Florida’s Senate in April passed what it calls a “Super Speeder Law.” Meant to curb exceptionally high-speed drivers, it gives law enforcement the opportunity to jail anyone caught going 50 mph above the speed limit or going over 100 mph—even if it’s their first offense. Despite only being in effect since July 1st, over 70 people have already been charged under the new rule.
Orlando news station WFTV 9 (via Carscoops) dug up arrest records for the past two months connected to the new law, known formally as House Bill 351. It found that 49 people were arrested for going at or above 100 mph, while another 22 people were charged for exceeding the speed limit by 50 mph or more.
Section 316.1922 of the law defines the above speeds as “dangerous excessive speeding,” and outlines the punishments for first-time offenders:
Upon a first conviction, by imprisonment for up to 30 days or by a fine of $500, or by both a fine or imprisonment.
Things only get worse if you get caught again. From the bill:
Upon a second or subsequent conviction, by imprisonment for up to 90 days or by a fine of $1,000, or by both such fine and imprisonment. A person convicted of a second or subsequent violation of this section that occurs within 5 years after the date of a prior conviction for a violation of this section shall have his or her driving privilege revoked for at least 180 days but no more than 1 year.
Amazingly, police couldn’t detain everyone they wanted to since the law went into effect. According to WFTV 9, deputies from several districts were prevented from making arrests “because the new charge code wasn’t yet in the system.” The first arrests reportedly didn’t happen until July 15.
Florida Highway Patrol told WFTV 9 it didn’t expect to see so many arrests following the new law’s implementation. The agency gave the news station several examples of “super speeders,” including a 20-year-old in a Dodge Charger clocked at 155 mph. There were two motorcyclists who were traveling 87 mph in a 35-mph zone. They also caught a 25-year-old allegedly traveling at 120 mph, who later told the officer “he thought the trooper was racing him.”
The new code, first introduced into the Florida legislature back in February, was pushed forward by lawmakers to deter speeders in residential neighborhoods and curb high-speed, often deadly highway crashes. Speed was a leading cause of fatal crashes in Florida throughout 2023, according to The Jaspon Firm, contributing to around 30 percent of incidents.
View this post on Instagram
Whether arresting a handful of people per month will help has yet to be seen. In an analysis of Canadian laws passed in the late 2000s, the NHTSA reported that increasing the severity of penalties for “excessive” speeding did, in fact, reduce fatalities.
Top photo: FHP
I doubt this will do shit. Redesign the shitty roads.
There are so fu*kin many horrific accidents in/around LA from high-speed collisions that it actually diminishes my interest in leaving the house… I kid you not. There are a zillion DUI crashes, as well as numerous street racing incidents, and those caused by just plain human stupidity/selfishness. Add in street takeovers, road raging, ridiculous mods that impact safety/driveability (big aftermarket wheels just coming off while driving, limo dark tints on windows and even windshiels, etc…), illegal moving violations and such, and driving around the city/county of LA is just a crapshoot every day: when will the odds catch up with you?
I really think there should be federal/standardized consequences for both speeders and impaired drivers, but it’d require adding another half-million prison beds to the US penal system, and nobody wants to pay for that.
I live where the speed limits are high, the terrain can be terrifying, the weather can be terrifying, and more and more drivers come from other parts of the country so they don’t really seem to grasp the risks involved. On my (very long) commute I saw my fair share of scary accidents, and more than one dead person under a sheet on an interstate.
…I’m fine with this approach to enforcement across all 50 states, and anything else that gets people to, I dunno, PAY ATTENTION TO THE FUCKING ROAD.
Unpopular opinion here: road cars should have speed limiters at 80mph, as you can’t really drive faster than that legally anywhere….
What a great time that would be, passing a truck on a 2 lane highway and “bong!” “you have exceeded your approved speed, prepare to be liquidated”
That’s on you for passing.
But since some states allow very brief bursts of over the limit speed for those kind of scenarios I imagine the limiter will permit a bit of speed for a few seconds while screaming at you to slow down and maybe threatening to tell your insurance company what you done.
I’m guessing you haven’t spent a lot of time behind fully loaded wheat trucks on windy little highways. 22 mph up a grade does not make for a healthy transportation network. You need to pass when the brief opportunity presents itself, sight lines are too poor.
Again the only time such a limiter would be an issue is if you were at the speed limit. If that truck is doing 22 in an 65 zone you’ve got plenty of buffer to pass.
As little time spent on that opposite side of the road as possible is safer. It’s better to see the obstacle (the truck) approaching ahead of you from a distance back, gain some speed, and swing around as long as you have the opportunity. Attempting to accelerate to a passing speed while heading up a grade means a much greater time spent on the wrong side of the road.
That might work in Kansas. Not so much elsewhere.
Kansas would be easy, flat and straight roads.
No shit…that’s my point. But not every place is like Kansas.
Sure, until you find yourself at speed and committed to the pass when suddenly an oncoming car appears on the downslope. Then you either slam on the brakes to avoid rear ending the wheat truck, possibly rear ending the truck anyway or risk a high speed head on collision. Either way its a big risk for little gain.
Better to just wait for a proper passing lane.
Nobody in USA passes on opposite side of the road.
I only ever see solid double yellow lines that don’t let you pass anyway
If that truck is doing 22mph in a 65, it’s because it’s a steep hill where you cannot pass safely. Once you crest the hill, that grain truck driver will suddenly be going faster than 22mph, because he is going to use that hill to gain all the speed he can. By the time you get to a good and safe passing zone, the grain truck is probably going 55-65mph and you need some speed to pass him.
