No argument there, in your example, this guy was being a jerk. However, if your vehicle can't make highway speed within the onramp, and then safely merge, should you really be driving it on the highway? I appreciate that you floored it and did the best you can, but if the vehicle can't do it, you have no right to be on the highway, as you are a hazard to others. This is the reason pedestrians, mopeds, etc are not allowed on the highway... for good reason.

Most speed limits are BS and/or illegally set in the first place, so that's a pointless reference to go by. The bottom line is that if everyone else is going faster than you, then YOU are the safety problem on the road, not everyone else. The safest speed for everyone is that of the rest of traffic (proven by numerous studies and the reason the law is written to setup speed limits at this level). If you don't want to go that fast, that's your choice... but then you need to get out of the way. Slowing down in front of a tailgater is just you being an asshole... especially if you then speed up as they pass you. By doing so, you're breaking more laws with your idiotic behavior than the person who is speeding (speeding up when being passed, not allowing faster vehicles to pass you, slowing down for no reason, etc)... you are the unsafe driver, not everyone else.

Learn the rules of the road that we ALL have to SHARE. You are not the only one on the road, and it's not YOUR road. Drive safely so that you avoid ANY accident, rather than creating one "at a lower speed".

In that case, since you are willing to spend the money, you should have no problem making composting mandatory. Because of people like yourself, a cottage industry could open up where people do the work for you, for a fee. If you're good with that, then fine...

Of course, if this industry/business opportunity doesn't pop up, then you can be sure that you are in the minority, and that most people don't find it to be a problem.

Does that seem fair enough?

The person tailgating you is likely going faster than you. So why do you feel it's your right/duty to block them? You are not the enforcer of laws. Get out of the way, let them go by, or whatever. It's not your job to police people. Lead, follow, or get out of the way.

There is no "problem" to fix here. It's been shown that there are no safety benefits to RLCs... so why bother at all? If the cities simply followed the rules of the MUTCD to setup proper timing, we wouldn't have any problems (except for those who are inattentive or simply jerks)... and tickets won't solve the problem from those idiots anyway.

And having meetings with all these people (to keep them involved) is somehow more efficient? The point is, people need to learn how to use email properly - stop copying everyone under the sun, and people have less to deal with. On the flipside, if you are CCed, then you can postpone the email until later since it's not directed to you... that assumes the sender knows how to use these fields, but again, that's part of using it properly.

I prefer email for the fact that everything is documented, and (being and engineer) data can be clearly shown to support my statements. In conversation, you can't do that... unless you're back to running meetings and (ugh) powerpoints which are even more useless and ineffective.

People need to keep in mind, this study asks the carriers or "WDS.co" company about the repair rate. When an iPhone has an issue, people don't go to the carrier to address the problem, they go to Apple. So, by definition, the data is skewed in Apple's favor because the study doesn't bother to ask about Apple's support rate at the Genius Bar! (If they would even disclose this, which they likely won't.) Therefore, it's no surprise they didn't see as many Apple-related calls... it would be like asking Apple how many Android phone calls they got... it's a dumb question.

"self-reported crash data from 707 motorists in Australia with less than 200 reporting they had been in an accident but, unlike Solomon and Cirillo, the researchers found no relationship between slower speeds and increased crash involvement." In other words, when people self-reported accidents (a known way to skew data) the "research" showed no relationship between slower speeds and increased crashes... "unlike Solomon and Cirillo". This simply means that research is likely flawed... not surprisingly. Even if you simply look at it simplistically, 2 researchers said it did, while 1 didn't... and yet you choose to listen to the one?

Besides which, I simply said you should consider that additional information. The previous poster already posted the more direct answer to the "source" question. There is plenty of research saying the 85% level is safest.

Lastly, to your last comment... the 85% percentile guideline (if you bothered to read it) is related to the unenforced speed of the road... so "increasing enforcement" is irrelevant to the safest speed determination. Please try reading about it before making inaccurate statements and conclusions.

It's clear that you have no real knowledge about how a car works. Try reading up on it a bit, before talking about damage to the car, or not being able to pull the key out. Fact is, shutting the engine off is "enough" for this test... when that happens, the ignition system is off, and the car won't "work off the battery".

As for "where are we supposed to learn this", why is it everyone else's job to teach you to take care of yourself? Go to an empty roadway or parking lot and practice. No one said to do this "in traffic" as you imply. Try to exercise a little personal responsibilty, and try reading and learning for yourself. If that's too hard, as mentioned by others, there are plenty of places to learn such things. Heck, there are even courses to teach you how to get into a skid, and out of one... it's not rocket science, but it does take a little initiative on your part. Sitting on your butt and saying "no one is teaching me" is not an answer.

"Kill people"... really? At worst, the car dies. The incompetence of the driver leading to further accidents and injuries is not a fault of the EMP, but the idiot behind the wheel. If you can't handle your vehicle when the car "dies" like that, you should have no right to drive.

Forget Montana... historical statistics say it's not so. Ever since the idiotic NMSL was repealed, the "common sense" crew was talking about thousands more deaths that were going to come from this. In realty, nothing like that happened even as states increased speed limits, nationwide. But let's not let data get in the way of a "good decision".

Exactly... the rules and regulations are already in place. The government just figures they don't have to follow them, because they say so. Engineers already say they are too low, but no one listens to them, so why would they listen to me when there is some ninny on the street complaining that his/her kids can't play because of cars passing by so fast? HE/SHE feels it's too fast, so they politicos listen to her. How about keeping your damn kids off the friggen street?

Have you ever been to kangaroo court (aka civil court)? They will find you responsible regardless, because it's actually guilty until proven innocent in the wonderful USA civil court system. Hell in my state of MA, they CHARGE you to go to court... how's that for fair?

Also consider: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solomon_curve

Except that current speed limits are NOT set by this rule, even though they are supposed to be. Simply because idiots think "common sense" somehow trumps science and engineering.