Take Their Cameras and All That Jive

A gang of Atlanta pranksters cause traffic chaos and rampant road rage by an act of mass civil obedience--of the freeway speed limit, with a squadron of their compadres taking over every lane and driving the legally required 55, and make an amusing and instructive five-minute video documentary of the results.

[Link via Instapundit.]

Comments

Lamont Cranston | March 1, 2006, 1:20pm | #

Everytime I have driven through Atlanta, I have thought that if the cops actually cared about the speed limit, they could just get in every lane and drive 55.

Of course, they don't care about the speed limit except as a money-making tool.

Red Rocker | March 1, 2006, 1:23pm | #

This howto video sucks. I still can't do it.

Matt L | March 1, 2006, 1:24pm | #

One of the things I learned in transportation engineering class is the speed that people travel is determined by the level of traffic (the number of cars on the roadway) and the geometry of the road. Speed limits don't have a major effect on traffic speeds.

Warren | March 1, 2006, 1:26pm | #

OK that was kind of cool, but if I got caught behind those punks I'd be pissed. If they really cared about changing things, they'd do it every day till the speed limit was raised.

joshua corning | March 1, 2006, 1:27pm | #

One of the things I learned in transportation engineering class is the speed that people travel is determined by the level of traffic (the number of cars on the roadway) and the geometry of the road. Speed limits don't have a major effect on traffic speeds.

that must be why urban planner require such wide roads on residential streets...so more kids will get run over from high speed traffic.

Eryk Boston | March 1, 2006, 1:30pm | #

Lamont, I don't recall the last time I saw a cop going 55 on the highway.

Rick Barton | March 1, 2006, 1:32pm | #

Good job, kids! Marvelously bold and creative! Let's have some other ideas that reveal the abundant foolishness of government.

downstater | March 1, 2006, 1:36pm | #

wow, this is interesting to me because i've been running my own personal experiment (and i use that term loosely as i'm not really testing anything). after receiving a speeding ticket i was interested in the fact that despite honestly speeding, i always seemed to be one of the slowest people on the road. so for about 2 weeks i've deliberately set my cruise control to the speed limit on the highways that i take to work.

i would then count the number of cars which passed me, the number of cars i passed, and the number of police vehicles seen.

typical numbers during a commute one way would be about 130 cars passing, 5 cars passed, and usually 0 police vehicles - but sometimes as many as 6.

due to the boiling rage and vitriol directed my way by other drivers tailgating, flashing lights and middle fingers among other things - i have concluded that i have never been in such perilous danger on the road as when observing the speed limit.

interestingly, i have not been getting to work any later since driving more slowly.

Rick Barton | March 1, 2006, 1:38pm | #

Who can figure out out to get in contact with these kids and let em know about this thread? If any of you merry pranksters read this, come on and take a bow.

wise ass | March 1, 2006, 1:43pm | #

Self-indulgent twerps who can't spell.
"Obediance"? They must be independant filmmakers.
Makes Blair Witch Project look like Citizen Kane.

Douglas Fletcher | March 1, 2006, 1:43pm | #

I hear their next experiment is going to be filling up a supermarket express lane with people who have 11 items.

joe | March 1, 2006, 1:44pm | #

joshua,

Urban planners argue for narrower streets, to slow down the traffic.

Your beef is with the Fire Department, who believe the highest priority is to allow two ladder truckes to pass each other when both sides of the street are lined with cars, and there are snowbanks crowding the road.

smacky | March 1, 2006, 1:50pm | #

I don't recall the last time I saw a cop going 55 on the highway.

Are you kidding me? That's the tip of the iceberg here in Cleveland. Rarely, if ever, do I see cops obey traffic rules here. I've even been in a police cruiser (it was an escort, ok?) that looked for cross-traffic at a red light and then went straight through it (from a stopped position!). This was only a few weeks ago that I actually experienced this firsthand, as a police cruiser passenger. (I've seen plenty of RTA city busdrivers do this, too). As an observer I see this in traffic all the time. Police will flash their emergency lights just to cruise through an intersection.

kmw | March 1, 2006, 1:50pm | #

Sweet, a "rolling roadblock."

I used to do this with several friends when I was in high school.

Of course, portable video devices weren't easy to procure back then.

Sassy Youngster | March 1, 2006, 1:54pm | #

Vacuum tubes were too fragile back then?

smacky | March 1, 2006, 1:55pm | #

I hear their next experiment is going to be filling up a supermarket express lane with people who have 11 items.

Don't even get me started on these assholes. There is a seperate level of hell reserved for these people. Ok, maybe not for people with 11 items, but for people like the old woman I and three others waited behind last week while she was being rung up forsignificantly many more items than were allowed in the express lane. The sense of entitlement some people have appalls me.

