Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

nyc.streetsblog.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 156 posts

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#141

Post by rationalist »

OutOfHere wrote: post #126
rationalist wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

People should be taught how to adjust their mirrors properly so that they do not have a blindspot. If a car is designed so that no amount of adjusting can get rid of the blindspot, then that car should be illegal (Chevy Malibu).

I don't believe that is possible. If it were possible, it wouldn't be called a blindspot. Of course a mirror should be well adjusted, but I don't see how it substitutes for checking the blindspot. Try it in a driving test; you will fail the test.

I literally have no blindspot in my vehicle, my parents' vehicles, or the vehicles I have rented except the Chevy Malibu.

When the mirrors are positioned properly, other cars transition from the side window, to the side mirror, to the rear mirror.

There is literally no spot that a vehicle or person standing in the next lane, is not visible.

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#142

Post by tptacek »

FireBeyond wrote: post #113
wahern wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In California cops, family members of cops, and related personnel (e.g. police union officials) can get a special insignia on their license. So when they're pulled over and are asked to present their license....

The FOP (Fraternal Order of Police). Also a thing in NY and NJ. Fun facts... the insignia you put on your license or on your car also has a thing like a registration tab... The FOP says its "to show your ongoing support", everyone else with a room temperature IQ knows its "to show you're 'paid up' on your protection money for the year". Oh, and some enterprising souls have created "counterfeit" FOP insignia and stick…

I think the FOP stickers are quite bad, but it's obviously not a "protection racket"; virtually nobody around here has them, and for a protection scheme to work there has to be some pressure to buy in.

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#143

Post by kennywinker »

keddad wrote: post #90
kennywinker wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jesus christ, 140kph?!? That’s fast. Max speed limit where i live is 120kph and that feels too fast for most roads.

It's really not, especially on a highway. Makes me sad to read about more and more speed restrictions - there is nothing wrong with those in areas there cars and pedestrians cross, but seeing a highway with a 110 (or sometimes even 80) speed limit just feels stupid. Sometimes I'm happy to live in a place with relatively modest speeding fines (also, you have to speed A LOT to loose your license over it, it's a very ra…

I feel like you live somewhere where highways are flat and straight. I don’t.

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#144

Post by kennywinker »

singron wrote: post #107
kennywinker wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jesus christ, 140kph?!? That’s fast. Max speed limit where i live is 120kph and that feels too fast for most roads.

For Americans, 120 kph is ~75mph and 140kph is ~85mph. I think there is a single road in the US with an 85 speed limit, and only some states use 75-80.

I’ve definitely driven 85mph on the I10 in texas. The roads are flat and straight, so it almost makes sense - but you have basically zero margin for error at those speeds. If I recall, the road fatality numbers for texas aren’t exactly good.

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#145

Post by ceejayoz »

ToValueFunfetti wrote: post #137
nkrisc wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If I don't trust my doctor, I can ignore them and find a new doctor. If I don't trust my therapist, I can ignore them and find a new therapist. If I don't trust my housekeeper, I can fire them and hire a new housekeeper. If I don't trust a police officer, it doesn't matter. If they detain me and order me to step out of my vehicle, I have to comply under threat of the law and violence. I don't get to only listen to po…

Are you saying you don't trust the people I mentioned for the reasons I mentioned? That a doctor who has demostrated a reckless disregard for his health outside of the law etc. etc.? Like, I get why trust is more important in this context, but I don't think it's at all normal to assume someone can't do their job because of decisions they make in their personal life.

Their point was pretty clear: you can’t opt out of a cop you don’t trust. You can opt out of seeing the unhealthy doctor.

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#146

Post by kennywinker »

Tade0 wrote: post #117
kennywinker wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Jesus christ, 140kph?!? That’s fast. Max speed limit where i live is 120kph and that feels too fast for most roads.

It was increased from 130km/h in the 21st century. What's surprising/weird/hilarious is the traffic fatality rate before and after the change: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Poland/mortality_traffic_ac... I'll let you google when that was so as not to spoil it.

