News-Record.com

I am glad this is no more than an idle fancy. I'm all for environmentalist laws, but if this would be mandated, I am afraid that I would have to shoot myself...

In the foot so that I could get a fast ride on an ambulance rather than have to deal with speeds that make my 80-year-old grandparents enraged.

"It would reduce road rage".

Disagree, road rage would skyrocket. Everyone would become so frustrated by going so slow they would be target shooting on the interstates, especially at "slow pokes" doing 50 mph.

"It would reduce racing..."

Agree, I'm not a NASCAR fan but it sure would be boring watching those cars go around the track at 55 mph :)

I know, a race car doesn't have a license tag but I couldn't resist.

If kooky ideas like this took place it would be a boon to general aviation, many more people would get pilot's certificates.

I say we just inflate out tires and nail it.

"I propose legislation"

Well then, it's a done deal. I'm heading to the auto parts store to buy mine this morning before the prices go up.

Thanks for the heads up, George.

I fixed the letter for ya:

About 50 percent of the people in America really think they are better than everyone else. The other half don't like them.

Small portions of our elected officials are in politics for their own personal gains and also think they are better than everyone else. Now, we will see who thinks that way and who doesn't.

I do not know any elected official who cares about others who would not support the law that I’m going to suggest. Seldom can a law be passed that helps everyone.

I am proposing that a federal law be enacted that within 12 months would require that all the smugness be stifled.

Persons found to be smug after enaction of this legislation are to be imprisoned for 3 years, 8 months, 2 weeks, 5 days, 18 hours, 12 minutes and 54 seconds.

Please, America, see what this law will do.

It would cut down on whining, require less complaining while also affecting a serious decrease in tears and belly-aching.

No amendments, please, to this proposed federal law.

I have spoken to a lot of people personally about this proposed law and have not found anyone yet who would oppose it. Most of them say it should happen but it won’t happen because of bureaucracy in Washington.

If we all take this attitude, I know it will not happen. Only the citizens and the elected officials who care can make this happen. If it doesn’t happen, I have wasted my time writing this letter.

It is up to you, America. A copy of this letter has been sent to all members of Congress, in both the House and Senate, and both presidential candidates.

Bless your heart. Officials need speeding to have a punishment, but not enough of one to discourage people from doing it. A stiff fine, doubling for each offense, would solve the problem immediately.

$1000 1st offense, $2000 2nd, $4000 3rd, $8000 4th, etc.

But people would stop speeding. And the money would stop coming in, and the budget would suffer. Let's look at another traffic problem for perspective. Greensboro shut off their red-light cameras because our courts ruled the revenue had to go to schools and not to the city/camera contractor pyramid scheme.

"A Guilford County Court earlier this year ruled that under the state constitution, monetary proceeds from public safety programs must go to the school system, not a private contractor"
http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1G1-130419179.html
http://blog.news-record.com/staff/offtherecord/archives/2006/05/probably_a_fata.shtml

D.C.:
"The devices are popular for local governments because of the revenue they bring in; some $2.3 million to the District government in one recent month alone."
( one month alone- wow)
http://www.washtimes.com/news/2004/jul/07/20040707-090154-5151r/

And other cities in NC:
"City officials in Charlotte and Fayetteville, N.C., recently turned off all of their red light cameras, concluding that a state law diverting much of the revenue they generate in fines to schools meant their general funds were actually losing money, NBC affiliate WNCN of Raleigh reported."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23710970/
http://www.fayobserver.com/article?id=263355

Safety first, eh? "their general funds were actually losing money"

They need people to speed because they count on the income. Don't believe it's a problem with the bureaucracy in Washington. Look closer first.

Moronic idea, btw. Suppose I'm badly hurt and my wife drives me to the hospital. If I don't make it, and 15 more seconds (capable at ~70mph) would've made the difference, who should her lawyer contact?

So you've spoken to a "lot of people and no one would oppose it." You sound the lady from the New Yorker Magazine who told us that she couldn't understand how Nixon won the election because she didn't know a single person who voted for him!

Thanks for once again for proving my contention that liberaslism is merely a from of mental illness. If ignorance is bliss, liberals live in a constant blissful state!

"have not found anyone yet who would oppose it"

Must have not asked that many people. I count 8 that are in opposition so far.

"I know, a race car doesn't have a license tag but I couldn't resist."

Many amateur racers drive their cars on the road every day.

You are kidding right? Another idiotic suggestion for the waste basket. Now there are nine.

george, more government is always the solution to you whiney statists...why not make the speed limit 35? 50? 53? ....WHY?..because there will always be some hypenate in the left lane going 10 mph under the limit...now do you part and stay at home

"It would save lives, save gas, reduce serious injuries and accidents, save on auto repairs, save on insurance claims and premiums, save on law-enforcement expense, reduce the overload in our court system, reduce road rage, reduce racing and save on attorney’s fees."

Each and every one of these assertions are demonstrably wrong, Mr. Sowers.

Try again.