Evan | March 1, 2006, 1:57pm | #

Me and my "boys" did the exact same thing in high school, but on a 3-lane road---and without the video documentation, or the "complex" planning (one day, we were getting ready to drive into town, and as we got into the cars, someone suggested it, so we did it. Not too much planning needed).

Anyway, I can do one better than these kids. As we were driving along, people were honking at us and flashing lights. Eventually, we got to a red stoplight, and of course, we were in front. As soon as we stopped, some enraged redneck in a pickup truck hopped out and started running towards my friend's car. I look over, and he's got this big-assed Croc-Dundee knife that he's waving around. Luckily, it was only a 3-way intersection, and only one car had triggered it, so it was clear---and we all just floored it through the red. Nothing was ever so funny as watching that hillbilly fuck standing in traffic waving his blade as we sped away.

And these kids, the best they could do is get flicked off? Amateurs.

Stevo Darkly | March 1, 2006, 1:58pm | #

Very interesting. I've never heard of "real world speed limits" being documented this way. Nice job.

I would just have two bits of advice for the video makers:

1) The sound mixing appears to suck a little bit. The volume of the "on the road" scenes is blaring, while the "indoor interviews" were very, very quiet. I kept adjusting my volume up and down and still couldn't catch more than 10% of what was said.

2) Maybe if the crew all had professional-looking signs made for the backs of their cars that said, "55 MPH Documentation Project," it might temper the anger of some of the other drivers, at least in their immediate area. They wouldn't know what was going on, but at least they'd know that something was going on, and that the kids weren't just a bunch of jerks.

Eryk Boston | March 1, 2006, 2:03pm | #

Hmmm...imagine three unmarked cops doing this just for the easy tickets every time someone tried using the breakdown laneto pass.

Steven Crane | March 1, 2006, 2:16pm | #

Hmmm...imagine three unmarked cops doing this just for the easy tickets every time someone tried using the breakdown laneto pass.

shut up, shut up, SHUT UP!

Ed | March 1, 2006, 2:25pm | #

The moral value of acts of civil disobedience (or in this case, obedience) ends when you infringe upon the freedoms of others. The fact that the de facto speed "limit" there is closer to 75 than 55 severely undermines the righteousness of their argument and puts the punks more in the anarchist camp than the civil disobedient camp.

Eric the .5b | March 1, 2006, 2:26pm | #

Maybe if the crew all had professional-looking signs made for the backs of their cars that said, "55 MPH Documentation Project," it might temper the anger of some of the other drivers, at least in their immediate area.

I wouldn't be reassured. :)

They wouldn't know what was going on, but at least they'd know that something was going on, and that the kids weren't just a bunch of jerks.

So, fraud? ;)

theOneState | March 1, 2006, 2:29pm | #

I think what they did is great. Yeah, I'd be pissed to be behind them.

You could do the experiment without angering people by having a single cop drive the speed limit. But then you probably wouldn't have the funny video.

Rick Barton, from the comments on ritilan.com, it sounds like one of the producers writes there.

Everyone: Can anyone identify the song?

Steven Crane | March 1, 2006, 2:36pm | #

The moral value of acts of civil disobedience (or in this case, obedience) ends when you infringe upon the freedoms of others. The fact that the de facto speed "limit" there is closer to 75 than 55 severely undermines the righteousness of their argument and puts the punks more in the anarchist camp than the civil disobedient camp.

You say this NOW, but when you're a black man pulled over for "doing 62 in a 55", maybe that de facto speed limit won't be so significant.

Rhywun | March 1, 2006, 2:36pm | #

So it's either drive the speed limit and get road-raged, or break the limit and increase your chances of getting ticketed. I'm so glad I don't drive.

smacky | March 1, 2006, 2:43pm | #

You could do the experiment without angering people by having a single cop drive the speed limit. But then you probably wouldn't have the funny video.

You know, ever since I bought my luxury-sized sedan (in a dark shade of paint), I find that at night, frequently cars in front of me slow down or drive the exact speed limit. Sometimes I suspect that they are mistaking me for a police cruiser. I know I personally slow down when I can't verify that a cop is indeed behind me.

downstater | March 1, 2006, 2:44pm | #

the scariest part about going the limit is when you're about to be overtaken by an 18-wheeler that's going a good 20 over when their limit is actually 10 under your own! (at least on IL highways) Especially when you only drive a 2-seater!

So it's either drive the speed limit and get road-raged, or break the limit and increase your chances of getting ticketed. I'm so glad I don't drive.

i'm with you there. not driving is my ultimate goal.

