It's likely because of the reason it was implemented. It was implemented specifically under the guise of school/children's safety. Being Seven Courts Elementary isn't open for classes on Saturday and Sunday...

Don't break the law, they won't generate revenue.

"Speeding is NOT a problem on seven courts drive and there is no evidence that any speeding on this road causes accidents, injuries, deaths, or unsafe driving conditions."

How can you NOT see a problem with speeding on Seven Courts Drive? Where do you live on the road? Have you ever tried to get across from one side of it to the other between 5-6pm? People are constantly speeding on that road and makes it nearly impossible at times to get across! I walk up and down Seven Courts on nice days and at least 10 times during that walk see speeding cars. I believe the camera has curbed some of the raceway between the school and pinedale since the box was placed. However, the took out the camera piece, YET AGAIN! What is with the county/equipment?

I walk for 90 minutes a day and cross seven courts drive at least twice a day without any issues, even during those times and I live on the hill after the circle. I cross there all the time with ZERO problems. How can so many people have problems crossing the street? It's never nearly impossible to cross the street, at least for me. I see people cross the street all the time, with dogs even. Runners and walkers have no issues crossing the street, even casual walkers, so why do you have so many problems with it? I'm sorry, but adults should know how to cross a street that they've lived on for years without a problem. Cars do NOT go SO fast down seven courts that you can't cross the street. I really don't know how you came to that conclusion, but that is your opinion which you're certainly entitled to. Cars speed on EVERY road EVERYWHERE because people drive at speeds they deem safe for both the road, familiarity and because they have complete control over their vehicle and know they can depend on their brakes if necessary. The cameras will have minimal effect, believe me. Speeding is not a problem, show me evidence that it is because as far as I can see, there is none.

WAKE UP MIKE WE LIVE IN BALTIMORE COUNTY NOT BALTIMORE CITY. Maybe if the police got dangerous/ignorant drivers off the road the roads would be safer and that is part of there job. How can you say you know everything going on around you when you drive when you don't even realize there are THREE CROSSWALKS currently on Seven Courts. You light by the elementary & senior center will not work. They have already done the research a couple of years ago and it is not a good place to put in a light. I know this because I was one of the parents begging for a solution to the growing problem of speeders on Seven Courts and how unsafe if is to turn out of the roads in that area. The decision was made by people that know a lot more then either of us know.

Interesting answer, I learned something new today. :) Thank you, however, the first 20-30 years of the existance of automobiles was over a century ago. I'm talking about the 70's and 80's. Cars have some a long way especially in the last decade and are much lighter now than they were back then which also makes handling, braking and handling under braking MUCH better and much more responsive. Cars today are so forgiving when it comes to things like that and as someone mentioned in another thread, during the Carter administration, the Federal Government started dictating speed limit laws because we were running out of oil. Sounds to me they were lowered to slow the use of oil and for no other reason and things never changed from there as far as speed limits and traffic laws go.

So, why are we still stuck back there? Let the traffic guys do their studies and figure out the appropriate speed limits based on individual roads and average speeds. There's no need for the Carter administration's mandates to still be in effect today. That seems kind of silly.

Just last year, the NY Times posted an article that traffic deaths are the lowest they've been in 60 years and auto accidents in general have been on the decline for years as well. Google it, there are too many links to post here. Interestingly though, motorcycle accidents have stayed the same.

As I said before, cars are more forgiving, the bend in the right places and people suffer less injuries from accidents as well as there being fewer of them in general. I attribute this more to technology than driving skill, but some people can just handle a car, I'm one of them and some people just... cant. It doesn't seem to be affecting the yearly decline in auto accidents and fatalities, though, so speeding and all this other nonsense must not be this huge monster everyone makes it out to be after all, huh?

Search google for "are auto accidents on the decline" and check out all the results.

I would counter your argument by saying there is always risk when driving a car at any speed and there will ALWAYS be car accidents. You will never have a number of 0 or even under 1,000. Think about this, there are what, 300 million people living in this country and your stats show roughly 5,000 automobile deaths a year?

About 1,300 people die on planes every year too, so how would that relate? Should we slow down planes too or continue to make them faster for more efficient air travel. It seems your goal is a zero death toll.

I would like to know how many of those accidents you cited were related to speeding as opposed to improper lane changes, cell phone usage, improper merging, reckless driving, fiddling with the radio or reaching under car seats or searching the car for missing items and things like that. Those numbers do not prove that speeding causes more accidents nor does it show that speed limits are appropriate or even the main cause of accidents.

I GUARANTEE you, cell phones cause more accidents than speeding. Speeding is only dangerous, to me, if its a guy going 20+ mph faster than everyone else, weaving all over the place, not using turn signals and, basically, driving like he just did a line of coke off the dash. Those people are the problem. People driving 80 in the fast lane on the highways are not the problem. People exceeding the speed limit by 12 or even 15 mph are not the problem.

The problem are people who drive, at ANY speed, while being distracted by cell phones, fiddling with radios or whatever it is people do in cars that take their eyes off the road. Even driving tired, driving DRUNK, how many of those people died from alcohol related accidents?

A zero death toll is unreasonable and, in fact, impossible. Look at how many people die a year from modern medicine such as surgical errors, death by medication, bedsores. A few years ago, it was over three million.