Source: I’m the grain truck driver.
P.S. Not every road has real passing lanes that will become available later.
Does any of that disallow the use of an 80 mph limiter on the car trying to pass?
You can’t pass a slow truck at 80mph? If not, you are not using the passing zones properly. Besides, if you can’t make it, you still have brakes.
Limit the trucks to 60 and everyone will be fine
A speed limiter doesn’t mean the trucks can go faster…
Wait I’ve got it. Make trucks not be able to go under 60.
Is that something that happens often? I drive through rural areas daily and yes I do on occasion pass trucks. Can’t think of a time I’ve come anywhere close to 80.
When I lived in farm country in Eastern Washington… Daily! During harvest season at least.
Well, there is a toll road in Texas where the posted limit is 85. And sections of I-10 east of El Paso where the posted “limit” is 80.
That said, I’ve never hit 100 passing someone. That might be a good cutoff point.
I guess you’ve never been to Texas and experienced 85mph roads? In my state of Idaho you are legally permitted to exceed the speed limit by up to 10mph while passing on a two lane road, the fastest two lane roads in Idaho are 75mph so, again, 85mph is entirely legal.
You seem fun
I’ve heard Florida described as 1930s Germany with theme parks, but this time it seems like a good thing.
As someone living in FL thank goodness. Highways are one thing but people doing 75 in a 35 in residential areas deserve some kind of torture with putting us all in danger. Now if we could just get some better enforcement AND get the people doing 45 on a 55mph highway out of the left lane we would be all set.
I’m not sure if it’s a Latin thing, but it does seem to always be older Latin people that will enter the highway at the speed of smell and immediately cross 5 lanes so that they can camp and impede traffic.
Probably not. Here in California the majority is Hispanic/Latino and AFAIK older latin people that will enter the highway at the speed of smell and immediately cross 5 lanes so that they can camp and impede traffic doesn’t happen.
The torture can be them being forced to watch as someone feeds their license into a shredder.
50 over? Where I live, 30 over is automatically a Reckless Driving charge and comes with a mandatory arrest and impound of the vehicle. Florida is too lax on this stuff, no wonder it’s so dangerous.
If it was 30 over 90% of S FL would be in jail. The local elevated highway speed limit in some places is 55 and traffic is regularly 80+
South East Michigan has a lot of this too. As one of the first metro areas to have paved roads en masse, they built the closed access highways with tiny on/off ramps for the cars of the 1920s. so the speed limits are 55mph, but if you go that speed then you are a hazard as the average speed is closer to 75mph. And yes this makes getting on an off the highways an adventure (lets not forget there are no vehicle inspections so we have lots of dangerous vehicles on the road as well). Any local knows about Southfield freeway or Davidson freeway, among others like this.
In Virginia, 20 over or 85 (which means 15 over in a 70 zone) is criminal reckless driving, and it’s 2 days in jail for every MPH over 100. Do it twice and risk being declared a “Habitual Offender” and losing your license permanently. They don’t mess around here.
Oh, I like that “jail days based on miles over” strategy.
Will it work? Maybe?
We have a similar (ish) law up here in Ontario. There’s something similar in BC too. It’s the stunting law. Basically, there’s a long list of things considered stunt driving that carry super harsh penalties. Street racing, speeding 50km/h over the limit, chasing, weaving… basically most of the things that you would have seen on F&F.
They lead to immediate roadside suspension of license. 14 day car impounding. Fines up to $10k. Fees for impounding. And the possibility of 6 months in jail. Then after conviction, you could be looking at a year or more suspension of license (could be permanent if you get caught multiple times).
It’s pretty severe. The province thinks it’s the toughest in North America.
It hasn’t really stopped people from driving like lunatics though. Frankly, I think they’re worse now. You can be travelling 130 km/h on the freeway and be passed like you’re standing still. A LOT. We get the odd news article of someone getting pulled over for doing 200+ km/h on the highway, but they never seem to stop. I’ve seen cars racing on the 401 multiple times lately, and I’m not even on it that much.
My running theory is that people need more instruction, and more positive reinforcement of good behaviours. I’d love to see driver’s tests every 5 years, and perhaps tie affordability to multiple great tests in a row. The reason the government doesn’t do it seems to be “too many people will fail.” Which is kinda terrifying. Considering the law reminds people that driving is a privilege, it sure as hell isn’t treated like it.
Ahhh the good old GTA, where everyone does the speed limit on local roads and goes balls out on the 400-series highways.
“Whether arresting a handful of people per month will help has yet to be seen.”
If those handful are the worst psychopaths among yes, it will help a huge amount.
Amazing. Florida actually managed to pass a GOOD law.
Even a blind squirrel gets a nut once in a while.
“Upon a first conviction, by imprisonment for up to 30 days or by a fine of $500, or by both a fine or imprisonment.” Et al.
Laws where the punishment for a violation can be just a fine rather than jail time aren’t exactly all that much of laws since such fines are generally such trifling amounts for so many rich people that the laws might as well not exist at all.
Some countries do tie fines to income levels which might actually provide a modicum of deterrent though it’d be tricky to implement in countries where the rich routinely hide their wealth through tactics such as offshore accounts, shell companies, non-liquid assets, etc, etc.
https://driving.ca/auto-news/crashes/switzerland-speeding-driver-income-fine-penalty
Just tie it to the MSRP of the car.
Can they just start with impounding all of the janky Nissan Altimas? We just had to drop the daughter off at college in Florida and they directly contributed to 99% of the automotive jackassery we experienced between Orlando and our destination.
