[CamperBob2]

Incidentally, do you propose that "too fast for conditions" be the law?

It is the law. The fact that you're even asking this question suggests that I'm wasting my time arguing with you.

You need to consult your state's driver's handbook, rather than asking some random guy on HN. Chances are it uses almost the same phrasing you're asking about. Failing that, have a look at the Michigan State Police's site: http://www.michigan.gov/msp/0,4643,7-123-1593_30536_25802-16... . I didn't read the whole page but it seems to do a good job explaining the difference between prima facie speed limits and "basic speed law."

I find that surprising, considering how much discretionary power that would put in the hands of the government.

Artificially-low speed limits give them that discretion now, which is sort of the whole point of my mini-rant.

[stinkytaco]

>It is the law. The fact that you're even asking this question suggests that I'm wasting my time arguing with you.

Yes I know it's the law. I should have been more clear:

Do you propose it be the exclusive law.

And the point of my reply is that speed limits are not artificially low, that's simply your contention, one that you have failed to provide any proof for.

[CamperBob2]

Do you propose it be the exclusive law.

I don't know. I'm not a traffic engineer, and that's the sort of question they would be best equipped to hash out. It certainly needs to be a component of the law, or a policeman would have no legal way to stop some lunatic who drives at the posted 75 MPH limit in a foggy blizzard.

I do know that "reasonable and prudent" was the exclusive rule on Montana's highways prior to the 55 MPH Federal NMSL law in the 1970s, and that they tried returning to it for a time after the NMSL was repealed. For whatever reason, it didn't work for them, and they went back to setting specific limits.

And the point of my reply is that speed limits are not artificially low, that's simply your contention, one that you have failed to provide any proof for.

Sorry, I'm not a librarian either. I'm satisfied that my position is correct and I have the same right (or lack thereof) to state it here that you do.

As far as our disagreement is concerned, it might help if we could drill down and find out exactly where our opinions diverge. Here are the premises I'm working from:

1) To optimize safe and efficient traffic flow, speed limits should be set by traffic engineers, and not by mayors, police chiefs, legislators, or soccer moms. (My main concern is highway speed limits, as I almost never find myself exceeding posted limits in populated areas, but I assert that this is true in all cases.)

2) However, not all speed limits are set by traffic engineers. It's indisputable that some are set for political reasons, and no, I am not going to "provide citations" for something this obvious. Subjectively, as my initial post in the thread stated, I'd go so far as to say that most limits are politically influenced. An organization such as www.motorists.org would be a better place to look for cases and statistics.

3) People who have the political authority to set or influence speed limits, and who are not qualified traffic engineers, almost always want lower limits than the engineers would advise setting for the conditions at hand.

From these I conclude that it cannot be the case that speed limits are always set at the optimal point for safe and efficient traffic flow. Experience as a driver suggests that speed limits are not commonly set at artificially high values. That leaves only one conclusion: that at least some speed limits are set artificially low.

Which specific assertion(s) do you disagree with, and why? I'd invite you to show this reply to your friends in traffic engineering as well, so we could see what areas they would agree/disagree with.