Rick Barton | March 1, 2006, 2:56pm | #

Douglas

I hear their next experiment is going to be filling up a supermarket express lane with people who have 11 items.

I hope not. We want em to target only the government.

Ed | March 1, 2006, 3:00pm | #

Steven,

Driving while black and driving really slow while stupid and white and filming yourself are two entirely different issues.

Steven Crane | March 1, 2006, 3:09pm | #

Driving while black and driving really slow while stupid and white and filming yourself are two entirely different issues.

But it points out the ridiculousness of keeping the speed limit low. If, as it has been rather obviously proven, the speed limit is kept well below the de facto speed limit, then what is the reason for keeping it so artificially low?

It's not implausible in the least to think that it's kept artificially low to give the highway patrol a pretext to pull someone over.

theOneState | March 1, 2006, 3:14pm | #

I hear their next experiment is going to be filling up a supermarket express lane with people who have 11 items.

Listen to Mark Lemhouse's "You're a bastard". Makes you feel just fine about losing your cool.

The big question, though, is how do we as a free socieity get people to behave in ways that benefit everyone (including them)? There are all these libertarian theories about order, but I don't see it.

How come everyone crowds the airport baggage conveyors when if everyone just stepped back three feet it would be easier on everyone, including the ones up front?

Bastards.

Invisible hand my ass. Or does that just refer to economic society? In any case, spontaneous order isn't real, is it?

ChicagoTom | March 1, 2006, 3:19pm | #

the scariest part about going the limit is when you're about to be overtaken by an 18-wheeler that's going a good 20 over when their limit is actually 10 under your own! (at least on IL highways) Especially when you only drive a 2-seater!

Ill seconds this. I've had truckers blow by me in my little hatchback while Im doing between 65 - 70 in a 55 mph on the I-290. Scares the shit out of me and makes my little hatchback shake and tremble

Eryk Boston | March 1, 2006, 3:30pm | #

I find I piss people off the most in here when I think of new things the state might do. As if they really need help in thinking of new ways to abuse their authority.

Jennifer | March 1, 2006, 3:30pm | #

I haven't confirmed this, but supposedly, you can get a ticket in some states for not going along with the flow of traffic, which is to say that if the speed limit is 55 but everybody else is going 70, you can get a ticket for endangering your fellow drivers by following the speed limit. Does anybody know about this?

Eric the .5b | March 1, 2006, 3:30pm | #

I think what they did is great. Yeah, I'd be pissed to be behind them.

I'm amused by this juxtaposition.

VM | March 1, 2006, 3:35pm | #

There is a (rarely-enforced) law here in IL that deals with "left lane fever" (not yielding to faster-moving traffic), but I've never heard of that being enforced. Gov Chicagovich was big on that. And that is my biggest pet peeve when driving.

For all the speed demons here: just remember to watch the rear-view mirror and yield to faster traffic. Then you'll avoid a big part of the road rage :)

Kwix | March 1, 2006, 3:36pm | #

theOneState,
How come everyone crowds the airport baggage conveyors when if everyone just stepped back three feet it would be easier on everyone, including the ones up front?

You should take a very pragmatic point of view on baggage. Just grab the first one out of the shoot. If it's your's great! If not maybe it has some good stuff in it, or at least better than what's in your bag. Nothing makes a trip better than a bit of gambling.

matt | March 1, 2006, 3:38pm | #

"How come everyone crowds the airport baggage conveyors when if everyone just stepped back three feet it would be easier on everyone, including the ones up front?"

That's a "collective action" problem. There is little incentive for any one person to step back.

"In any case, spontaneous order isn't real, is it?"

Uh, yeah. It is. One obvious "non-economic" example is language.


W/ regard to the video:

If you want to protest the 55 mph speed limit that's fine, but don't do something like this that not only unecessarily aggrivates hundreds of people but could easily cause as serious accident. How 'bout just putting a bumper sticker on your car like a normal person?

Jennifer | March 1, 2006, 3:43pm | #

If you want to protest the 55 mph speed limit that's fine, but don't do something like this that not only unecessarily aggrivates hundreds of people but could easily cause as serious accident.

That's the point--if obeying the law is unnecessarily aggravating and potentially dangerous, then what does that say about the law?

Are these guys college students with too much time on their hands? If they did this every day, during rush hour, for a month, that might result in some changes to the law.

Rhywun | March 1, 2006, 3:48pm | #

There is a (rarely-enforced) law here in IL that deals with "left lane fever" (not yielding to faster-moving traffic), but I've never heard of that being enforced. Gov Chicagovich was big on that. And that is my biggest pet peeve when driving.