Look, all I'm saying is there will always be deaths from driving and there are always risks when driving a car. Your stats are nice, but they only show half the picture. What were the circumstances behind those deaths? What other factors were involved? Those numbers don't really prove anything except the end result and considering our population, I'd say those numbers are pretty solid. Of course, it's sad when ANYONE dies, but there is always risk with cars, always. I just am not in favor of living in fear of these things. If car technology advances, so should the laws and speed limits. I would bet that even with my suggestions put in place, you would not see a rise in deaths on the road. I think you'd see less, to be honest.

For an example of "more tolerance = less problems", do you know what country in the world has the fewest drug problems? Portugal. Know why? All drugs there are legal and people with problems get treatment, not thrown in prison. That may not relate too well to the conversation, I guess, but I am implying that more tolerance on the roads and squeezing people less would not only make drivers feel safer in the long run, but it would make roads safer as well. Otherwise, there's no point in advancing technology. I do not believe that speed limit and traffic laws of 30 years ago are still "appopriate" now in 2012 when cars are completely different machines with completely different capabilities. No WAY can that be accurate and the amount of people who speed should be all the evidence you need that the speed limits are too LOW and people feel safe driving faster than said speed limits. I'm telling you, everyone does it. Everyone, except the elderly.

I brought this up before too and got flamed for it, but people over a certain age should not be allowed to drive or should be tested regularly to make sure they are still able to drive safely. Elderly drivers are dangerous drivers when they get to the point where they barely even know what's going on in front of their car much less to the sides and rear. There should be something done about that. Test them at a certain age and make SURE they still have the faculties to drive safely. I swear, these are the ones going 20 in 25mph zones.

First thing is ban non-hands free phone usage. First offense, 200 dollar fine no points. Primary offense. The state legislature - both parties - haven't had the stones to do this. Too "unpopular".

Now, if we take cell phone use out of the equation, I totally agree with your opinion on minimum speed limits. I would be hesitant to raise speed limit maximums though, simply because it'll result in higher gas prices (lower economy) and more QQ about the prices of gasoline. Although I agree with the midnight to 6 am bit.

but yeah, all of your suggestions make sense. There are TONS of aggressive drivers in this city/county. They are all allergic to turn signals and manners.

You can drive 75 and not drive impolitely/irresponsibly. It just takes a bit of forcing of the average local driver's mindset.

Mike is apparently a world class, all-pro driver. What's to stop the drivers who are not from continuing to drive like idiots, but at higher speeds. Everybody thinks they are the best drivers out there, and we should all get out of their way.

Oh, Other Tim, how I've missed you so. lol You flatter me and yes, I know the limits of my vehicle well. All pro driver? You're too kind, all I'm saying is I have never driven so fast in a car that I felt like I had anything less than full control. I am cautious when necessary and aggressive when it's safe to be. I don't think anyone should get out of my way, I just go around them. :) If I can't go around them, I just chill out about 2-3 car lengths behind, but I'll get on the gas and make a pass if I see an opening on a two lane highway where I can do it safely, you bet. Like I said, I love the acceleration part of the cars more than the top speed part and I admit, I do love to overtake people, but I have a lot to live for and I do not have a death wish nor do I wish for my actions to cause harm to anyone else. There is a balance between driving styles that, apparently, most exist for many people. For me? The line is well defined. I do just fine. I learned where this line was the hard way by being a reckless driver when I was a teenager and getting a bunch of speeding tickets, but I haven't been pulled over in what, nine years now? I am much more cautious than I used to be, but I also realize there is a time and place for everything plus it feels great when the opportunity arises to rev up that engine. :) I'm so sorry that you miss out on all the fun parts of driving a car, Other Tim.

Evets, I disagree with frequency jamming devices. Problems with cell phone use are, first off, you only have one hand free. Second, you have to constantly hold the phone to your ear, it's as if you were only born with one arm. Those two alone mean less control over the car because you have one hand on the wheel most of the time. Those things combined with the conversation and you have, essentially, a one handed drunk driver.

A hands free device eliminates two of those problems, that's why they make them. It's certainly safer than holding the phone and if we're going to ban hands free devices, we should also ban having passengers in the car and if you MUST have passengers, no talking!! C'mon, Evets. Hands free devices, I'm fine with. It's just like talking with someone sitting next to you in the car. Are we now saying talking with your friend in the passenger or back seat is a driving hazard?

Kind of missed my point, Mike. No matter how good a driver you are, other people who are reckless drivers will exceed the speed limit no matter how high the limit. We have a law against murder. We would not need it if people acted sensibly. Same with driving laws.

You're right, there always will be people who will exceed the speed limit, but simply exceeding the speed limit does not mean you deserve to be penalized. Exceeding by 20mph, sure, and give them harsh penalties as opposed to penalizing everyone. It depends how you drive while you're going 12-15 over the limit. Are you weaving? Are you endangering anyone's lives? Are you being a menace on the roads or are you just driving along not bothering anyone.

Speeding should be dealt with on a case by case basis, not a blanket "one size fits all" policy. It's not only stupid, but it penalizes the ones who are driving safely.

Except, as I said, people should be allowed higher speed limits on beltways. Speed limit of 75mph with a minimum of 65mph, that's the way it should be. Highways were built so people could drive FAST to get to their location quicker. No people walking around, no houses, just cars and straight, open road ahead. If you can't handle those kinds of speeds in those conditions, what's the point of even having them?

