https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/30/us/michigan-cyclists-killed-suv/index.html

Here's one link. Your favourite browser will yield more, sadly.
The article mentions that alcohol is suspected to be involved.

pH in Aptos

On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:19:02 AM UTC-7, pH wrote:
> https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/30/us/michigan-cyclists-killed-suv/index.html
>
> Here's one link. Your favourite browser will yield more, sadly.
> The article mentions that alcohol is suspected to be involved.

Of course, the REAL problem was not intoxication but the desire to speed well above the speed limit and no cop caring enough to enforce the speed laws.. Cars driving 100 mph or even faster are a common sight on the bay area bridges where there aren't any places for the cops to hide. Wouldn't you think that this would cause the Highway Patrol to actually patrol? There are now so few cops enforcing driving laws that people commonly run red lights at high speed. The streets are becoming the wild west. How long before you have to carry a gun to protect yourself from these people?

On Sun, 31 Jul 2022 11:24:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
<cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:

>On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:19:02 AM UTC-7, pH wrote:
>> https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/30/us/michigan-cyclists-killed-suv/index.html
>>
>> Here's one link. Your favourite browser will yield more, sadly.
>> The article mentions that alcohol is suspected to be involved.

>Of course, the REAL problem was not intoxication but the desire to speed well above the speed limit and no cop caring enough to enforce the speed laws. Cars driving 100 mph or even faster are a common sight on the bay area bridges where there aren't any places for the cops to hide. Wouldn't you think that this would cause the Highway Patrol to actually patrol? There are now so few cops enforcing driving laws that people commonly run red lights at high speed. The streets are becoming the wild west. How long before you have to carry a gun to protect yourself from these people?

Nice change of topic. You offer the choice of speeding, traffic
enforcement, and right to carry. You left out blaming the Democrats
for everything, but that's ok. I'll take speeding.

If you see the "common sight" of cars doing "100 mph or even faster"
on any of the bay area bridge traffic cameras, please grab a screen
capture and post it. One of these cameras should capture something
interesting:

Caltrans CCTV map and streaming video list
<https://cwwp2.dot.ca.gov/vm/iframemap.htm>
<https://cwwp2.dot.ca.gov/vm/streamlist.htm>

Otherwise, your BS might be yet another amazing fact, such as when you
announced in RBT that there were bus loads of illegal aliens being
driven from the central valley to San Leandro to help swing an
election.

Did you actually see anyone driving 100 mph or faster on any of the
bay area bridges? I have my doubts.

Speeding on the bridges:
<https://www.google.com/search?q=bay+area+bridge+high+speed+chase>

The bridges are never empty, even at night. If you were driving at
100 mph, and the traffic was going at 55 mph, you would risk ramming
the car ahead at 45 mph. Hitting anything at 45 mph is not pleasant.

A conventional automobile requires spoilers to keep the car on the
ground at speeds over about 70 mph. No spoilers and the car goes
airborne, especially if there is substantial airflow under the car.
The curved shape of the car top provides lift while the spoilers push
downward. Drive over a bump, and the car becomes an airfoil. Add
some wind (it doesn't take much) and you will lose control. Between
the rubber expansion joints, the reflective lane markers, and debris
in the roadway, you're going to leave the ground at some point. At
100 mph and without spoilers, you're going to flip or roll. If that's
not enough of a thrill, there's also the fog to simulate blind
driving.

You're correct that there are no CHP speed traps on the bridges, but
for the wrong reason. It's not that the CHP cars and motorcycles
don't have any place to hide. It's that it would be seriously unsafe
to chase a speeding car at 100 mph on a crowded bridge. It's much
easier and safer to stop a speeder at a toll both or off ramp.
<https://www.photoenforced.com/nocal.html>

Now, tell me again, did you actually see anyone driving 100 mph on any
bay area bridge, or is this another of your "common knowledge"
sources?