I have to agree with that. Most of my problem with speeding is that so many Americans simply don't know how to drive properly. Being out on an American highway with everyone driving different speeds and heedlessly swerving from lane to lane scares the shit out of me. Yet I've been on a German Autobahn at 120 mph and felt no fear - because Germans know how to drive. I was completely amazed the first time we drew up to a slower driver in the left lane--and they actually pulled over to the right to let us pass!

Steven Crane | March 1, 2006, 3:49pm | #

I haven't confirmed this, but supposedly, you can get a ticket in some states for not going along with the flow of traffic, which is to say that if the speed limit is 55 but everybody else is going 70, you can get a ticket for endangering your fellow drivers by following the speed limit. Does anybody know about this?

I think this really only applies to people who are driving markedly under the posted speed limit; as in someone going 35 on the expressway. IIRC, Illinois also has a posted minimum of 45 on the interstates, so anyone driving below 45 would be subject to the ticket.

If you want to protest the 55 mph speed limit that's fine, but don't do something like this that not only unecessarily aggrivates hundreds of people but could easily cause as serious accident.

It's not the annoying 55-drivers that are the ones liable to cause a serious accident. If you try blowing around them on the breakdown lane and wind up taking out a pulled-over car, that's on you.

Jennifer | March 1, 2006, 3:51pm | #

I think this really only applies to people who are driving markedly under the posted speed limit; as in someone going 35 on the expressway. IIRC, Illinois also has a posted minimum of 45 on the interstates, so anyone driving below 45 would be subject to the ticket.

The example I was thinking of was specifically about "you are following the speed limit but you're so much slower than everyone else that you can get a ticket."

But as I've said before, I don't know, and I haven't bothered looking up all the traffic-law statutes.

Bob Smith | March 1, 2006, 3:52pm | #

>the old woman I and three others waited behind

Did she cap off the event by not getting out her checkbook and filling out the check *before* her items had finished being rung up, causing even more delay?

Stretch | March 1, 2006, 3:56pm | #

You know, ever since I bought my luxury-sized sedan (in a dark shade of paint), I find that at night, frequently cars in front of me slow down or drive the exact speed limit. Sometimes I suspect that they are mistaking me for a police cruiser. I know I personally slow down when I can't verify that a cop is indeed behind me.

I drove a Caprice for awhile in high school, and I can verify that people think you're a cop. It's fantastic sometimes because people will actually get out of your way.

This experiment would never work on 76, the highway going into Philadelphia, as it rarely moves above 20mph. On 95, however, you'd get shot. We've got a gun problem in Philly, don't you know?

Rhywun | March 1, 2006, 4:01pm | #

That's the point--if obeying the law is unnecessarily aggravating and potentially dangerous, then what does that say about the law?

Driving at the speed limit is only dangerous when drivers don't know or don't care about following certain rules. Again in Germany, you will find lots of people driving around 100 kph on the Autobahn. Invariably, they're in the right lane.

Isaac Bartram | March 1, 2006, 4:07pm | #

Jennifer

I'm fairly sure there is no place where you can actually get prosecuted for refusing to break the law. But I could be wrong:)

What "the flow of traffic" thing does in most places is get the speeding drivers a pass because 1) The cops can't pull everyone over and 2) In the absence of an actual dangerous condition (like weaving and passing on the left the cops are willing to let things pass.

The other violator of "the flow of traffic" is the moron who insists on weaving in and out, passing on the left etc in traffic which is mildly congested but moving along at perhaps 5 to 10 MPH below the limit. Even if said moron does not actually exceed the speed limit he is very likely to get a ticket. And there are several very clear statutes in most states covering such conduct.

matt | March 1, 2006, 4:19pm | #

"If they did this every day, during rush hour, for a month, that might result in some changes to the law."

I think (I don't know for sure) that Georgia might lose federal highway funding if they increased the speed limit because of I-285's frequent congestion and its proximity to Atlanta. If this is true then the law is unlikely to be changed. Anyone know what the federal funding regulations are?

theOneState | March 1, 2006, 4:20pm | #

"In any case, spontaneous order isn't real, is it?"

Uh, yeah. It is. One obvious "non-economic" example is language.

matt, if you don't take my sarcasm less seriously, I'm going to have to stick my invisible hand up your invisible ass and make some adjustments.

kwix, I'm gonna try that next time.

matt | March 1, 2006, 4:25pm | #

Haha. Sorry onestate, no need for ass-play. Thought you were serious. My mistake.

gnip gnop | March 1, 2006, 4:32pm | #

Anyone know what the federal funding regulations are?

If you don't do what they want, you don't get the funds.

R C Dean | March 1, 2006, 4:43pm | #

Maybe if the crew all had professional-looking signs made for the backs of their cars that said, "55 MPH Documentation Project," it might temper the anger of some of the other drivers, at least in their immediate area.