Nissans are responsible for probably 75% of the reckless driving I’ve ever encountered in the wild, especially if we’re counting Infiniti too. The rest is Teslas, pony cars, and German luxury sedans that are leased by 20 something bros who have something to prove.
Excuse me but Dodge Chargers would like a word with you.
Try renting a car at MCO that’s not a huge family hauler, and not getting either a Nissan or a Hyundai-Kia product.
We rented a full size car and somehow ended up getting upgraded to a fully-loaded Jeep Grand Cherokee 4xe! A little luxury was nice, but they have a an awful lot to learn from Toyota (I have a ’25 Camry) about smoothly integrating a hybrid system.
I don’t understand how Jeep came out with such a bad set of PHEVs in 2022 when the Chrysler Pacifica Hybrid from 2017 is such a good PHEV.
I mean… Aside from the fires.
The build quality was not good, sure, but the basic drivetrain is excellent. I don’t think there have been any fire issues since the recalls were completed.
Unexplained fires are a matter for the courts
I was driving home from work the other day and was stopped in traffic because a bus had broken down on the freeway. The car next to me was also stopped and a Altima came out of nowhere and crashed into the car next to me hard at full freeway speed, no brakes, causing a chain reaction of collisions. I looked over at the Altima and the passenger side airbag had gone off but the driver’s didn’t, which made me think the driver’s airbag had been removed at some point.
I’m probably further left than nearly everyone on this site but I am 1000% behind harsh penalties for reckless drivers. In yee haw land antisocial driving is a public health issue at this point and I genuinely couldn’t care less about the well being of anyone who’s willing to drive 100+ on public roads. At that point you are making a conscious decision to risk the lives of everyone around you and no one hits those speeds by accident.
So sure, throw em in jail and give em felonies for all I care. When it comes to what people do to do with their own safety, their own bodies, etc I’m indifferent. If you want to use substances until you’re dead or do risky shit on your own time for an adrenaline kick then have at it. It’s none of my business. Live your life however you see fit.
But once your actions put other people at risk it’s not just your life anymore. That’s when it becomes antisocial, and antisocial people need to be reprimanded severely. That’s just behavior that I have no tolerance whatsoever for and unfortunately social media incentivizes it. The dude doing 150 in his Charger or whatever can get fucked. If you want to experience those speeds then go to a damn track day.
Yeah, it’s indeed very much a public health issue.
People may talk all they want about personal freedom but it’s not exactly personal freedom to be injured or ourtight killed by someone else’s actions, for crying out loud…
Yea they have the personal freedom to drive 100 on their own private property, not on public roads.
To be fair I haven’t met anyone that actually thinks everyone should be free to drive whatever speed wherever.
I’m with you, I’m just honestly past trusting law enforcement to apply the laws equally. Or judges and DAs to impose punishments equally.
So what constitutes being further left than others on this site? Farthest left is Stalinism, which is also farthest right. Dictatorship with total control.
Stalin is, thankfully, not relevant to today’s American political spectrum.
Maybe not now. But he is the farthest Left I could think of. Pol Pot?, Mao? It’s always the Elites who decide what the “Masses” want, when usually all the masses want is to provide for the family and have a safe living environment.But, it’s all about power and money for the leaders, and they’ll say anything and do anything to get it.
Nah, I’d say “farthest left” would be anarchists (not including “libertarians”, who see corporations as the highest authority). Those others are just dictators, no less than Franco or Pinochet.
The spectrum bends back on itself at the extremes. Like a 1980s side-scrolling video game.
I don’t think the Florida penalties are harsh enough. $500? How about impound the car for a mandatory minimum month.
Amen brother.
Let’s ignore the issue is cops and the powerful are exempt.
I abhor Meatball Ron and the xenophobic, homophobic, anti-intellectual culture of bigotry and stupidity that he has fostered in the state I’ve called home for all of my 50+ years. I generally agree with this legislation, but only because it’s pretty basic common-sense stuff. Of course, it has to be dressed up in a thin veneer of tough-guy bullshit just like when he cosplayed as a fighter pilot during his cringey presidential campaign. I guess it can be chalked up to “a broken clock is right twice a day”. I wonder if that second time is going to happen.
There’s a discrepancy in your post. You say you generally agree with his legislation, but you also called him a xenophobic, homophobic, anti-intellectual culture of bigotry. Most of his legislation is xenophobic, homophobic and anti-intellectual.
THIS legislation, as in this bill. Not HIS legislation, as in Alligator Alcatraz, the “conservative makeover” of New College, etc. I can see where the confusion would happen, though.
There was no discrepancy.
We all got DMM’s point
Lol, yeah, the second time’s not likely to happen since the broken clock is actually a 24-hour clock.
https://www.antiquesnavigator.com/archive/2016/05/24/282043331329.jpg
This IS the second time. The first was when he reconstituted Disney’s private government so it wouldn’t be Disney’s as much.
Of course, he immediately took a huge steaming dump on that by stacking the new board with culture warriors who were actually disappointed that their responsibility was strictly infrastructure and seem to have thought they’d get creative control while simultaneously guaranteeing the the people who do have creative control’s jobs would stay in California when the plan had previously been to move them to Florida.
Don’t forget that he dissolved Reedy Creek solely as a response to Disney taking a very mild stand against “Don’t Say Gay”. Basically it was a gubernatorial temper tantrum.
Yes. He was right for in the worst way possible for the worst reason possible.
Also at the worst time possible – Iger was just taking back over at Disney and moving Animation and Imagineering to Lake Mona was Chapek’s pet project (and also very unpopular among the staff being told their jobs were moving from the center of the industry they’d worked so hard to get into, to a company town on the other side of the country…) It ended up giving Disney an excuse to cancel the whole thing.
