I'm in CA, and 80 mph here is only 15 over in most places and only 10 over in more rural areas. So 80 mph basically commuting speed.
Sorry to hear you are getting dinged for what is basically the high end of normal freeway speed here in CA.
Ha that is sure correct. In fact there is a local stretch of interstate where 85 is average, even in the slow lane of a 4-5 lane (per side) road. The fast two lanes go over 90 standard and you cannot safely remain in traffic going under 70 even in the slow lane (were one would have to merge a lot more and be at increased risk to begin as a result. The irony is if you go under 80 a lot more people will go around you constantly putting you at greater risk of an accident than just going with the flow.
I once tried to take a vehicle that topped out at 80, meaning it only operates at ~65 without being redlinned the whole time, from point a to b and it was a very unsafe and unenjoyable experience as dozens upon dozens of people continued to go around me at cut in front of me because I was merely doing the speed limit
I personaly would love if they started cracking down on people and reminded them it is called the "speed limit" for a reason, and not the "speed suggestion". If you don't like the limit, then get it changed. The limit is the limit, not the median, which is how most people view it.
For those who think the police are just hassling you, there is reasons the speed limit is what it is. It is not because people cannot control vehicles at higher speeds, it is because the survivability in most vehicles is decent between 55-65 MPH. With 65 being the top end, and why 55 was the speed limit for so long.
However a collision at 80+mph is far more likely to be fatal. Metal can only take so much force, and vehicles are designed to keep people safer at freeway speeds with things like crumple zones etc.
A crumple zone designed to work at 80 would not be very effective at 55, and a crumple zone designed to operate at the standard 55-65mph will not work well at 80+. The industry standards are for lower speeds.
I don't care how good of a driver you are. If you have a heart attack, have a tire blow out, brakes fail or other mechanical failure, sneeze the wrong way, or otherwise have a problem even as the "perfect" and capable high speed driver you think you are, your vehicle can still impact others at speeds above what they are designed to handle. Unless you drive a motorcycle you are endangering others, and that is moraly reprehensible.
In CA if you have an accident at such speeds and someone is injured you can be charged with a felony, and rightly so.
I see such careless endangerment no differently than recklessly firing a firearm in an unsafe and even posted location, and view an actual accident where someone is injured as a result as no different than recklessly firing a firearm in an unsafe location and accidently hitting someone with a round.
Both deserve strong punishment and were willful negligent decisions that put others at risk.
Unless driving to the hospital for an emergency, or shooting to stop a threat, neither are excusable.
The only difference is one has become acceptable because so many do it on a daily basis.
On top of that driving is not a constitutional right.