Talk about defeating the purpose. Geez, Stevo.

Lurker Kurt | March 1, 2006, 4:47pm | #

There is a (rarely-enforced) law here in IL that deals with "left lane fever" (not yielding to faster-moving traffic), but I've never heard of that being enforced. Gov Chicagovich was big on that. And that is my biggest pet peeve when driving.

My sister and brother-in-law are both Illinois State Troopers and both have ticketed people for doing such. They have only done it a couple of times as it is somewhat difficult to catch someone doing this.

It is also a big pet peeve of mine. I believe such offenders should be summarily executed.

Denis Leary | March 1, 2006, 5:12pm | #

I drive really slow in the ultrafast lane.

While people behind me are going insane.

Charles Hueter | March 1, 2006, 5:15pm | #

The moral value of acts of civil disobedience (or in this case, obedience) ends when you infringe upon the freedoms of others.

I agree...you don't want to become what you are fighting. However, I don't think what they did reaches the level of "infringement." Semi-passive obstruction, yes. Infringement (as in forcefully preventing someone from acting), no.

The fact that the de facto speed "limit" there is closer to 75 than 55 severely undermines the righteousness of their argument...

I don't see why. Their argument is the speed limit is set too low...objectively demonstrated by their video. That so many drivers ignore it and have set a higher de facto cruising speed is part of their argument's "righteousness."

...and puts the punks more in the anarchist camp than the civil disobedient camp.

Well, they certainly weren't trying to be disobedient. Ironic obedience would be more accurate. I bet if they broke any laws, those laws pertained to "rolling roadblocks" and they didn't give me the impression they want the separation of road and state (as I, incidentally, would advocate) so I wouldn't label them as anarchists either.

"Punks" they are not, Sir. They do not deserve to be insulted by pointing out the arbitrary nature of this state law. Yeah, you can write a letter to the editor and lay out an intellectual case or you can publish a blog that discusses peer-reviewed traffic research. OR...you can get quick and widespread attention by filming four cars driving legally (aside from "flow of traffic" rules) down the road that results in observable absurdity.

Kudos to them.

linguist | March 1, 2006, 5:41pm | #

Sorry if someone's already said this,

you can get a ticket for endangering your fellow drivers by following the speed limit. Does anybody know about this?

"Impeding traffic" is illegal in some states, and can be selectively enforced to against people going so slowly they put themselves and others in danger.

I failed my first driver's test in Ohio for "slowing down more than necessary" to make a left.

Ron | March 1, 2006, 5:42pm | #

I just drove through Atlanta, (round trip, hit it coming and going) and everywhere that there was an on or off ramp the traffic stopped. When there were no on or off ramps, the traffic periodically stopped for no apparent reason. I was told at my destination that this was normal behavior. Can't merge and can't stand the thrill of sustained speed.

Apparently these kids were on a different highway. I'd have been more than happy if I could have driven 55 mph through that place.

smacky | March 1, 2006, 5:48pm | #

I failed my first driver's test in Ohio for "slowing down more than necessary" to make a left.

You don't say. I failed mine for hitting a bunch of cones during manuverability.

SY | March 1, 2006, 6:16pm | #

You don't say. I failed mine for hitting a bunch of cones during manuverability.

I failed mine for hitting a bunch of examiners during break-time.

Here in the Bay Area, we have a name for people who drive cluelessly in the left lane. "Asians."

Hey, somebody had to say it.

Petunia Picklehead | March 1, 2006, 6:21pm | #

I think some people may be missing the obvious point that these kids were NOT obeying the law:

1.It's illegal in GA to drive two abreast, thus blocking those behind you
and
2.It's illegal to use the passing lane for anything other than passing.

Stevo Darkly | March 1, 2006, 6:37pm | #

I failed my first driver's test in Ohio for "slowing down more than necessary" to make a left.

My state is semi-notorious for people who slow to a complete stop for making a right.

Are these guys college students with too much time on their hands? If they did this every day, during rush hour, for a month, that might result in some changes to the law.

Yeah -- they'll probably make it illegal to "drive in formation."

Hey, speaking of cops and speeding, this reminds me of a puzzling incident. Once upon a time I was driving my dad's SUV on I-70 between St. Louis and Kansas City.

This is a long, flat, boring, empty drive. The speed limit is 70 MPH, but unless I make a conscious effort to do otherwise, I usually find myself going about 85 MPH. (And I have received one ticket at that speed.)

However, because my dad was in the car (along with other family members) and cares about such things, I tried to keep it around 75 MPH. (A friend of mine was briefly a cop several years ago. He told me the police radar guns are only accurate to within 5 MPH, so the cops are told they can't give you a speeding ticket unless you're going at least 5 MPH over the speed limit.)