Kind of like Trump getting rid of the penny – it was the right result but done in a probably illegal way.
(It would be simpler to ban the large-scale minting or printing of any currency with negative seignorage.)
Him getting blindsided by Disney’s Royal Lives Clause is pretty funny though.
Ooo, maybe he can bring back his pretty white boots and use them while painting crosswalks.
I have mixed feelings about this law. Obviously, arresting someone going 150+ mph in traffic or doing 90 on neighborhood streets is perfectly reasonable. I don’t like that 100 mph per se is grounds for arrest, though. Also, while I don’t think the law is written this way, I usually hear it interpreted as a zero tolerance law where arrest is mandatory for anyone clocked at over 100 mph.
I suspect most of us have gone over 100 mph on an empty highway at some point. It strikes me as unnecessary to arrest someone for going 20-25 mph above typical highway speeds, assuming they are doing so in a reasonable situation.
Florida isn’t Montana or West Texas.
Nope.
I agree most of Florida isn’t conducive to high speeds (I have lived there for several years), but there are a few places with minimal traffic and good visibility. A few that come to mind are Interstate 10 west of Tallahassee, I4 between Daytona and Deland, and the northern 3/4s of the Suncoast Parkway. Those roads aren’t Montana empty, but have times when a high-ish speed run isn’t dangerous to anyone but yourself.
I’m not defending dangerous driving, but it is a poor use of resources to arrest someone going 101 mph on an empty road when the weather and visibility are good. Again, I see this billed as a “zero tolerance” kind of law, which is what I have a problem with. I 100% support arresting drivers who are endangering others , but existing laws allowed for that. This law is 50% common sense and 50% political theater.
What if you’re going 102?
102 mph is situationally dependent.
Speed is morally neutral. I’ve done up to 160 on public roads where it was reasonable and prudent. Speed is fun and prosocial. If you are driving in a way that risks injury to bystanders, that is wrong at any speed.
Again, my frustration is that speed per se is an arrestable offense.
Your definition of reasonable and prudent is not one shared by any governing body. I’ve been 130+ driving and 160 as a passenger on public roads. Doing so anywhere other than a closed course is not reasonable or prudent. By definition a public roadway always has bystanders as you cannot control access to prevent bystanders.
“Your definition of reasonable and prudent is not one shared by any governing body.”
I don’t see how this is relevant. Laws are written to apply generally as opposed to very specific situations. This is why I’m not fond of the new law – it appears to give officers less discretion for enforcement.
As for me, the time I went 160 was in a very specific situation where I felt it was safe. The road was straight and in a rural area in the midwest where you could see for miles in all directions. The stretch of road had no exits for ~10 miles. It was during the day when visibility was good. There were literally no other vehicles on the road at that time. I was on a high performance motorcycle I had ridden for around 20k miles at that point, so I was very familiar with the bike. I got the bike up to 160 and slowed down after a few miles.
I’m struggling to see how that is inherently unsafe. Frankly, I have a hard time seeing how a closed course would be any safer. I disagree with the idea that speed per se is dangerous or must be strictly enforced in all situations.
Also, as I said in one of my other comments, Florida law already allowed law enforcement to arrest drivers who were driving dangerously. If you went 100+ on a busy highway (which most highways are in this state) you were already likely to end up in the back of a police car. I strongly support law enforcement arresting genuinely dangerous drivers.
My point is that on public roads 160mph, or frankly ‘just’ 100mph, is not safe by virtue of being a publicly accessible road. I’ve sped on public roads as well thinking it was fine in the moment when in hindsight it definitely wasn’t. This 10 mile stretch may have been completely desolate but you have no way of actually knowing. You’re just assuming based on what you can see while covering a mile in 23 seconds in this case. A closed course/track on the other hand has controlled access, emergency services on site (usually), and measures to prevent harm (such as sweeping the track).
Officer discretion is a valid point, however, so is deterrence via law. Nuance in law is not inherently bad when it’s a targeted application in response to a specific problem. Stiffer penalties will impart some deterrent against the crime. How much is definitely up for argument. Weaving through traffic is different than a street takeover for example.
In this case it seems you’re feeling personally attacked by this law, which is why you’re arguing a roadway designed for 70mph is actually totally safe for you specifically at 160mph when you decide it is. You feeling that it was safe does not have any relevance on whether or not it was actually safe. Not to mention significantly illegal all the same.
I don’t feel personally attacked by this law as much as I think it will be ineffective. Again, I see it as redundant – we already had laws to prevent dangerous behavior. Those laws were not strictly enforced; why would this be any different?
However, I will reserve final judgement on this law for a few years. If injuries and fatalities actually decrease on our roads I will support it. I wouldn’t bet on that being the case, though. Florida politicians are some of the worst for political theater. This law strikes me as yet another stunt with a primary goal of getting reelected.
We are going to have to agree to disagree about the safety of my 160 mph run. Again, I could see for miles in all directions and the lack of entrance/exit ramps controlled access significantly. Also, I’m not arguing that this was safe for me. I am arguing that it did not risk harm to anyone else. I thought the risk to myself was acceptable (I still do).
Also, I would have loved to have taken that bike on a track. I never had any opportunities to do so. Racetracks are not very accessible.
Agree to disagree works. From the sounds of it you aren’t making high speed runs anymore.
I’m not in Florida or have ever lived there, but if the tracks are anything like here in Michigan the hardest part is just knowing when they will be hosting track days (t&t, HDPE, etc). I’m much more involved in drag racing, and the older track owners tend to be horrifically bad at making schedules or posting them.