There should also be higher speed limits not only in general during daytime hours by 5-15mph, but there should be even more leniency between the hours of, say 11pm-6am when roads are mostly empty and people are in bed. Weekends, maybe a little different. At the very least, more cops on the road watching out for drunk drivers, but speed limits should be raised during after hours as well.

"Kind of missed my point, Mike. No matter how good a driver you are, other people who are reckless drivers will exceed the speed limit no matter how high the limit. We have a law against murder. We would not need it if people acted sensibly. Same with driving laws."

I will reply directly to this. You are correct, even if speed limits were raised, people would still speed, only faster. Here's how you deal with it. Keep the 12mph buffer, make it 15mph after hours and leniency with empty stop signs and stop lights and let people use common sense. For the ones that abuse those privileges, harsher punishments! More points on the record, more fines, maybe even lose your license for a month after a second offense and a couple days in jail. Punish the bad drivers and leave the good ones alone.

As for murder, people will always kill others especially as long as things like the US, organized religion and the middle east exist because all three love to kill others. We would not need laws if everyone acted sensibly, you're right, but that is heaven you speak of if you believe in that sort of thing. We live in a very different world with many laws and many laws that need to be changed and updated with the times. The majority of people know how to act sensibly, I just don't see the point in punishing them because of the ones who don't act sensibly. Punish them harsher, give them less leniency, and really drive that message home. I think we fall short with that in this country.

...and come down harder on those highly aggressive drivers that run lights and stop signs (even though the cops do it constantly, so that tells me that it's ok to do so long as you use discression (spelled that wrong). Go after the ones causing the problems, not everyone just because of a few. I'm totally with you on that one. If a driver shows he can drive fast, change lanes and generally drive without endangering lives, just let them go. Get the ones that are driving as if they own the road and don't care who they cut off and actually show some kind of compassion and awareness of other drivers.

Does seem a shame to keep beating it, doesn't it?

Jeanne, I agree with you. I had some white high end car pass me this morning (I was doing 30 towards Joppa) and of course right after the camera the *wonderful* driver sped up to over 40, if not 50 where the bends in the road start. I just shook my head... they got stuck at the light anyways which made me laugh.

First off, Jeanne, driving 42mph is legal on seven courts drive. Second, if you have cars flying past you and refuse to speed up with the flow of traffic, you are the one who is the hazard on the road, not them because as a driver, it is your responsibility to keep up with the flow of traffic, not expect everyone else to slow down for you. Tailgating is WRONG and TBH, I would have hit the brakes just to tick him off and make him pass me. I HATE tailgaters. The law that you keep talking about allows 12mph over, so you can talk about it being 5mph all you want, 12 mph is legal and so is 15 apparently because cops don't pull people over unless they are really doing something wrong these days it seems and good for them. Jeanne, you need to learn to keep up with the flow of traffic. If EVERYONE is driving faster than you, it means you are driving too slow, period and are a hazard to everyone else. You might as well be driving a tractor to a farm site, that's how much you obstruct traffic when you cause those situations.
Yes, SCD is lined with houses, but this is not your typical residential street. It is wide enough to handle four cars driving side by side. The houses are far enough from the road that no one is in danger. I don't really think you realize how WIDE this road is and kids don't run out into the road, seniors from Seven Oaks don't run out into the road. Put a traffic light and a crosswalk there if it's so dangerous, but of course, we don't want things that make sense.

People do obey the law. The slow drivers who REFUSE to keep up with the flow of traffic are the ones causing more problems on the roads than the ones driving faster. Cops allow it, you see how fast cops drive around this area sometimes? You see how often they run stop signs and red lights for the hell of it? Driving 40mph down SCD is within the law. If you refuse to acknowledge that and are waiting for everyone to drive slow like you, you'll remain in this confused state. Traffic laws are more lenient and they should be. If you can't keep up with the flow of traffic and you have people going around you, that's your fault to be honest and it SHOULD tell you that you're driving too slow. Instead, it's everyone else's fault. Adapt to the times, Jeanne. They've passed you by. :) SCD is a straight, wide, road that is a two lane highway for half of it's distance. What do you expect? You again in your post admit speed cameras don't work, but still support them instead of thinking of better solutions. It really is starting to get laughable now. You support things that don't work, then get mad when they don't work. What did you expect? Cops have better things to do than sit around pulling people over all day. If they did that, all of Nottingham would be ticketed in a month. The times have changed, change with them and stop resisting and blaming everyone else because your "solutions" don't work. Think of better ones or listen to people who have better solutions.

Technically, 42 mph isn't legal. In theory, the camera shouldn't get you doing that. However...

cameras and radar appartus need calibration occasionally. I suspect this is why they set the parameters so liberally. If one believed they were going 10 over, and complained they got 'snapped', I'd say stop speeding.

What Jeanne says is true though, people drive 45-50 on the front 1/2 mile of Seven Courts consistently. Nothing other then some nice bumps will slow these a-holes down.

I personally go out of my way to force them to slow down if I can, by straddling the middle (when there are not, offically, two lanes) while going around 35 in the 30. If we are in the two lanes marked section, as it's obviously illegal.
They can tailgate me all they want, zero cares here. Usually its someone with their head cocked in the 2/8 o'clock position anyway (i.e. on their cell phone)

Victoria, I do that too, I'll speed up because sometimes, you can catch that light in time to get through it, but once I see I can't, I slow down again way before I even get to Weis. Since when is passing someone reckless driving? Again, this is EVIDENCE that speed cameras don't work. If you guys insist on doing things that don't work, don't sit here and complain about how they don't work when you KNOW they don't work. Traffic light at Seven Oaks, crosswalk, that's the solution that will slow people down in this area of the road but nooo, you want these cameras that, by your own admittance, don't work. They don't work ANYWHERE. It's nothing but an attempt at revenue.