It looks like it changed in 2011? The trend was already decidedly downward from 2000 to 2011, so it’s hard to say what if any impact raising the speed limit had. Xkcd 552

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#147

Post by FireBeyond »

wahern wrote: post #140
FireBeyond wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That in itself blows my mind, why on earth should someone see your membership in this order? It's not a LE agency, and in many states the FOP allows membership for retired cops. I do agree with what you're saying, though, but the issue to me is why that's even something that should show up when your plates are run, "Oh, you're a cop somewhere, or used to be".

I don't remember if the DMV status is actually FOP, or something else, but I knew a lawyer who worked with a police union who had this status. But that's just icing on the cake compared to stuff like https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_Enforcement_Officers%27_Bi... I have a friend who's a union leader (as in actually runs a sizeable union) and, in the eyes of most people, a straight-up socialist. He convinced me public…

What about the Federal register of LEOs who have been terminated or resigned to avoid termination? Very useful concept for transparency...

... but the police unions that represent approximately 70% of the nation's police have negotiated it into their CBAs that this register "cannot be used for hiring or promotional purposes".

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#148

Post by OutOfHere »

toraway wrote: post #60
OutOfHere wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am of two minds about it. On one hand, speeding alone when done by a mature highly-attentive driver isn't really dangerous no matter the limit, because the driver has enough expertise to know what his personal limit ought to be. The residual risk is more from immature drivers, the mistakes of other cars, cyclists, and pedestrians. I have been on both sides of it. I have been the speeder who can drive very safely, a…

I live near a middle school in the suburbs and it may come as a surprise but kids are frequently crossing a busy street using a regular, unprotected crosswalk.

It is an engineering problem. Almost all pedestrian concerns are engineering problems. If kids are doing this, they should be instructed repeatedly to use the painted crosswalk instead. If there are no painted crosswalks, ideally with a walk button to press, there should be more, potentially also with traffic lights. If this is insufficient, a well thought out and maintained stair-free bridge could be better.

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#149

Post by OutOfHere »

jcranmer wrote: post #100
OutOfHere wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I am of two minds about it. On one hand, speeding alone when done by a mature highly-attentive driver isn't really dangerous no matter the limit, because the driver has enough expertise to know what his personal limit ought to be. The residual risk is more from immature drivers, the mistakes of other cars, cyclists, and pedestrians. I have been on both sides of it. I have been the speeder who can drive very safely, a…

> the driver has enough expertise to know what his personal limit ought to be It is actually somewhat amusing that you worded this as "ought to be" rather than "is". Because one of the big problems with most drivers is they have an overly inflated idea of how competent they are at driving (I am not so churlish as to exclude myself from the category). And our system does nothing to bring drivers' beliefs about their c…

Speed limits below 30 are lazy copouts by lazy people that have for decades come in the way of instituting proper safety systems that don't require lowering the speed. Making roads narrow is worse; it is simply horrific. Extending your depraved logic, disallowing cars on the road would work even better. Your metric is one-sided in that it accounts for wanting pedestrian safety but not driver utility.

If you actually begin to use your head, there are other ways to lower collisions:

1. Make roads and lanes substantially wider. This allows pedestrians to be seen from the edges before they come in the front of a car.

2. Shoulder parking is a pathetic substitute for a absence of multilevel parking lots, so these lots should be constructed and used. The shoulder parking should be eliminated as it is very detrimental to pedestrian visibility.

3. There should be well-maintened painted crosswalks, with a walk button that actually works, also with dynamic traffic lights to go with them. These exist at some places in NYC. No-stair bridges also work if they stay maintained.

Re: To Protect and Swerve: NYPD Cop Has 547 Speeding Tickets

#150

Post by Tade0 »

kennywinker wrote: post #146
Tade0 wrote: post #117

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was increased from 130km/h in the 21st century. What's surprising/weird/hilarious is the traffic fatality rate before and after the change: https://www.theglobaleconomy.com/Poland/mortality_traffic_ac... I'll let you google when that was so as not to spoil it.

It looks like it changed in 2011? The trend was already decidedly downward from 2000 to 2011, so it’s hard to say what if any impact raising the speed limit had. Xkcd 552

Yes - the interesting bit is that this downward trend was stronger than the effect of this legislation.

Truth be told a lot of this has to do with most fatalities being that of pedestrians. Personally I witnessed two such accidents, fortunately minor ones. Both times it was a pedestrian crossing on their green, but the car turning right also having green.

Post reply on HN