If you still have a bike and want in on safe speed, I just finished Sick the Mag Michigan Miles which had 4 bikes out of 153 racers. 7 days, 1073 miles driving around Michigan, 4 race days (5 with 1 rained out).
I don’t ride fast anymore. I’m not sure if any vehicles in my current fleet can actually go 100 mph. Nowadays I tend to be the guy going precisely the speed limit in the right lane. I still ride motorcycles, but my bikes are a 150 cc Honda and a Harley touring bike.
Part of the reason I don’t own anything fast is because I don’t have anywhere to drive or ride fast. I will look into track days around here. I think I would really enjoy that.
I’ve been to Grattan here in Michigan, highly recommend if you ever get the chance.
I’m similarly the guy doing the speed limit in the right or middle lane. If I want to go fast I have a drag car I’m close to finishing. 545ci big block in a 2700lb Foxbody should do the trick.
You couldn’t pay me to ride cageless in FL or MI today, way too many phone obsessed people behind the wheel. Lately it seems a rider gets run over and killed every week locally.
I think the context matter a lot. When I read your first comment about prudently going 160, I thought you were nuts (because I pictured an empty-ish freeway somewhere near a population center). But yeah, I got my bike up to 130 on a desert road in a western state where I could see 10 miles ahead and behind. It might have been (relatively) safe, but I still don’t think it was prudent. However, the only one who could get hurt was me. In those rare situations, sure go as fast as you want.
“you cannot control access to prevent bystanders” so there’s this thing called a controlled access highway. It was invented to solve exactly the problem you are talking about. There are 48,876 miles of controlled access highways in the US.
Controlled access highway only means use of on/off ramps instead of normal intersections. Nice attempt at a gotcha.
Unlike a race track which actively controls access, you do not necessarily have safety workers warning you about hazards ahead, you’re sharing the road with other motorists unaware of your presence, and wildlife crossing the road is much more common.
A controlled access highway does NOT just mean that the intersections are interchanges. In fact, many controlled access highways(that aren’t part of the interstate highway system obviously) have stop signs and traffic signals.
It means the highway is fenced on both sides, along its entire length, preventing livestock from entering the road. It means that there are no sidewalks. It means that pedestrians and low speed vehicles are prohibited. From a traffic engineering perspective, the most important aspect is that access to the highway(via intersections) is very regulated and very restricted, to no more than about one intersection per mile, preferably no more than one every 5-10 miles.
It’s definitely not a controlled environment to the extent that a racetrack is, but a controlled access highway means a lot, and it is why 80mph is so safe and commonplace that we don’t think it’s a big deal. 80mph is really fast, and it’s a big deal. But controlled access highways do, all things considered, an extremely good job of mitigating the risks involved with sustained high speed.
There’s probably a case to be made that if visibility is good, a driver who is able to handle 100+ on public roads is planning for potential hiding places, and if it’s quiet enough for 100+ to be prudent, it’s probably not worth a cop’s time to be out there.
I would think that 100% of laws the Politicians publicize are political theater. They’re using it for future elections. It’s all the other laws they pass that they don’t hype that you have to worry about.
This. I once did 105 with 4 other cars from Reno to Winnemucca, which is a bit different from I-4.
I doubt that I have ever owned a car that was capable of going over 100 mph on public roads. I have certainly never had any reason to try.
Obviously I don’t know what your fleet looks like, but I doubt that this is true. Any car which has enough horsepower to really keep up with traffic in 2025 has enough horsepower to go 100mph given enough road. My 1995 f150, which is a full size pickup with 150hp, has a top speed of about 95-100mph. My 1991 Honda Accord with broken VTEC and, idk, 120ish hp(it’s rated at 140 with working VTEC) has a top speed of 119mph. Heck, even my 1986 CJ7 could almost certainly do 100mph if I was brave enough to take it over 75.
How quaint. The penalties in Ontario are much more onerous. https://www.ontario.ca/page/speeding-and-aggressive-driving
A good start then?
On the one hand, GOOD. The book should be thrown at these morons who are endangering the rest of us, especially on non-Interstate and residential roads. On an empty Interstate, who cares? Blazing past my house at 50 over the speed limit is a bit more of a problem. On the other hand, something less than 100 arrests since the law was passed, in a state of 22 million people plus Dog Knows how many tourists. Yawn.
How about going after the idiots like the guy in a Civic who dive-bombed across three lanes of traffic and would have PIT’d himself against the front of my Mercedes if I hadn’t seen him coming and firewalled the brakes to the tune of full-on ABS activation at 80mph? In heavy traffic. THAT was fun… Missed me by about the thickness of the paint even so, and thankfully the guy behind ME was paying attention too. People weaving through the usual heavy traffic on I-75 is much more of a problem, but Governor DeStupidis veto’d the left lane law that might actually have helped with that.
If there’s a cop to pull over a speeder then by definition the highway isn’t “empty”. There’s someone else there too.
Whatever dude.
You asked:
“On an empty Interstate, who cares?”
The cop, that’s who.
It is his job. But whatever. You knew exactly the point I was making, and had to be a pedant anyway, as usual.
If not a cop then whomever or whatever is puts into danger by speeding, including whoever is in the car with the leadfoot on that “empty” highway and the leadfoot themself. Even just as a taxpayer and insurance customer you have a financial interest in this.
Do you want your taxes to pay for the medical/funeral bills of uninsured, destitute idiots, especially if those medical bills are for a lifetime? Or the care of whomever is in the car with them that is injured in the crash? Or even just to fund the clean up of the mess they make?