Back to common sense. People just don't know how to use it anymore and we can say we're beating the dead horse, but it's the same issues you guys are complaining about with the same solutions that you just refuse to acknowledge or even consider. It's your way or no way. Well guess what? Laws are changing, change with them, stop getting behind "solutions" you know don't work and complaining about it when they don't work and start getting behind solutions that do work. You guys shoot yourselves in the foot, you know.

haha Tim, straddling the "phantom" two lane area. I still go around, but it's kind of disturbing that you get some kind of pleasure out of creating a line of cars 5-7 cars long just because you can. That's kind of ... A-holish, no offense intended. If it was a big problem, it would have been dealt with a long time ago. Regardless of people's speed, people have proven, at least on SCD, that fast driving does not cause accidents. You idiots who insist on taking the law into your own hands and straddling the road like you own it and going 10mph slower than everyone else are the ones that are going to end up causing accidents.

By the way, there has always been a leniency with speed limits though I always thought it was 10, not 12, and this leniency seems to apply everywhere. Like I said, I drive through speed traps going 10-15mph over all the time, in a safe manner of course, and never get stopped. It's the leniency in general. These "reckless, no good hooligan speeders" aren't causing accidents or any significant problem on the roads, so its becoming a non-issue and it should be. Cops have better things to do anyway like, I don't know, go out and stop some real crime or something.

Mike: None taken!
For me, it's no more a-holish then speeding unsafely. I'm the one following the speed limit (or somewhat close to it).

It is a problem, and it'll never be handled because county code prevents real fixes to the problem.

Additionally, any leniency given by police officers is by their choice and theirs alone. Of course, they may be instructed accordingly, but this does not change the actual speed limit as noted by signage.
If you are going 35, you are speeding. So yes, in that sense, tehcnially I speed to :) Just slightly, compared to other maniacs.

Haha, yeah, like I said before, everyone speeds because the limits are too low. That's the whole point. Driving 40mph down seven courts is not unsafe especially in the area in question. That is not driving like a maniac.

My definition of driving like a maniac is 20mph over, changing lanes in traffic without signaling and just having a general disregard for other drivers on the road and cutting people off. That is driving like a maniac, not driving 40mph in a straight line. Straddling a "two lane" road just to take the law into your own hands is more "maniacal" than driving 40mph through this area IMO. Just let people go around you, what's the big deal? The cops will eventually get the ones causing the real problems, they don't need you doing things like increasing risks of accidents by straddling the road. Even cops treat that area as two lanes, I see it all the time. You pick a side to drive on and drive on it. That's how it works and that's how it's worked since I've lived here, 25 years. People are expected to handle that part of the road in that way because that's just how it works, even for cops.

I would urge you to stop doing that and just let people pass you. You don't own the road, so don't drive like you do otherwise, you're no better than the ones you are criticizing only you are doing more to cause accidents than they are.

Mike: We'll agree to disagree then.

You say everyone speeds because the limit it too low.
I say everyone speeds because they are self-absorbed and irresponsible, driving that speed in a RESIDENTIAL area.

This isn't the interstate we're talking about, or a highway.

and yes, I AM better then those who would speed past me and potentially put residents walking on the sidewalks, or kids occasionally recklessly crossing the street at risk.
We can agree to disagree on that as well, but it won't stop me from situationally doing it.

Agree to disagree, indeed, but I will have my say as well anyway.

Seven courts drive is not your typical residential street. After Pinedale, there are what, six houses along the street? After that, it pretty much is a low class highway especially due to how wide it is. It was obviously designed for heavy driving. It's a straight, wide open road where no one has ever been injured due to speeding. Non issue, period.

No, it's not an interstate or a highway which is why the speed limit shouldnt be any higher than 40mph past Pinedale, but that IS appropriate for that stretch of road. Don't complain about the school unless you're going to put a traffic light and a crosswalk there. Otherwise, just leave it alone because it shows an unwillingness to deal with that situation rationally and effectively.

Oh, so now you're talking like some elitist driver? lol You're now "better" than everyone else because a race between you and a snail would be a photo finish? Please. Sidewalks? When has anyone driven on the sidewalk and hit someone on SCD? Kids recklessly crossing the street? THEIR FAULT if they get hit, not mine, not yours, not the elderly man going 20mph that broke some kid's legs. It's the fault of the PERSON crossing the street because the CARS have the right of way. Do not transfer blame when it's convenient for your argument. You want residents to have the right of way? Traffic light, crosswalk, end of discussion.

Mike: I'd wager I'm a better, more attentive driver then 90 if not 95% of the drivers in this county. They really are bad around here.

Drivers have a responsibilty to look out for pedestrians. It doesn't need to be legislated. A lot of legislation (generically speaking) wouldn't be needed if people (again, generically speaking) just used good sense and looked out for each other.

Again, we agree on most concepts here, it's all good on this end.