Well, at one point I noticed a police car riding my tail. He was quite close --tailgating, actually. I noted my speed was about 75 MPH.

Knowing that police officers don't always like to feel that the speed limit applies to themselves, I thought that maybe -- like most tailgaters -- he was trying to get me to go faster because I was impeding him. Since he was a cop, I sped up to about 80 MPH.

The cop still followed strangely close. However, I was afraid to go any faster, mindful of my previous 85 MPH ticket. I figured if he really needed to go faster, he could go around me. (I think I was already in the rightmost lane.)

Eventually, he did pass me to the left -- and "blipped" his siren briefly as he did so. That caused me to automatically brake momentarily, and he continued on.

I can't figure it out -- did he actually object to me going 5 MPH over the speed limit, and blip his siren at me as a warning? But why did he ride my ass so close? To get my attention? But there was no way I was going to slow down with him following so close, either.

Or did he expect me to either speed up even more? Or get out of his way(by moving left so he could pass me on the right)?

Any ideas what was going on there?

Mad Scientist | March 1, 2006, 6:49pm | #

I think what they did is great. Yeah, I'd be pissed to be behind them.

I'm amused by this juxtaposition.

I'm amused by it too, but I have to admit I feel the same way. I'd be mighty annoyed to be stuck behind a bunch of kids all doing the speed limit, but once I found out what they were up to, I'd probably be inclined to join in. If nothing else, it would be fun to hold up all the bastards in the passing lane who are usually holding me up by not bothering themselves to pass anyone.

Mad Scientist | March 1, 2006, 6:59pm | #

Maybe he was just screwing with you, Stevo. Several years ago in Arizona I was driving a bunch of fellow geology students out to the boondocks to poke around in the rocks when were were passed by a state trooper on a lonely stretch of nowhere. I figured if he could break the law, so could I so I sped up to match his speed (80 in a 65) but stayed about 10 seconds behind him. After about 5 miles the cop suddenly slowed down and pulled onto the shoulder. So I dropped down to 65 and as we passed him he pulled in right behind me and rode my ass for another 5 miles. Now, the evil part of me is just begging him to pull me over and write me a speeding ticket so I can fight it in court, but the sensible part of me knows it won't make any difference and just hopes he'll go away. Eventually he went around and sped right back up to 80. So.....I sped up. Well, what did you expect me to do? But the cop got off at the next exit, so I'll never know what the hell he was doing tailgating me in the middle of nowhere for 5 miles. I'm guessing he was just trying to show me that he was the one with the authority, because, you know, I needed to be shown that. Or something.

GregA | March 1, 2006, 7:24pm | #

As Jacob Sullum pointed out in a story or blog some time ago, the drinking age only works because it is generally ignored. I put the highway speed limit in the same category.

Stevo Darkly | March 1, 2006, 7:59pm | #

Maybe he was just screwing with you, Stevo.

I guess it could be as simple as that.

Good thing he didn't find out about the cocaine-stuffed corpses in the trunk.

pigwiggle | March 1, 2006, 8:20pm | #

"Any ideas what was going on there?"

At least he didn't call you a chicken fucker.

Bill | March 1, 2006, 9:18pm | #

The speed limit is set too low in order to base enforcement on political rather than justice criteria. If everyone is in violation, then police always have a reason to stop anyone. Police can even claim that someone driving the speed limit was "driving erratically" or "obstructing traffic". We have enormous numbers of laws and regulations. It is almost impossible to be completely in compliance. This allows for selective enforcement against "dissidents", "troublemakers", or political opponents.

Jason S. | March 1, 2006, 9:38pm | #

That's the tip of the iceberg here in Cleveland. Rarely, if ever, do I see cops obey traffic rules here.

Here's a real story of the CPD. I was on Lakeside Avenue when I saw a police car stop next to a hot dog cart. The officer who was driving turned on the emergency lights. Another officer got out of the passenger side, bought two hot dogs, and went back to the cruiser. The driver turned off the emergency lights and drove away.

Stevo Darkly | March 1, 2006, 10:02pm | #

How do you know it wasn't a hot dog emergency?

violent_k | March 1, 2006, 10:14pm | #

Denis,
You are an asshole.

Ken Shultz | March 1, 2006, 10:54pm | #

I keep checkin' back here half expecting to see a comment from Ruthless. ...Somethin' about an experiment to get rid of stop lights and stop signs.

Blogimi Dei | March 2, 2006, 12:45am | #

These kids are just too young to remember the Original propaganda that "55" is to conserver fuel... oil?

