[gnicholas]

Exactly. The author came across as smug and not credible, since he was clearly pushing an agenda. The first red flag was his straw man:

> Think about your behavior when you enter a highway. If you are like me, you take note of the posted speed limit, set your cruise control for 5 m.p.h. above that limit, and you're good to go.

I can't remember the last time I used cruise control, but it was definitely on a 200+ mile trip. If the author is such an un-engaged driver that he relies on cruise control every time he gets on a highway, I'd hate to think how lackadaisical he is when he's "only" going 40 MPH around town. Certainly drivers like this—to the extent they actually exist—would need encouragement to stay attentive. But pretending that everyone is this checked-out while driving isn't realistic (I've ridden with many drivers from all over the US in the last 20 years, and no one reaches for the cruise control right after getting on a highway).

It may be the case that narrower lanes is the way to go, but the tone of this article undermined the persuasiveness of the evidence cited.

[douche]

What correlation does using cruise control have with not paying attention? I think that's a strawman. I certainly feel much safer on the highway with people driving at a relatively constant speed, rather than gunning up to 80 mph, then falling back to 60 because they are fiddling with their radio or taking a call, then accelerating back up.

> Think about your behavior when you enter a highway. If you are like me, you take note of the posted speed limit, set your cruise control for 5 m.p.h. above that limit, and you're good to go.'

This is exactly what I do, every time. Except I set it at the speed limit, and trundle along in the right-hand lane. You get there just as fast, and don't run the risk of attracting any attention from the five-o.