Tim, I'd bet you're right about being a very attentive and compassionate driver. I am too, we just go about it in different ways, I guess. I like driving fast, but give myself plenty of time to slow down if necessary and will slow down if I have any doubt at all that I may have to up ahead. Open road? Different story. :)

Where I disagree is that drivers have the (primary) responsibility to look out for pedestrians, at least ones that run out into the street without looking. I always notice when there are people on the sidewalk or looking to cross the street and if they make a dash across, I slow down and let them and think nothing of it. The bottom line is, on the roads where there are no crosswalks, it is the responsibility of the pedestrian to look both ways and make sure it's safe to cross before they even take a single step onto the road. Cars have the right of way, pedestrians are the ones who are responsible to look out for the cars. That doesn't mean I'm saying drivers should not be aware of pedestrians, but they shouldn't be running out in front of cars and expecting them to slam on their brakes either.

I agree with everything else. You start punishing the truly (by my standards) maniacal drivers, you'll see these situations improve. Harsher penalties is a good start and will make people think twice and pay more attention to the road because who wants to lose their license or pay more car insurance especially in these days?

Mike:
Completely agree with the aggressive driving. Anyone with common sense will say that a driver driving 12 over but swerving in between lanes on the highway is much more dangerous then another guy just going 20 over with no traffic around them.

I've been impressed with the gen pop around here lately. Specifically with 3 or 4 way stop signs. Years ago when I first moved here, it was like a foreign concept to drivers here.

I do agree with this commentary though. Speed cameras aren't the optimal answer in most scemarios because their sphere of influence is small. It doesn't mean I hate them though, I don't mind their existence. They just have very, very limited value compared to other options. As I mentioned previously, we literally cannot get better and less effective means of speed management on that first mile stretch of Seven Courts do to the nature of the road itself - at least at this point in time. This makes real solutions very limited.

We fundamentally agree on the important things, just with some variances in technicalities. As always, I enjoy the discourse on this stuff (dead horse or not).

I guess I just look at this as a parent now, and it'll be my kid walking on those sidewalks before I know it!

I equally enjoy the discussions on these forums. I love to debate just in case that's not obvious (ha ha). There are better options than speed cameras, definitely, but people seem to have this tunnel vision when it comes to this topic. "It's the speeders! It's all the speeders, slow people down! That's the only solution! Speed cameras, that's it!" when people agree on here that they aren't even effective at curbing speeding at all. I think people need to open their minds a little bit more on subjects like this and hopefully, these conversations do just that. The first mile of SCD is a two lane highway, it really is, and 40mph is reasonable completely. After Pinedale, 35 is good IMO. There is just so much space, it's not a tight or narrow street. Residential roads don't get any wider than SCD which is why I am for these increased speed limits as well as the good visibility you have of oncoming traffic on most of the street. After the circle, it should be 30mph. That, to me, is completely sensible.
No one is driving on sidewalks unless they are drunk and in most cases, they'd hit a parked car before they even made it to the sidewalk. I don't really see where you're coming from on that one, to be honest especially since it never happens and never would with a sober (or non hands free cell phone user) driver.
I care about the kids too and of course, I once was one, but I was taught the proper way to cross the street, so maybe that's a focus point for parents.

Mike: Oh hell, if we want to get into parenting failures in this generation...it wouldn't take us long to flesh that out.

I guess I just take a much more passive tack these days when driving on residential roads. Interstate? I'll go with the flow up until about 78-80.

Other Tim - I have been a runner and cyclist for going on 42 years. I cannot agree more with you about people at stop signs when turning right (and red lights) who think it is perfectly OK to roll through a stop sign or (red light if turning right) if no car is coming form the left. People roll up to the top sign, look left, keep on rolling and often are shocked to see someone to their right (because most people never look to their right) as they roll through the sign. And what is their reaction? They jam on the brakes, beep the horn at you, and often swear at you for being in their way. On my bike, I stop at stop signs, then often have to stop again in the intersection as others cars roll through as if I am not there. STOP means STOP. You stop, look left, right, then left again before proceeding. And in Maryland, all pedestrians have the right of way at any traffic controlled intersection (that means a stop sign, red light, yield sign, etc.), even if no painted crosswalk is present.

IMO, most people's driving habits change markedly when they become parents, and even more so when their kids are old enough to walk and/or ride their bikes in the community. At least I know that was true for me. You realize that everyone out there is someone's kid, or father, mother, brother, sister, etc.

My last question on here for Mike: Where are you in such a hurry to get to?

Sorry to apply another lashing to that poor dead horse. What did he do to deserve this?

Haha Your whole post shows you've hardly read anything I've said in regards to any of that stuff. If i "think" no one is around even though I look both ways at least three times before I roll through. Slow drivers, over cautious drivers cause more accidents because they dont know how the F to drive. Yeah, haven't read a word I said if you think I don't "look around" first. I swear, you don't read anything and just make assumptions, twist words into what you want to believe and then run with it. Traffic laws are outdated, cops drive any way they want and yep, just leave out the best idea in the whole discussion of putting a TRAFFIC LIGHT in front of seven oaks with a CROSSWALK. Completely ignored and dismissed. Yeah, you don't really read anything I write. Pick things out and run with it. If I'm such a threat, I'd have a record and wouldn't even have a license. I know people who have lost their license because they are threats and drive like maniacs.

