Re: Almost Reckless driving

[William Elliott <CN=William.Elliott/OU=MKE/OU=CORP/O=MMS#064#MMS%lngw@wtgw.corp.mei.com>]

>>One law for all.  _Your_ car is safe at 125mph (BTDT, Hamburg - Munich)
>>but Ralph Nader was right about many of the others.

Ralph Nader was never right about ANYTHING.  Of course, since
I consider him to be evil incarnate, I may be a bit biased. ;-)

>And that's why I see the speed limits as nothing more but a tool for
>enhancing revenue. Same speed limits apply to Trabant and UrQ - a most
>absurd law I can think of.

Actually, in terms of damage or injuries to _others_, I'd venture that a
Trabant (weighing 1200 lbs) at its top speed (about 60mph... on a good day... 
down hill...with a tail wind...) is safer than a UrQ at it's top speed (in 
excess of 130).

<<Personally, I think the car is a relatively small part of the equation. I'm
more worried about the capabilities of the _driver_. >>

<<Better (insert your favourite driver here) in a Trabant than a regular boob
in an UrQ...>>

But it's always a Jeff Gordan wannabe in a Mustang or Ms. Invincible
in a Suburban or an oblivious person in a clapped out ______ (you fill in the 
blank)
with no brakes and bald tires... cars easily capable of more than 60mph and 
possessing
enough mass to be dangerous.

Another thought... if you don't have insurance.... or a license.... you're not 
as
worried about those points!

I agree it's more the driver than the car and that speed limits are entirely 
about 
revenue... for the state and the insurance companies!

Bill Elliott
Lake Mills, WI
Corvair, Trabant, and UrQ