I smell class action:
Frequent N.H. Speeder Wants Limit Raised
DOVER, N.H. – A man with a penchant for speedy driving has come up with an unusual tactic for beating speeding tickets — raise the limit. So far this year, Larry Lemay has been ticketed four times for speeding.
Rather than slow down, Lemay is suing the state Department of Transportation to study traffic and speed limits across New Hampshire, to see whether limits could be raised. … Lemay said he believes many speed limits are set intentionally low so the state can cash in on drivers.
I’m not sure exactly what this lawsuit is meant to accomplish. So he wins, and a judge orders the state to do a “study” that it doesn’t want to do? Want three guesses as to what the study is going to say?
On the other hand, I might have to give him a call to see if I can file an amicus brief. I have a lot of parking tickets that I think violate my right to park on the sidewalk.
13 Comments
Lemay’s lawsuit is asserting exactly what a Federal Highway Administration study in the 1980’s concluded – that state and local authorities routinely set speed limits 15 mph below the established standard for safe and reasonable, the 80th percentile unregulated speed, in order to generate revenue through speeding fines.
Here in Texas, the speed limit is whatever is safe under the circumstancs.
I agree with this litigant. I would also ask the court to ban all Subarus, Volvos, and any other van or car with a factory installed Kerry-Edwards bumper sticker from the left lane.
I believe 85th percentile is the federal guideline, and the majority of roadways in most jurisdictions are likely in violation of that. In Michigan, the State Police have been working to raise speed limits on the grounds that inappropriately low limits make the roads less safe (for a variety of reasons I will not get into here). Raising the speed limits on local roads immediately generates a lot of local political pressure — most people want the speed limit to be 25 mph around their homes and 50mph everywhere else. This creates an obvious conflict.
I have read a Federal report, if I remember correctly (it was about 8 years ago) that stated that speed limits should be set more to road conditions (i.e. straight, two-lane, separated or narrow, windy two-lane not separated) rather than an arbitrary number (55 mph, anyone?)
When the Federal speed regulations were abolished, Montana set a guidleine of “reasonable and safe”, overturned by the Montana Supreme Court after a much-ticketed speeder (up to 140 mph) claimed it was unconstitutionally vague.
Anyway. With no speed limit, there was no massive increase in roadway fatalities or injuries.
I work for the Montana Department of Transportation. My first job there was doing…speed studies. MDT does at least several a year, or at least several specialized ones (the type I did most). Many areas have at least one speed study done every year or so.
My thought is, maybe the guy is right–speed limits should be looked at. Maybe a lot of people in those areas are speeding, while others toe the line–quite an unsafe situation. In this case, the state should be, and probably should have been, doing studies. I wonder why an assistant attorney general would make such a broad statement, without maybe consulting a traffic planner. It would be like me commenting on a proposed action by, say, the Department of Environmental Quality–what the hey do i know about all that jazz?
Of course, this guy’s asking for legal fees for this is…geez, I haven’t the term.
I imagine the limits are set a bit low on the expectation that a certain percentage of drivers are going to speed by a certain amount no matter what the limit is. Using the 85th percentile is an attempt to keep even most of the speeders at or below the road’s actual safety rating.
But yes, what a jerk.
Public policy by lawsuit is bad, even when the result is good.
Mr Lemay has stumbled onto a little known truth, virtually ALL speed limits in the country under our governing laws are illegally set (Title 23 et al). Speed enforcement has digressed into a public theft entitlement program, that when examined in detail has nothing to do with safety, nor can enforcement as practiced reduce accidents either. We have won virtually every case we have argued.
We have offered him our support. This offer also goes for anybody that would to learn more about how speed limits should be set or to challenge them. More importantly, we can show you how to actually make the roads safer! Please feel free to contact us.
Best Highway Safety Practices Institute
http://www.bhspi.org
I wonder whether speeding laws would pass a reasonable “rational basis” review. Presumably the state interest would be avoiding traffic accidents. Speed stands as a proxy for risky driving because faster driving is assumed to be riskier than slow driving, at least for values sufficiently above the speed limit.
If each individual speed limit had to withstand such scrutiny, a large number would certainly fail. Even with a ‘de minimis’ of 7 mph, there are certainly areas where those going more than 7 miles per hour are, on average, driving no less safely than those going less than the speed limit.
Arguably, speed limits should require some level of Federal scrutiny. Arbitrarily low speed limits significantly affect one’s right to travel among the States, which is a pretty fundamental right.
“It seems ridiculous to me. I don’t know what incentive the state would have to do that,” Hilts said. “I’ve not seen any evidence that that occurs. I don’t believe it.”
Wow – a politician who is a straight-faced liar… whodathunk?
HELLO? “incentive”? MONEY, duh! He’s not only outright lying, he’s insulting the intelligence of everyone who reads or hears that statement!
That said, this lawsuit is still quite over the top.
And, while I have no familiarity with BHSPI (sounds like a good idea, in theory), Chad Dornsife’s statement about speed limits being basically nothing but another funding method for local government certainly matches my experience.
Having driven on a two lane highway across rural New Hampshire once, I agree that the speed limits are ridiculously low, and quite arbitrary. On roads that in Michigan would have a speed limit of 55 mph with a few of the sharper curves flagged with lower speeds, the speed limits varied from 45 to 30, changing at nearly every curve.
If you (markm) are referring to the yellow and black caution signs, they do not set speed limits. They merely inform you of recommended speeds based on road engineering criteria. Note that jurisdictions vary and I’ve heard rumors of jurisdictions where exceeding a recommended speed creates a rebuttable presumption that you are driving too fast for road conditions.
I’m generally considered a pretty safe driver. I’ve collected two speeding tickets in 50 years of driving. I’ve been in three accidents for which the other drivers were ticketed. I could once be at ease driving at 120mph but the limit I put on myself now is south of 90.
The quality of speed limits varies by state in my experience. Some, as DC or MA, are too conservative by far. But I’ll take the limits on country roads in VA or WV as pretty much right, especially if it represents a major change from the previous limit (i.e., 55mph down to 20mph).
The Interstates are a different matter. Certainly, congestion should result in lower base limits. But there are many, many areas where >70 is perfectly safe, given good weather conditions.