Addictions... heh heh heh

dead_elvis | March 2, 2006, 1:18am | #

As an observer I see this in traffic all the time. Police will flash their emergency lights just to cruise through an intersection.


I'm impressed that they even flash their lights. I usually see them just cruise on through.

And I'm sure everyone's tucked safely in bed by now, but for the record the "death to slow left-laners" should have an exemption for areas that have left lane exits (I've observed that not all drivers seem to be aware that those exist). As well as an exemption for those stretches of Oklahoma and Arkansas in which the right lane has been worn out to the point of becoming an asphalt washboard.

dead_elvis | March 2, 2006, 1:22am | #

As an observer I see this in traffic all the time. Police will flash their emergency lights just to cruise through an intersection.


I'm impressed that they even flash their lights. I usually see them just cruise on through.

And I'm sure everyone's tucked safely in bed by now, but for the record the "death to slow left-laners" should have an exemption for areas that have left lane exits (I've observed that not all drivers seem to be aware that those exist). As well as an exemption for those stretches of Oklahoma and Arkansas in which the right lane has been worn out to the point of becoming an asphalt washboard.

Ruthless | March 2, 2006, 9:28am | #

David Friedman points out that the high seas are a place where anarchy reigns and works.
Highways are similar, in spite of highway patrolmen, speed limits, and other impediments to smoothe-running anarchy.

Ruthless | March 2, 2006, 9:34am | #

"I keep checkin' back here half expecting to see a comment from Ruthless. ...Somethin' about an experiment to get rid of stop lights and stop signs."

Ken Shultz,
I love you man.

Mr. Nice Guy | March 2, 2006, 9:41am | #

(Grouch alert)

These points have been made before, but these kids were wrong for two reasons:

1) They blocked the passing lane. This violates a very basic rule of the road.

2) They were participating in an effort that could've gotten someone killed. Yeah, it was fucking hilarious when that van smashed a side-view mirror. It could've been easily a stranded motorist on the shoulder holding a child.

Yes, it would've been the fault of the asshole who did the shoulder-stunt, and that asshole should be locked up. But the chain of events leading up to that would've still been intentionally initiated by the kids. Part B doesn't happen without part A.

Qbryzan | March 2, 2006, 11:17am | #

I keep thinking there must be some alternate-reality where they have a slightly different version of this, where one or more of these kids were killed as a result of the road rage, and we are seeing clips of the video on the news.

And politicians are using it as an example of the problem of using cameras in cars, and passing laws to ban filming while driving.

R C Dean | March 2, 2006, 12:04pm | #

1) They blocked the passing lane. This violates a very basic rule of the road.

I'll give you that.

2) They were participating in an effort that could've gotten someone killed.

No way are they responsible if some asshole road rages and hurts someone. The responsibility for that is 100% on the asshole.

just another lurker | March 2, 2006, 12:40pm | #

Blogimi Dei wrote: These kids are just too young to remember the Original propaganda that "55" is to conserver fuel... oil?

As an older person, yeah, I remember that (wasn't it by Nixon, after the oil embargo?). Also, I remember hearing at the time that the target goal was a 60mph speed limit. They made it the "double nickel" because they ASSUMED that most drivers would exceed it by at least 5mph.

Also, in response to some of the observations about police, it's my understanding that cops are legally allowed to drive 10mph over the speed limit at any time, on duty-- at least here in Washington State. Because they're trained professional drivers, got important stuff to do, places to go, yadda yadda yadda.

Mr. Nice Guy | March 2, 2006, 12:57pm | #

RC:

My beef is that the kids are laughing at a potentially catastrophic event like it was some big joke. Like I said, replace that busted mirror with an innocent bystander and all of sudden it's not so ha-ha.

They intended on making a point. Someone getting killed would've been an unintended consequence. And I question whether this was really worth that risk.

Agreed, the asshole is 100% guilty. If I had my way, he would be hung off a bypass in a small cage. I'm all for bringing back the laughing stock.

Jennifer | March 2, 2006, 1:07pm | #

Mr. Nice Guy, I doubt the kids would have laughed if somebody had actually been killed. I don't see their laughter as being much different from laughing at a guy who slips and falls on his butt ("How can you laugh? The guy could have broken his neck and died, you know!").

By saying that the kids bear some responsibility for any road rage they inspire in others, isn't that a little like those people insisting that Danish cartoonists are partially responsible for riots terrorizing the Muslim world?

Xellos | March 2, 2006, 1:18pm | #

--"Ironic obedience would be more accurate."

Also known as a white mutiny, or obeying orders to the letter but stupidly. It's quite amusing how much havok you can cause with this sort of thing.

Mr. Nice Guy | March 2, 2006, 1:41pm | #

I know my point #1 is much more solid then point #2, but I'll keep going with this.

