this from a backwards perspective. People want to do whatever they want. Then one rule shows up. Then another. Then another. Each one is imperfect, and so each rule and method gets expensive to implement, but also makes people feel hemmed in a little more. And each rule pisses people off because they have habits that work into the gaps of the old system.

Wealth inequality is so outrageous. I sometimes have to cross a 4 lane road to get to an official bus stop. I mean, they built a fucking bus stop, and the fucking bus stops there multiple times a day, they have to assume people are crossing the street at least once. Signage? None. If I get hit, it's my fault. I sometimes have to wait a few minutes at rush hour for a safe time, and thank god there's a generous median or I'd be just standing in traffic doing hailmary's just to get home.

But I live right near a lake and when those rich fucks want to cross the lakeside road to go from their mansions to their private beach there is a fuckton of signage:

WARNING: CROSSWALK AHEAD

SLOW

CROSSWALK AHEAD

STOP SIGN

BLINKING RED LIGHT

CROSSWALK

And that's when they actually WALK to the beach because most of the time they're taking their little private golf carts.

And all this to cross a lightly travelled 2 lane road with a speed limit of 25MPH.

I understand why the French Revolution went the way it did.

Ignoring largely empty stretches or highways where there's practically no signs, have you seen how many signs are out there on heavily occupied highways?

We're just coming out of Gulfport Mississippi, Highway 49 (don't worry I'm riding passenger, not driving), and it's pure information overload. When you're surrounded by like 500 signs, McDonald's, Circle K, RaceTrac, Shell, Chevron, this and that doctor's office, etc, and you're only looking for the BIG signs to see what exit to take, well its all too easy to miss the random speed limit sign that they don't even post but once every 3 miles or so.

When surrounded by signage information overload, while you're supposed to be keeping your eyes on the road, you simply cannot read every damn sign. You mostly keep your eyes on the road and follow whatever the pace of traffic is, only glancing up and around for the green signs with road names and highway/interstate directions.

The rule of thumb I've learned, is that no matter the posted speed limit, as long as you're driving safely about the pace of traffic, and aren't the idiot darting through 20mph faster than everyone else, then the cops generally aren't gonna mess with you.

School zones are definitely an exception, you better be going 15mph along with everyone else, and of course following the directions of the traffic guards and bus stop signals when to stop.

TL;DR - Too much information, cannot read all signs and keep eyes on the road simultaneously.

1. It's socially convention

2. Would be too quick

3. Oh boy, you're in luck!

4. Oh buddy, you'll love this!

Because people want to get places faster, and everyone knows law enforcement can't reliably say if you were going 30mph or 40mph without a radar. So everyone collectively agrees that up to 10mph over the limit is fine since you probably won't get pulled over unless you go more than that.

If you raise the limit from 30 to 40, people will just end up driving 50.