> have speed limits and fines set based on the idea that cops won't catch most speeders
I don't think there is any truth to this at all.
> We set a relatively low max speed
We made the mistake of mixing vehicle and pedestrian infrastructure. Our speed choices have way more to do with this than with imagined enforcement outcomes.
> because you are only going to be pulled over a fraction of the time.
Many cites engage in "zero tolerance traffic enforcement" programs. This is where they patrol a single stretch of road and stop every single person who is even 1mph above the limit.
> most are designed based on the enforcement capabilities of the time.
Most are "designed" (a.k.a rapidly created and pushed into existence) in reaction to disasters that occurred and people broadly feel could have been prevented if there was a law curtailing the behavior that led up to the accident.
We didn't make speeding laws based upon "enforcement capabilities" we made them in response to "wasteful deaths."
A lot of your post wreaks of 'citation needed' but I'll choose this one.
>Many cites engage in "zero tolerance traffic enforcement" programs. This is where they patrol a single stretch of road and stop every single person who is even 1mph above the limit.
Searching this all I find is Virginia where over 80 is an automatic reckless driving, but the highest speed limit in the state is actually 70. I've never heard of anyone being pulled over for 1mph over the limit.
"Reeks" (stinks) not "wreaks" (inflicts). And for any linguistic archaeologists of the future, yes, this is evidence that those two words are audibly indistinguishable in American English in this time period.
Yeah, they'll do it. You'll typically see a pair of cops with a speed gun. Then as you pass a curve, bridge, or other obstruction there will be six or more squad cars lined up. Speeders are picked up by radioing ahead. I've seen it in Illinois.
It's called "STEP." The NHTSA encourages states to do it. Several California cities engage in it once a month. Search a little harder before you victoriously declare "citation needed!"
I don't think there is any truth to this at all.
> We set a relatively low max speed
We made the mistake of mixing vehicle and pedestrian infrastructure. Our speed choices have way more to do with this than with imagined enforcement outcomes.
> because you are only going to be pulled over a fraction of the time.
Many cites engage in "zero tolerance traffic enforcement" programs. This is where they patrol a single stretch of road and stop every single person who is even 1mph above the limit.
> most are designed based on the enforcement capabilities of the time.
Most are "designed" (a.k.a rapidly created and pushed into existence) in reaction to disasters that occurred and people broadly feel could have been prevented if there was a law curtailing the behavior that led up to the accident.
We didn't make speeding laws based upon "enforcement capabilities" we made them in response to "wasteful deaths."