People do drive as fast as they deem safe and what do you know, less accidents, less deaths and no issues on seven courts drive. You sir are the moron who is the selective reader. Keeping up with the flow of traffic. As a matter of fact, in NJ, it is PROHIBITED from blocking traffic through slow driving because it is PROVEN that it causes accidents because collisions are caused by people driving too slowly and backing up traffic. FACT, and its a FACT everywhere else too.

The officer also said that part of the problem with increased speeding and dangerous drivers is because you can use Seven Courts as a short cut between Joppa & Harford roads.
Pedestrians are suposed to look both ways before they cross the road just like drivers are suposed to stop (or yield at circle) and look both ways before continuing.
People have to get their license renewed every five years, why not also have a test each 5-10 years to see if they can still drive following the law? It should be both in the car and written to get a complete picture of the driving ability imo.

You keep saying things and then when confronted say that's not what you said.
Now you say "It is the LAW to keep up with the flow of traffic". That simply is not true if you are doing the speed limit, or even a little under it.
You say "In Florida, it is LAW that slower traffic stay to the right and if someone comes up behind you going faster, it is the LAW that you move over and let him past." According to this statement, if I am driving 30mph in a 30mph zone on a 2 lane road, I must pull over to the shoulder to let you pass. Do you even believe some of the lies you post?
You say "The LENIENCY means that 12 mph over (42mph) is LEGAL on seven courts drive. Hear that? LEGAL!" Maybe in your twisted brain, but not according to the law. You can be legally ticketed for doing 39 in a 30mph zone, and even get a point for doing so if pulled over by a cop.
Twist the laws any way you want, (hopefully you will one day lose your license), but twisting does not make it fact.

LOL Other TIm, all you've done most of our conversation is twist my words, so please don't lecture me about that. That thing about Florida is Florida law, look it up. So is the law about NJ, where it is prohibited to drive so slow that you are backing up traffic because, as I've said since the beginning, it slows traffic and CAUSES ACCIDENTS which is what you people put others at risk for.
You think the whole world revolves around you and we should all drive like you and if we don't, we're unsafe drivers who don't deserve a license and you're implying that I'm full of myself? You look at the law by the letter, not the spirit and the spirit of the law is to protect people. In other words, you don't arrest someone for doing something if it's not dangerous at the time it's being done. You arrogant people who want to hog the middle of the road are the "morons" and in that case, you should get honked at and you should get tailgated because you are deliberately slowing down traffic because YOU are selfish and think everyone should live the same way YOU do because you're acting like an elitist snob. Sorry, at that point, it comes with the territory. Maybe that's why everyone honks at you, Other Tim, because you drive like an arrogant, selfish A-hole? Not that you ARE one, just that you drive like one. Maybe that's why because I don't get honked at and I rarely ever see other drivers get honked at, so maybe you're the one driving like a moron. Change w/times or get the F out of TW!

..and BTW, I will never lose my license and will likely get less than two tickets the rest of my life. I have friends and know people who scare the S out of me when driving and I drive nothing like them. Know what happens to them? They get tickets, they get points, they get raised insurance and eventually, they lose their license for six months or however long. I have SEEN what TRUE reckless, dangerous driving is both from the seat of my own car and from the passenger seat of others and I drive nothing like them. That's why I've had a clean record for nine years, its not luck, its called knowing how to drive an F'n car while using common sense and not only knowing there's a time a place for everything, but knowing when those times are. Common sense and critical, independent thinking which is something you lost a long time ago, my friend.

Still twisting, Mike. Earlier you said people should never honk or tailgate, now you say it's OK if I am not going fast enough for you.
You implied that in Florida I would need to pull to the shoulder on a 2 lane road to let speeders (lawbreakers) pass. I don't need to look up Florida law, because what you said makes no sense. You look it up, show me, and I will apologize.
While on a road with 2 or more travel lanes, the slower drivers should stay in the right lane. I always do, but there is no way there is any state that dictates all cars must drive at the same speed, especially if that speed exceeds the speed limit by your LEGAL 12 MPH (your words, not mine).
(Funny story related to that. I was in court with my son for a traffic violation. One of the people before us tried to use the excuse for speeding was that he was keeping up with traffic, and asked the judge why he was the only one pulled over. The judge asked him if he had ever been fishing. When he said he had, the judge asked him if he ever caught all the fish.)
Also keep in mind that I must be in the left lane sometimes, such as for left exits off highways (airport exit off 295, for example.)
I do not think the world revolves around me. I simply believe in obeying the law, and will not be bullied into breaking the law.
One final thing: be careful when you look both ways 3 times while rolling through stop signs. You could get whiplash twisting your head that fast.
Got to go- out of space.

Obviously, the MAJORITY of people don't agree with you or the others in this thread that agree with you. Maybe there should be a vote. Since the majority of drivers can drive safely at higher speeds, that tells me the laws are behind the times. It does not tell me you should fight what (obviously) the majority feel is safe over what a handful of people feel. It's called things change, the world changes, technology changes and laws should change with them. Isn't that the whole supposed point of voting? The majority rules, not the minority? Though I still think elections are fixed, that's the spirit of it all, is it not? If the majority feels safe driving at 35-45mph, no one is being hurt, no one is being killed, no sidewalks are being driven on to pass people and everyone is safe, then the ones that need to "get over it" are you guys. It's amusing that people think that traffic laws from 30 years ago are still appropriate after 30 years of advancement. That's just hilarious to me. Why not just keep them that way for the next 100 years when every car is capable of 200mph and can drive safer at 100mph than someone like you can at 30mph. It's called advancement and all you people want is regression and to fight technology and fight advancement. Do you remember how much police fought when they had to read miranda rights to people? They thought it was the end of the world! Change is needed in the forward direction, not being stuck in the Carter administration.

