30% of fatal accidents are caused by speeding. Why don't the cops adopt a zero-tolerance on speeding?

Question

I'm sooooo tired of all you people.

http://www.lawcore.com/car-accident/statistics.html

I commute 3.5 hours from the forest to the big city, and drive the limit all the way. There is nowhere I am going that speeding is worth getting there earlier.

Answer 1

There is one simple reason, why cops can't employ a zero-tolerance against speeding infractions. That reason is the court procedure. There are a # of factors that go into a speeding ticket testimony and depending on the size of the officer's jurisdiction and that jurisdiction's opinion on speeding will influence at what point a cop will write a ticket.

Example: most mechanical devices used to perform speed enforcement have a +/- 1 to the reading displayed. So you couldn't write someone for lets say 51mph in a 50mph zone.

Most cops have a tolerance on their visual estimation of the vehicle's speed before they use a mechanical device (it can be as low as +/-2 to as high as +/- 5). So that can be applied as well.

Also, the courts generally understand that speedometers that can have errors, usually +/- 5.

So right off the bat you've got +/- 11mph that need to be added to the speed limit before you write a summons.

Now, I've seen people's DMV license abstracts after pulling them over and I've seen speeding convictions for 34mph in a 30mph zone, but those convictions are always in some small town, never a big city. This occurs when a small town or village agrees with your concept of zero-tolerance.

Answer 2

police officers do frown upon speeding , but there has to be some leway due to tolerances in manufacturing,not all speed cameras are accurate and not all speedometers are accurate, and if the speedometer on your car is 100% accurate what about the wear on your tyres. new tyres have a larger diameter than used tyres and that can affect the speed that you travel. oh and speeding has never claimed a life, it is always the sudden stop at the end. I lived in an area that had an open speed limit (no speed limit as a maximum on the open road) and that area of my country had the lowest fatality rate even though 100-130 miles an hour was a "normal" open road speed

Answer 3

I think that since police departments are individually run there is a problem getting them all to agree on anything. I am a reformed speeder. I no longer have any money to spend on tickets and I recognize the total waste of my time in court and driving school. I have been watching my speed for some time now at least the last l0or so years- no tickets. I want to keep it that way-lol I am also, studying for my commercial drivers license now. I can't afford any traffic violations. -k- p.s. I too am sick of being flipped off for going the speed limit.

Answer 4

As one who drives the speed limit as well, I am tired of speeders too. Not to mention the aggressive drivers. But let's face it, there simply isn't the police manpower and government money to catch all the speeders. Personally, I never had a problem with photo-radar in Ontario. Those who got caught and had to pay were the ones crying the blues. Hey, if you don't want to pay the fine, don't do the crime. Besides, if everyone drove as the law states, then maybe insurance companies wouldn't be getting richer and richer off of the high premiums they feel they are justified in charging because people drive and act they way they do.

Answer 5

1st: There are lies, damn lies, and then there are statistics.
2nd: your question is not accurate.

"30% of the car accident fatalities can be attributed to driving above the speed limits"

Just because someone is going above the speed limit does not mean they caused the the wreak.

You have to also ask the question on average how many people at any time are speeding? Around where I live it is probably like 70% The rest of the time I am sitting in a traffic jam.

Answer 6

I dont know why, but if they did, they would find a gold mine in AZ. Its especially irritating because the roads are seldom up to the speeds traveled on them. We had the limit raised on our road 10 mph, when we asked DOT why, they just said that was what most people were doing so they just adiusted it upwards rather than consider the fact that the road wasnt up to that speed. Irritating!!! The saving in fuel and lives would seem like goals worth going after, but guess not.

Answer 7

If cops adopted a zero tolerance policy on speeding, nobody would speed and the government would miss out on millions of dollars in fines.

Answer 8

Because they would have to pull themselves over too and that would be kind of confusing. Half of the cops where I live dont drive the speed limit and I know in some cases there wasnt an emergency.

Answer 9

If their was a zero tolerance ..You would have to hire millions of cops to enforce it and that will "never " happen...The courts would be in a quagmire..Live with it!!! I have a business that makes me drive many thousands of miles per year...I drive at the maximum of the speed limit and cars pass me like I was the Tortoise,in the Tortoise and the hare story..They always have and always will.The unpopular truth

Answer 10

the variety one rationalization for harm to a police officer is a single vehicle twist of destiny. He and he on my own wrecks his unit. The variety 2 reason is a self inflicted wound from there very own gun. He photos himself. in case you do away with those to reasons of injuries Police paintings is taken into consideration one of the safer jobs to have. Rairly is a 2 vehicle twist of destiny there fault! Or the new child working right into a highway there fault!