How about your insurance rates, do you like paying more to cover the risky behavior of others?
Maybe you don’t care but you should.
I have spent too much time on the Autobahn to believe that speed *in and of itself* is a problem. Speed too fast for the conditions at hand is a problem (and “conditions” includes the road, other traffic, and your own car, and your own ability).
There are few better places for going fast than a smooth, wide, straight, flat, empty American Interstate highway in the South. And yes, “empty” doesn’t necessarily mean “not another car for 100 miles” – you slow the f’ down when you approach other cars, or a rise, or a place you can’t see. There is, however, risk in everything and anything you do. But risk is manageable by paying attention. You can be killed by a flaming toilet seat from outer space just walking down the street.
So you want all Floridamen in their hoopties and pickups to be allowed to drive the highways of the South as Autobahns?
Careful what you wish for.
“You can be killed by a flaming toilet seat from outer space just walking down the street.”
So? The probability of such a thing happening is so vanishingly small it’s not worth discussing. You might as well be fearful you’ll spontaneously quantum tunnel to the far side of the universe.
The probability of being killed as a pedestrian OTOH is 1 in 471:
https://injuryfacts.nsc.org/all-injuries/preventable-death-overview/odds-of-dying/
Again – please pay attention – “speed too fast for the conditions”. If you are driving a hooptie, then 40mph might be too fast. If you are on meth, 1mph is too fast for YOUR condition. Etc.
So you now expect those hooptie drivers and meth heads to just meekly behave in the right lane while you blast by them at autobahn speeds? Or do you plan to slam on the brakes to match their speed +4 every. single. time since speed gradients that high are evidence of driving too fast for conditions.
You are completely missing my point, so I am done with you.
Your “point” is anyone can be killed by a deorbiting toilet seat so fuck it, you should be allowed to drive as fast as you want if you think the road is nice and that you pinkie promise to slow down if something comes up. You think the dangers involved are acceptable. I don’t share your view.
Not even remotely my point. I’m out – have a nice life.
That’s a slippery slope. Health insurance rates are far more impacted by people eating crap and not exercising than by reckless drivers. Should we be yelling at people in the drive through? (No, no we should not).
Auto insurance not health insurance.
Can’t resist this one – oh yes it is. After a car accident, your car insurance is PRIMARY for fixing your or the person you insured’s body, not your health insurance. In fact, your health insurer will go after your car insurer to get reimbursed to the limit of your policy.
As was my point, auto insurance is primarily responsible for care after an auto accident so they are the ones most likely to jack up everyone’s rates thanks to risky drivers. Health insurance, not so much.
Dive bombing across multiple lanes is still arguably reckless driving. Do that in front of a cop and you’re getting lit up.
A public roadway is definitionally not empty, you have no way of knowing what’s around the bend or sitting on the shoulder. At 100mph you’re covering a mile every 36 seconds, not to mention your stopping distance increases significantly. It may take you upwards of 1/4 mile to see a problem, react to it, and come to a complete stop.
You’d think so, but the problem is the cop is sitting back at a crossover holding a speed gun and not paying the slightest attention to anything else going on.
You slow the f’ down when you can’t see or are coming up on traffic you can’t be certain of (all of it in the US). As I just said in another reply – I have spent too much time on the Autobahn to believe that speed *in and of itself* is much of a problem. Speed too fast for the current conditions is a problem. And conditions are everything from weather to other traffic to visibility to your own car and your own state of mind. That is a very important distinction that gets lost in the bleating on this side of the pond.
I agree in that speed alone is not unsafe. I do disagree in that autobahn speed in the US would be incredibly unsafe. Our highways aren’t built or maintained to the same standards, semi regulations are vastly different, there is no to rather minor mechanical inspection of vehicles depending on state, and most importantly a massive cultural difference.
Disagreement on your specific example aside, the cultural differences alone are why speed is so much more dangerous here. The average driver is in a 4000-6000 lb vehicle generally driving much faster and following closer to other vehicles than anywhere in Europe (my understanding, apologies if incorrect), all while facetiming someone with one hand, eating with the other, and steering with their knee. Finally for every individual speeding that is being attentive and following conditions, there’s 50 cruising at 90+ doing the above activities just because they can.
Again, you are rather willfully ducking my point. All of your points are why as a general rule, going much faster than current fast lane flow of traffic is, in fact, “speed too fast for the conditions”. But conditions ARE variable, and speed in and of itself is not a problem. At the end of the day, while I have had no issues belting along at 130-155 in Germany (and 100-110 in other European countries, despite it being “illegal”, I never go faster than 90 in the US for all of those reason and more. And conditions have to be just right for me to be comfortable going that fast.
And if you think that the typical Autobahn is a better place to go fast than I-75 in Florida *in terms of the road itself*, I have a bridge to sell you in NYC. Most rural American Interstates that are in good repair (which is actually most of them) are actually far better roads than the typical Autobahn. Wider, flatter, and straighter, with nice wide shoulders. The Autobahn only works as well as it does because of the other road users, not because the road itself is magic. In many cases, it really kind of sucks.
Not intentionally ducking your point. Apologies if it read that way. Interesting that I75 in FL is actually a better roadway than most of the Autobahn. The more you know.
Your comments of too fast for conditions and other roadway users does lean to my point in spite of being incorrect on general roadway maintenance. I may have been unknowingly projecting a bit due to Michigan roads and highways generally being so terrible. My points on semi regulations, vehicle inspections, and cultural differences you seem to agree with. Out of the US vehicle population, I’d guess less than 1/4 would pass German inspection.