"Speeding on Bay Bridge. So many questions"
<https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/my14ai/speeding_on_bay_bridge_so_many_questions/>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
PO Box 272 http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Ben Lomond CA 95005-0272
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Sun, 31 Jul 2022 15:02:51 -0700, Jeff Liebermann <jeffl@cruzio.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 31 Jul 2022 11:24:58 -0700 (PDT), Tom Kunich
><cyclintom@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Sunday, July 31, 2022 at 11:19:02 AM UTC-7, pH wrote:
>>> https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/30/us/michigan-cyclists-killed-suv/index.html
>>>
>>> Here's one link. Your favourite browser will yield more, sadly.
>>> The article mentions that alcohol is suspected to be involved.
>
>>Of course, the REAL problem was not intoxication but the desire to speed well above the speed limit and no cop caring enough to enforce the speed laws. Cars driving 100 mph or even faster are a common sight on the bay area bridges where there aren't any places for the cops to hide. Wouldn't you think that this would cause the Highway Patrol to actually patrol? There are now so few cops enforcing driving laws that people commonly run red lights at high speed. The streets are becoming the wild west. How long before you have to carry a gun to protect yourself from these people?
>
>Nice change of topic. You offer the choice of speeding, traffic
>enforcement, and right to carry. You left out blaming the Democrats
>for everything, but that's ok. I'll take speeding.
>
>If you see the "common sight" of cars doing "100 mph or even faster"
>on any of the bay area bridge traffic cameras, please grab a screen
>capture and post it. One of these cameras should capture something
>interesting:
>
>Caltrans CCTV map and streaming video list
><https://cwwp2.dot.ca.gov/vm/iframemap.htm>
><https://cwwp2.dot.ca.gov/vm/streamlist.htm>
>
>Otherwise, your BS might be yet another amazing fact, such as when you
>announced in RBT that there were bus loads of illegal aliens being
>driven from the central valley to San Leandro to help swing an
>election.
>
>Did you actually see anyone driving 100 mph or faster on any of the
>bay area bridges? I have my doubts.
>
>Speeding on the bridges:
><https://www.google.com/search?q=bay+area+bridge+high+speed+chase>
>
>The bridges are never empty, even at night. If you were driving at
>100 mph, and the traffic was going at 55 mph, you would risk ramming
>the car ahead at 45 mph. Hitting anything at 45 mph is not pleasant.
>
>A conventional automobile requires spoilers to keep the car on the
>ground at speeds over about 70 mph. No spoilers and the car goes
>airborne, especially if there is substantial airflow under the car.
>The curved shape of the car top provides lift while the spoilers push
>downward. Drive over a bump, and the car becomes an airfoil. Add
>some wind (it doesn't take much) and you will lose control. Between
>the rubber expansion joints, the reflective lane markers, and debris
>in the roadway, you're going to leave the ground at some point. At
>100 mph and without spoilers, you're going to flip or roll. If that's
>not enough of a thrill, there's also the fog to simulate blind
>driving.
>
>You're correct that there are no CHP speed traps on the bridges, but
>for the wrong reason. It's not that the CHP cars and motorcycles
>don't have any place to hide. It's that it would be seriously unsafe
>to chase a speeding car at 100 mph on a crowded bridge. It's much
>easier and safer to stop a speeder at a toll both or off ramp.
><https://www.photoenforced.com/nocal.html>
>
>Now, tell me again, did you actually see anyone driving 100 mph on any
>bay area bridge, or is this another of your "common knowledge"
>sources?
>
>"Speeding on Bay Bridge. So many questions"
><https://www.reddit.com/r/sanfrancisco/comments/my14ai/speeding_on_bay_bridge_so_many_questions/>

Ah Jeff... you see, you just don't understand old Tommy. He doesn't
need proofs, research, or data. Why" Because Tommy Knows! He sits
there in his cheap little house and closes his eyes and ZAM! The truth
is shown him!

Rather like that Christian Guy, struck by lightening on the road to
Damascus he was blind for three days and then could "see it all".
Tommy does it even better. He just closes his eyes and he knows it
all, no lightening required.
--
Cheers,

John B.