Originally Posted by
The Human Car
One thing that really bothers me is we penalize the behavior irregardless of the damages that behavior caused. Yet different behaviors get different fines based on the severity of damage they usually cause. So speeding is not as bad as drunk driving, so speeding should always be lesser punishment, so we have a system were getting caught in a speed trap on the freeway is the same fine as speeding on a residential street and killing a boy. Which is a lower fine then getting caught at a sobriety check point. Does our system really make any sense?
Yeah, I've always been bothered by this logical inconsistency. I will freely admit to busting the speed limits on interstates and limited access highways on a pretty regular basis (although I'm never doing 100 and weaving in and out of lanes of heavy traffic.) And I would not for one second whine about it if I got pulled over -- that self-righteous "But I was just keeping up with traffic!" or "But he was going slower than me
//ahem, but still above the speed limit// in the left lane!" crap cuts no ice with me. At all.
But I am absolutely inflexible about never speeding in neighborhoods, not ever, and not even a little bit. If it says 25, I'm going 25, and the guy behind me can tailgate and honk to his heart's content. The risk of some little kid darting out, or something else unexpected happening, is just too high. Two nights ago, driving home in the dark on the little roads in my neighborhood, twice I was barely able to see people who were out for a stroll, wearing dark clothing. If I had been careening around the turns at 10-15 mph over the speed limit, I could have easily hit and seriously injured one of them. Which, penalty-wise, should be a whole different ball of wax from, say, doing 65 on an empty Route 100 at 11:30 p.m. on a weeknight.