Hacker News Reader

Germany also has much higher standards for driver education, stiffer fines for infractions, and a safety first approach towards operating heavy machinery. In the US, you can get a license by answering 25 questions, driving around a block, and doing some sort of parallel parking exercise. They pretty much hand them out regardless of actual driving ability.

One thing that would reduce the number of crashes in the US is making tailgating and passing lane camping a heavy infraction. To drive safely is to anticipate conditions and expectations.

I would also support 10 year renewal testing before age 65, as bad habits quickly become routine. Shorter intervals thereafter.

Also of note is that it's illegal to pass on the right in Germany, making traffic more predictable and orderly.

It's illegal in the US as well, just hardly ever enforced here.

It depends on which US state you're in.

Germany also has much higher standards for the engineering of the actual roads themselves.

Like, they are designed to function 24x7x365 for years and decades on end, because they have a much deeper and thicker roadbed, and much better irrigation and runoff control.

Part of this is because the road maintenance costs are built into the initial build cost, and any further maintenance in the future has to be done for free, at the cost of the road builder. And to the standards required by law. Since no road builder wants to ever have to pay for any future repairs, they seriously engineer the heck out of the roads to begin with.

Here in the US, repairs to roads are a profit center. So, of course road builders are going to make them as cheap and cheesy as possible, so that they can cash in on all that great guaranteed future income from all the repairs they're going to have to make in the next few weeks, months, and years.

We have to make the USA a viable place to live without a vehicle before we can increase license requirements. If we raise the standards too high, then people will just drive without licenses. Of course, it's probably a self-correcting problem, because I suspect many poor drivers are doing so out of obligation and would no drive if they had a viable alternative.

Designing our cities around the automobile was one of the worst mistakes this country made.

I think a big source of contention is a failure to clarify what type of road requires change, leading to frustration from people believe someone wants to drop their suburban 45mph artery road with no driveway access to 20, when the other person is just talking about an collector in some dense urban zone. Not to say those people may have a point however; speed cameras always seem to have a mysterious way of appearing on split expressways with a new speed limit rather than the avenue near the school zone that actually requires it.

I've driven the unlimited Autobahn and saw no significant difference in driver behavior from what I'm used to here on the east coast US. If anything, it felt like trying to drive in Miami where you've got both hotshots driving way too fast in anything they can get their hands on (even if the suspension, downforce, and brakes aren't designed for it) and old Grandma's driving way too slow in cars that won't be able to keep up with fast traffic.

> Now, while there are certainly many more or less valid arguments for a speed limit, I have never heard anyone arguing about the number. The verocity of the debate is contrasted by a total lack of arguments for or against a specific limit. Why 120 and not 130 or 90. What about 160?

You could ask the same question for basically every other limit. Why is the speed limit in cities usually 50 and not 40 or 60? Why do you need to be at least 18 years old to have the right vote, why not 17 or 19, ...?

In the end most of those limits aren't determined by a single argument but by many. Speed limits have to take into account the road quality, the traffic density, the kind of vehicles sharing the same road, how many pedestrians are around, environmental aspects like wind speeds, ... You also don't want vehicles with huge differences in speed.

The later is my favorite argument against the missing speed limit on parts of the German Autobahn. You can have everything between stopped vehicles in a traffic jam, a tractor with 60km/h, trucks at 100km/h or less when they struggle with inclines, the average cars at around 130km/h, the business people rushing from one place to the other at 160-220km/h and those who just like to have some fun with their sports cars or bikes at >200km/h with no limit.

Of course I have no idea what the best limit should be in every case, instead I suggest to figure this out with lots of experiments. Introduce certain speed limits on certain parts and find out what an effect this has on the number of accidents, traffic jams, efficiency, noise, etc... Then the speed limit can be adapted according to those results.

>To me it looks like there are many people either offended by or incapable of dealing with other people making different choices. The whole debate seems to be a way to force others into coercion and the actual limit is chosen to coerce as many people as possible.

This observation applies to a hell of a lot of things.