Originally Posted by LarThaL
I beg to differ. Speeding is most certainly not wrong. A given speed limit is determined by a whole slew of factors, not all of which are always present, yet it would present a logistical nightmare to set a differing speed limit for differing conditions.
Scenario #1: A 77 year-old guy with mild dementia. He is in a 12 year old pick-up that barely passes inspection, driving in freezing rain with minimum tread all-season tires. The speed limit is 65, and he is driving 62.
Scenario #2: A 38 year old PhD engineer. He is driving an e92 M3 on a clear, dry, deserted interstate early in the morning. The speed limit is 65 and he is driving 90.
Who do you think is "wrong" here. My contention is that the guy who is driving 62 is "wrong" even though he is under the speed limit, as he is posing a far greater risk to public safety than the guy going 90, who, IMO, is posing no threat to anyone whatsoever.
And how about a highway that crosses a state line with no change whatsoever in the road or environmental conditions, and yet the speed limit can change 10mph. Why? Why is it "wrong" on one side of the line and not "wrong" on the other.
I could go on and on, but I think you get my point.
Try this scenario in court and tell me the result.