biased source.

tl/dr

The cool thing is- when reading your comment, I have no idea what your pathetic little burst of *fuck the man* is actually referring to. Try using quotations next time so I can belittle you more directly.

Are you serious? You think that speeding does not equal higher accident rates?
You think you can react just as fast to road hazards when your vehicle is traveling faster?
How about the damage caused by a collision, will that also be the same?
Would you rather get into an accident with a car going 60 or 80?

I'm not sure that estimating the speed of a tiny falling object in the second it takes to go from your shoulder to the floor is comparable to a estimating the speed of a two-ton mass flying around other two-ton masses over an extended period.
I've been stopped on many occasions for driving too fast when I wasn't being radar'd, sometimes even with the cop traveling in the opposite direction. They're pretty good at this.

I really have to wonder why that's modded as informative.

haha you dumb troll.

aw man, that's pretty cold.

ya, sounds pretty much like a pirate...

zing!

[citation needed]

if by "some contest" you mean a computer security contest where skilled systems analysts and security experts meet to discuss holes in computer security, then yes, I'd look to that contest as a pretty good indicator. Where would you look, kid?

wowo, piss in your cornflakes huh?

less exploits are found because less people use it...

surely there's a penis in someone's mouth in relation to this story.