I still don't AGREE with tailgating, but if you are being tailgated because you are hogging the road and being honked at, that should tell you something about the lack of your driving skills. I don't honk, I don't tailgate and I don't agree with tailgating, but if you people are being tailgated all the time? Why do people tailgate? Simple, you're driving too slow and not allowing them to pass. On a single lane road, it's different. If I am being tailgated, I will usually speed up and if someone got pulled over, the cops ALWAYS go for the tailing car, not the leading car or the middle cars.

In Florida, when did I mention the shoulder? If you are in the left lane and you are slowing up traffic, its the law that you pull over to the right lane and let them pass. Right lane = slow drivers. Left lane = fast drivers. No rolling roadblocks, which is disrespectful in itself anyway. THe 12mph is the leniency in speed camera zones anyway, it's clearly stated. Keeping up with the flow of traffic is doing so within reason, otherwise, as NJ law says, you're breaking the law there because you are driving too slow and causing traffic build ups and accidents. I know this because I know a few people from NJ and did verify it on the net somewhere. I'll look for it again later, but it is the truth. If you're speeding faster than everyone else, obviously, you're creating your own flow, not keeping up with the existing one. Big difference.

The laws will change as this becomes a bigger issue, first off because there is too much REAL crime going on and is on the rise. Baltimore City cops need more manpower and that's where more cops should be, not in suburbs issuing tickets where few accidents happen and people aren't getting hurt or killed. Also, what will you do, issue the entire state of MD speeding tickets? You wanna talk about whiplash? Wait until the courts get thousands of people in for petty traffic offenses. It'll never happen, laws will change before then. The minority (you) should not and does not have the power or right to change the laws for the majority (the rest of us), it's the other way around.
I slow down long before I even reach a stop sign and by the way, I do have eyes with working muscles, so using that along with my neck makes it easy and fast to scan the area without "whiplash", but thanks for your concern.No one (not even me, even though you think so) is saying people should just drive any way they want whenever they want, but if you are slowing down traffic and blocking the road, of course people will tailgate you (not me, but plenty would though again, I don't agree with it, but I understand it happens and why it happens) and you're being honked at, it's probably because you are being a "menace" to other drivers and impeding the flow of traffic. If one day you are in a car accident, which I pray you aren't, it will probably be more because of your driving than theirs. You're slow.

Yeah, well I verified everything I said on the net somewhere, too. I'll look for it again later, too.

" Driving Too Slowly
A motorist should always try to keep up with the normal flow of traffic, while not exceeding the posted speed limit. Some collisions are caused by driving too slowly and backing up traffic. When road surfaces and traffic are normal, New Jersey law prohibits blocking traffic through slow driving.

If vehicle problems prevent a motorist from keeping up with the normal flow of traffic, he/she should pull off the road and activate hazard lights. "

Of course, it does say without exceeding the posted speed limit, but that is impossible in today's age of living., but it clearly says collisions are caused by driving too slow and backing up traffic.
Bottom line is the laws are outdated especially the speed limits. Keep making cars that accelerate from 0-60 in 4-6 seconds available to the public, but make it illegal to use it. Keep making cars that can exceed 100mph, but make it illegal to go more than 60. Sounds like the fund raising tour and the automakers are working together, doesn't it? The appeal of buying a fast car is to... drive fast! Again, why is this legal? Why are these cars legal and why do they continue to advance in technology in every way if its ILLEGAL to use it? What sense does that make? Traffic laws have to and will change. THe majority rules cops don't have the manpower or the time to sit around pulling people over when people are commiting real crimes. The laws are outdated, same with drug laws, and need to catch up to the times.

http://www.state.nj.us/mvc/manuals/chap_04_01.html

Oops, there's the source. Speed limits still the same, but again, outdated laws and outdated speed limits. All of it and obviously, majority rules in that case and it shows in how people drive on the roads, the stats showing less accidents and less deaths and the fact that accidents are not a big problem in this area or even a problem at all.

Again with the twisting, Mike. That only proves my point, not yours.

No, it proves that driving too SLOWLY causes accidents and NJ law prohibits slowing down traffic by driving too slow.

Like I said, the MAJORITY rules and the MAJORITY obviously want faster and more lenient speed limits evidenced by EVERYONE being speeders. People are sending a message, hundreds of millions of them, and they're all saying "speed limits are too slow", but if you know anything about people, it's that they are slow to change and always resist it initially. This change will happen, the issue is on the rise and something will be done. Speed cameras don't work, not even their supporters say they work, they won't solve a damn thing. You are in the minority on this particular topic, obviously, and in the end, the majority will win and is winning.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/maryland-politics/post/montgomery-lawmakers-ask-state-to-raise-speed-limit-on-icc/2012/02/08/gIQALgXYzQ_blog.html
Montgomery county lawmakers pushing to raise speed limits.

http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/mdlimit.html
Article from 1995 showing that raised speed limits REDUCED fatalities and therefore, accidents by default.

http://www.mit.edu/~jfc/laws.html
More evidence, laws are attempting to be passed to raise speed limits and not only that, there are a growing number of places in the US where there IS no speed limit, imagine that? Shall I find more sources for you? You are the minority, you adjust and get ready to adapt to the wishes of the majority.