I completely agree with you, which is why in most cases, much more than 10-20 over the speed limit is usually “too fast for conditions”, and in some cases half the speed limit is too fast. For some drivers, parking lot speeds are too fast. But ultimately, speed limits are *arbitrary*. Which is my entire point really. It really makes no sense that “99 your fine”, but *1mph* faster and you are going to jail and your life ruined.
You should never project that your local conditions are anything but local, especially in the US where so much IS locally administered. And there is definitely this fantasy that the Autobahn is some sort of “super road” – it’s not, at all. It’s ultimately a road system that was designed in the 1930s and it’s roots very much show. It IS very well maintained, but it’s no pool table (especially in the former East), and it’s curvy and hilly and NARROW by US standards – and the truck traffic, which is moving MUCH slower than in the US, has to be seen to be believed (other than on Sundays). But for all of those cultural reasons the derestricted speeds on portions of it work “well enough”. And don’t forget, not everyone on that road system running along at whatever speed is German, with a German license and a German-inspected car. Though it is usually the non-Germans who cause the most chaos, LOL. Nothing like having some English dude in a RHD car pull in front of you without looking with a speed differential of about 50mph – BTDT. M235i’s have REALLY good brakes…
I was not intentionally projecting local conditions to everything, which is why I mentioned it as a possibility.
Here in Michigan, speed limits are mostly not arbitrary. We have specific sections of interstate or divided highway that are 75mph, while most are 70. We also have some undivided highway at 65 instead of the more common 55. Any time there’s a deviation from 70/55, there’s a road use study that includes traffic load, population density, road condition, and other factors I can’t recall. This is a more recent change and state specific. Based on how Michigan does things I doubt we’re the only one with a system in place.
Some of the arbitrariness is also that FMVSS are somewhat based around the same 70mph divided, 55mph undivided baseline, so crash worthiness of vehicles is partly defined around those speeds. This is technically correct but not absolute, as there are no crash tests that actually replicate 70/55 conditions. Even EPA highway cycle testing has a max of 60mph, average of 48.3.
I guess agree to disagree on the “speed limits are arbitrary” point, otherwise I’d be typing up a book on all the historical and contemporary reasons why speed limits aren’t simply ‘reasonable and prudent’ for conditions.
Thanks for the info on the Autobahn. Unfortunately, the closest I’ve been was German airports.
But 75 or 70, or whatever IS arbitrary. The US Interstate network had a design speed of 75mph when cars were wallowing barges with drum brakes. Those speed studies are generally designed to reinforce a foregone conclusion – and most states DON’T do that anyway.
One thing that hasn’t changed is human reaction time, even as brakes, tires, and headlights have had massive improvements. You’re still covering 102ft/s at 70mph, and average human reaction times are still 0.25-0.35 of a second. Automatic braking would allow panic stops at 75 in the same distance as a human at 70, if the tech was perfect.
Maybe speed limits will increase in the future (I doubt it due to vehicle demand energy use), but only on Autonomous only roads (more likely to happen IMO).
You can have the reaction time of Mario Andretti and it won’t matter if you are driving a 2ton barge with poorly adjusted drum brakes. Modern cars make up for a LOT.
I actually think 80mph is probably the appropriate limit on most rural Interstates, with “reasonable” enforcement in good conditions (aka, not revenue generation enforcement). That also happens to be what the highway speed limit is in most of Europe (130km/h = 81mph), and the “suggested” speed on the Autobahn, oddly enough. And then allow somewhat faster in good conditions – which is also pretty much how it works over there. Though they like to do a little revenue generation with the portable speed camera setups too. Most permanent speed cameras are sign-posted in Europe. Though the British have fallen in love with nasty “average speed” cameras, and the French do that too between tollbooths sometimes – and the French LOVE tollbooths.
Don’t you have to take drivers Ed for a crazy amount of time and pay a crazy amount of money to get a license in Germany? It’ll never happen here, but it would send a message: driving a car is difficult and dangerous and requires serious training.
Fines and penalties are also much steeper in my understanding, significantly steeper than this law.
Not generally, at least for speeding, in most, but certainly not all of Europe. My friends in the Netherlands just call speeding fines the “speed tax” and expect to get some tickets in the mail every year. They are generally MUCH worse here in the states – and of course in most cases you get the fun of dealing with a cop personally. That’s not really a thing in Europe unless you are doing something *actually* dangerous behind the wheel.
Yes, but you don’t need a German driver’s license to drive in Germany, and at any given moment there is a huge percentage of non-Germans driving there. No different than driving in a different state here. In general, European licensing standards are more rigorous than “free in a box of Cracker Jacks” like here – but it varies WILDLY by country. If you want the BEST driving education by most accounts, get your license in Finland, not Germany.
Funny enough the only European country I have driven in was Finland. Helsinki airport to approx Ruoholahti subway station and back in a local friend’s 5spd Golf. No moose or ice to deal with at the time luckily. Probably would’ve been fine if either popped up after multiple winters in the Keweenaw Peninsula of the UP.
I’ve driven there too – beautiful place, and the roadside buffet mystery meat lunch places are an interesting adventure. Being from Maine, I too felt right at home on those roads, and even more so in Sweden, which looks so much like Maine it inspires homesickness.
God I hate the stupid “speed was the cause of accidents” bullshit. I have yet to see a study that actually proves that speed is the CAUSE not just a variable in play.
Speed is the cause of fatalities/injuries. Better way to put it.
If you reduce the speed limit to 0, there won’t be any crashes at all… Doesn’t mean it’s an appropriate measure to take.
