[developer1]

That is normal here too, and it's more like 7-8 mph. So you can receive a ticket for impeding traffic even if the people you are supposedly obstructing would be exceeding the speed limit? Instead of ticketing the slow guy, set up a sting and ticket every person exceeding the limit by more than 6 mph. This whole thing sounds backwards.

[mmmBacon]

Driving substantially slower than the speed of traffic is extremely dangerous because of the potential speed differential. Relative velocity matters.

Also Regensdorf is really pretty busy and all you're doing by going slow is pissing people off. If you want to go that slow, that's what side streets are for.

[clort]

An alternative viewpoint is that attempting to drive substantially faster than the slowest vehicle is extremely dangerous because of the potential speed differential. Relative velocity matters, as you know!

[twblalock]

It's a matter of public safety. Holding up a line of cars is likely to result in road rage, or an accident.

It's also very rare for slow drivers to get ticketed.

[clort]

Incitement to riot is no excuse for rioting, surely?

Holding up a line of cars that would otherwise be driving too fast is not going to be the cause of an accident. The cause of the accident would be the driver who was driving too fast!

[nitrogen]

The point of traffic is to run an economy, not to parade at a precise speed for the amusement of deontologically obsessed nannies. If a line of traffic wants to go at speed+5, then the proper speed of traffic is speed+5, and going speed-5 is causing economic harm.

[TeMPOraL]

You need to balance it against the amount of disutility from deaths caused by the line going at speed+5 on a road where they were supposed to be going at speed. You need to also add the disutility generated by that line fucking up traffic flow in the nearby area.

Seriously, this stuff is to be determined from top down, not from perspective of individual self-interested drivers with zero context, little responsiblity and no interest of ensuring optimum flow.

Also, the general culture of aggression and disregard for law is something that is not healthy for neither society, nor economy.

[cyber]

Road speeds need to be re-evaluated every 5 years. They take into account the speeds of traffic that are currently flowing on the road.

[judk]

How very undemocratic of you. Sometimes the law from top down is incorrect. The experiences of stakeholders matters.

[TeMPOraL]

> How very undemocratic of you.

Yes, it is. So what? Democracy is not a silver bullet. Some problems it solves well, others it can't tackle.

> Sometimes the law from top down is incorrect.

Sometimes it is. And sometimes it isn't. I argue this is a case where top-down approach is the right one.

> The experiences of stakeholders matters.

I think health and life of innocent third parties should matter more.

[Piskvorrr]

By inductive reasoning, the proper speed of traffic is equal to the maximum speed of the car, and anything less is causing economic harm. (#cc: That was sarcasm)

In other words, that would only work for a traffic system which only moves one way, linearly, and has zero branches. Out there in meatspace, things are...a little bit more complex. Intersections and buses and trucks and pedestrians, oh my.

[nitrogen]

To clarify, I'm referring to freeways, not suburban neighborhoods. No pedestrians.

[talmand]

Take humans out of that equation and I would agree. Otherwise, that kind of thinking gets people killed. Which, I suppose, you don't care about since you are more concerned over the minute details of the economy.

[DrScump]

Except that driving artificially slowly correlates well with being intoxicated... so being slow can call attention to oneself.