And, OMG, what about THIS article.

http://www.sha.maryland.gov/Index.aspx?PageId=295

I quote:
"What conditions influence speed limits?

Speed limits often are set higher or lower than the statutory limits when one or more of the following circumstances are present:

* Atypical traffic characteristics because of particular land use or other conditions.
* Road design elements substantially above or below what are typical.
* Prevailing speeds consistently higher or lower than the statutory speed limit.
* Transition between rural and urban areas on major highways.
* Schools or other significant pedestrian traffic areas.
* Road construction activity.
* Frequent collisions in which speed is a contributing cause.
* Unusual or unanticipated conditions. "

I'll repeat again, " * Prevailing speeds consistently higher or lower than the statutory speed limit." influence speed limits!!! What's going on on the roads these days? That very thing!!! I think my point has been proved thoroughly. Majority rules, minority adjusts. Speed limits will change and it will be in the upward direction. You'll see, I've got you on this one, Other Tim.

Now see, I may have mentioned this earlier, but I definitely agree that the cameras themselves are fairly worthless. I just don't have a problem with them being there, as long as the county isn't losing money on them.

If it came out that they actually were losing money on them (speed cameras, specifically) I'd have an issue with them only in this sense.

You don't need a crosswalk to cross seven courts anyway, but all of you people seem to think it's sooo difficult, so you guys should have your crosswalk. If people ignore it, then I guess you'll just have to learn how to cross the street, huh? :)

If it were up to us, the entire road would have speed bumps installed at somewhat regular intervals. However, AGAIN, it is completely out of OUR hands.

A stoplight would slow down traffic far more then people actually driving 5 over the speed limit at most. Crosswalks? At least 50% of Maryland local drivers ignore them in a purely legal sense.

Seven courts is way too wide and too busy of a road to put speed humps in. Speed humps are for smaller, narrower streets. Hines and Summit are two great examples of that. Seven courts is too wide, too busy and too much of a major road for speed humps. It would be like putting them on Joppa Road. Speed humps is a terrible idea on busy roads like Seven Courts, even Ebeneezer, it's a bad idea. Now, I wouldn't be opposed to putting a couple of them in front of Seven Oaks and school zones in general, the long wide ones. They allow 30mph speeds over them quite easily. Any faster than that and you risk damaging the alignment of your wheels and other suspension parts. The whole road? Not a chance, the circle works great and I was originally opposed to it because I assumed drivers were too dumb and would end up causing accidents, but the circle works great and people have adjusted well to it.

Well see, there's the rub.

Something's got to be done, in lieu of speed humps in order to enforce speed limits.

I agree that speeding on a 4 lane section is inherently less dangerous then on a 2 lane stretch of the same/similar road. This is also why they put the circle off of Gunview.

Still, to say that there's no history of speeding on the 4/pseudo 2 lane part of Seven Courts is just false. Now, is there an extensive history of accidents as a result of speeding? No, not really. That's a point (accidents) I can't reasonably debate.

Aside from SCD, no! Silver spring road is a straight line, literally, from beginning to end. Speed limit should be 40mph there easily. I have confidence that speed limits will be raised in the near to reasonably near future in certain areas. Even Joppa road should be 40mph. I think 40mph is a safe speed in most places, to be honest aside from beltways, where you should be able to drive 80-90 in the fast lane. Laws are catching up and I'm glad for that.

From that post, it seems crosswalks are completely useless unless at a stop sign or stop light. That certainly needs fixing.

ANd also Jeanne, how do you know those accidents were caused by speeding or drivers not paying attention? Do you see them happen? Do you hear about it from police or have inside information? Between speeding and not paying attention, which is more dangerous? That's an easy one. Not paying attention will get you in an accident long before simply speeding will. Not paying attention, using non hands free cell phones, driving tired or drunk... those are what causes accidents. Simply speeding is way down on the list. If people paid attention like they should, we wouldn't have accidents, but not paying attention, you'll hit parked cars going 25mph or slower. I see that as the major cause of the accident unless the speeder was flooring it going 50-60 through a school zone, but that can't be true because no injuries occurred and the police weren't called. Still doesn't prove speeding is an issue, but it proves not paying attention is.

Some people will.

I guess we should get out of the way.

And that's your right, but don't complain when people constantly pass you. :) That's all I'm saying. If you want to drive slower than everyone else, don't complain about being passed. It's that simple. :)

Nah, you don't have to get out of anyone's way, they will just pass by you when the time comes that they can and you can continue on your merry way at 30mph.

You really don't quite get the concept of obeying the law, and you just cannot grasp the concept that there are people who do obey the law. Yes, I love my cruise control, but after years of driving at safe, sensible, legal speeds, I can gauge my speed pretty accurately. You probably watch your speedometer much more than I do to make sure you are only going 11mph over the LEGAL speed.
It's drivers like you who speed up, slow down, tailgate, honk horns, yell, blow through stop signs, swerve in and out to pass people like me and just overall drive like you are the only ones on the road that are a real danger to society.
Takes one to know one really applies to your calling someone a hypocrite. Take some time to read your posts (it will take a lot of time) and you will see the flip-flop seesawing you have been doing over the last few days.
I'm done with you.