That said 50 over or 100+ isn’t exactly unreasonable. I think VA was sending people to jail for doing 80, which absolutely IS unreasonable.
Jail for going 100+ on an interstate where the average speed is 85 or more? Probably unreasonable, especially ina relatively modern, well-sorted car. But when it’s an Altima on two donuts, or a brodoser? Now we’ve opened up a whole can of worms.
That said, I have a four year old child – if you’re doing 80 in a 30 I’ll drag your ass to jail myself.
That’s the problem here in good ‘ol FL. The ones doing 100+ are exactly those two examples, plus the usual under 30 douchebag male in a Mustang or FCA product. No scenario in FL requires 100+ on the interstate regardless of traffic. Someone dies every few years hitting a alligator they didn’t see on the road at usual speed, for that matter!
It sounds like someone has never barked their shins on a trailer hitch.
IMHO jerks who leave trailer balls on when not towing deserve to have said trailer balls forcibly thown through their rear windows.
VA fortunately changed that, it’s now 85…which is still crazy considering the state has highways with 75 MPH speed limits but hey…baby steps? 20 over is still an automatic reckless though which seems a little excessive.
People don’t realize that outside of NOVA and Richmond VA is a deep red state. I’m pretty sure the average rural Virginian I’ve met would love to send speeders to the electric chair…although they themselves routinely do 90 MPH in their lifted F350 and mysteriously never get pulled over. Gee I wonder why….
“Gee I wonder why….”
Blue Lives Matter bumperstickers?
Nah just the little black-blue-black squares the local FOP now gives out as symbols of petty corruption.
Speed reduces the amount of time you have to react, increases stopping distance, and affects steering wheel input. At some point you have exceeded your limit, so while you might be perfectly capable of responding to a car changing lanes in front of you at 45, it’s completely different if you’re going 100. At a lower speed it’s just a normal driving maneuver, at too high a speed, it’s an accident.
But that is my point. It is a variable. It is not the direct cause of the crash. That was what I was trying to say. You might as well say weight is the cause of all crashes then because if the car was light enough it could stop. It’s just a dumb argument. There are too many variables to make blanket arguments like this. It is bad science.
No, I disagree. In my example the primary difference between crashing and not crashing is speed.
Unless the car has significant downforce, the car being lighter would not cause it stop significantly faster with current brake regulations.
Differences in speed kills.
Grandma doing 40 when merging onto the freeway and camping out at 55 in the left lane can be just as deadly as Videogame Vinny and Main Character Manny cutting in and out of 70-80 mph traffic at 90-95.
Here ya go!
“Inappropriate speed is responsible for 20 to 30% of all fatal road crashes. After reviewing the current knowledge on the relationship between speed and crash risk, this report analyses eleven cases from ten countries that have recently changed speed limits or introduced a large-scale automatic speed control. The analysis confirms the very strong relationship between speed and crash risk and that higher speed is associated with increased occurrence and severity of road crashes.”
https://www.itf-oecd.org/speed-crash-risk
I read the study. It does say changes in speed can cause accidents but the main conclusion was that speed impacts the severity which is obvious. My point is speeding doesn’t cause a crash. If I drive 10 miles over the speed limit crashing doesn’t immediately occur. It effects the severity and some times speed can be a cause (ie speeding in rain) but if joe blow pulls out in front of you on the freeway, he is the cause of the crash, not the fact you were going 10 miles over. I am the son of a researcher and the whole speed causes crashes is bullshit.
Speed inappropriate to the conditions is a problem. Speed in and of itself is not. But as a Florida resident, there are very few places or times in Florida where 100mph is appropriate – and certainly 50 over the speed limit off an interstate highways is never appropriate. And rather too high – it should be 25 over gets you cuffed and stuffed.
But as I said in another post – there are many driving behaviors that are far more dangerous on the Interstate than simple speed, but it is a very rare thing for people to be pulled over and cited for them. Speed is just too easy to enforce. And our idiot governor veto’d a bill that would have made failure to keep right unless passing illegal. THAT is a huge cause of problems, far more so than simple speed.
if joe blow pulls out in front of you on the freeway, he is the cause of the crash, not the fact you were going 10 miles over.
If by traveling at the speed limit a speeder could have avoided that crash then that speeder absolutely caused that crash.
That is especially true if the reason Joe Blow pulled out in front of Leadfoot was because leadfoot was not visible as Joe began his merge. That might happen even under ideal conditions due to undulations, curves in the road or because Leadfoot was hidden behind a car that was doing the speed limit and Leadfoot passed it just before the collision. That’s not going too fast for conditions, that’s just going too fast period.
And that last part is the clincher – in your scenario LEADFOOT hits JOE. That alone puts blame on Leadfoot. If that hit is a full on rear end that in all likelihood puts ALL the blame on Leadfoot. Leadfoot can argue all they want but good frickin’ luck convincing the court that anyone but Leadfoot was to blame.
I am the son of a researcher
Good for you. Is that supposed to mean something here? Should we be impressed?
and the whole speed causes crashes is bullshit.
Yeah, well, that’s just like, your opinion, man. How about you post some valid data or research to support it?
You’re making an extremely tendentious argument against the concept of causality itself.
The main reasons where speed is the cause is where you lose control of the vehicle due to speed, or your reaction time is too slow to stop or avoid hitting a road hazard. At 100mph you travel 147ft per second. At that speed your stopping distance is likely between 600-700 feet. If there is something in the road 1/8th mile away (660ft), by the time you see and react to it you already have no way to stop in time. This is one reason why high speed crashes are more common at night, as OEM headlights don’t have enough range to see a hazard in time to avoid it.