Say that someone did get killed. If you were to ask those kids if they could do it all over again, would they, I think the answer would be obvious. I suspect that they were pranking more then anything else.

On the other hand, if you were to ask a newspaper if they, in retrospect, would've ran those cartoons, I don't think the answer is as obvious. The intention wasn't mischievous in nature.

Ed | March 2, 2006, 2:35pm | #

I was rather disappointed that "bouncy girl" didn't take off her shirt.

One thumb way down.

Mr. Nice Guy | March 2, 2006, 2:48pm | #

Ed:

We're having a very serious discussion about life and death, and you're talking about a cute college girl taking off her..

.....

..okay, that would've been the most awesome thing ever.

Ed | March 2, 2006, 3:54pm | #

Now that I think about it, if the girls had flashed the slow-moving, pissed-off motorists, this flick would have legs, if not tits.

BADHTML | March 3, 2006, 10:10pm | #

While I commend them for making their point, I would point out that if they were truely interested in promoting safe driving and highway safety, the last thing they should be doing is using or attempting to use their cell phones while driving! It's a scientifically and statistically proven fact that trying to drive while using a cell phone is not only unsafe and dangerous, it's downright disrespectful to so blatently disrespect and endanger other drivers because they feel it is necessary for them to yack to their girl/boy friends or whomever they are talking to, while attempting to drive a car safely at a high speed! People you are not the only people on the road that you are endangering with your selfishness and self serving insistance to endanger everyone else by driving with a cell phone glued to your head while attempting to drive, and doing quite a poor job of it at that! If you don't believe me, put down your phones and do yet another expose/documentary on this very subject by driving behind someone else who is using a cell phone while driving and videotape their pathetic attempts at driving! The only thing I object to when you go mame or kill yourself by trying to drive while yacking on a cell phone is that you are also likely to kill and/or mame some other poor soul who's only trying to make it home from their job to their beloved family that they've worked so hard and long to support! I know that those of you who do talk on your cell phones while driving are only concerned about yourselves and for what you want to do and no one else matters anyway or you wouldn't be doing so in the first place! For the first time in your self centered lives think about someone else for a change! If you wish to kill yourself through your foolish and selfish acts that's fine with me, but it's the others you are going to harm and destroy that I am thinking of here, and so should you all! If your phone call is that damn important, PULL OVER or GET OFF THE ROAD AND TALK, don't risk other's safety just because of your selfish and thoughtless actions! What if it was your loved one's who are killed because of this, then it would matter wouldn't it? Next time it very well could be! This is a complete and utter disgrace that's gotten completely out of control and I applaud those states who have seen the danger and acted upon it to make cell useage while driving illegal! It's about time that it's nation wide before more innocent people are killed needlessly! I dare you to do an expose on this, and not some fake, contrived and rehearsed act you video tape just to try to disprove what we all know is the truth! We'll all be looking for your next work of candid camera work in the name of public safety!

Rumple Stiltskin | March 5, 2006, 1:04pm | #

Good comments, everyone! Also kudos to the stupid white folk in Atlanta who thought this prank up. Millions of sheeple "go with the flow" without ever pausing to ponder the greater meaning of a lemming-like world; let alone make an effort to document and share their vision.

Perhaps this can be tried again in a redneck southern state (such as Alabama), with all the participants being young black males. they can even have bumper stickers which read "suspicious black male aboard."

I have a friend who used to do this on local roads, but he'd instead drive 20 MPH in a 45MPH zone. He called it "slow riding," and it would happen on a one-lane highway. Wasn't making any point, except being an ass hole to everyone else around him.

aaron | March 5, 2006, 10:08pm | #

this is hilarious i saw this on cnn

Andrew | March 6, 2006, 1:06am | #

What all of you are forgetting in this is the $$$$. Since the speed limit was set to 55 in the 70's traffic tickets have become a booming industry. Each year about 34 million traffic tickets are given at average of $150 a pop. That works out to over $5 billion! The speed trap is the bread and butter of thousands of small highway towns. The speed limit has very little with highway saftey (why else would I get ticket for being 15 mph over the speed limit on a deserted highway?) Remember the wise words of the Wu-Tang Clan. . . Cash Rules Everything Around Me. C.R.E.A.M Get the Money! Dolla Dolla bill's y'all.

gavin | March 6, 2006, 5:57pm | #

1) They blocked the passing lane

Actually, since nobody could have been legally passing them, Why do they need to keep the passing lane clear? If they had failed to yeild the right of way to an emergency vehicle they would have been breaking the law, but it is georgia law that you are not to drive faster than the posted speed limit in clear and daylight conditions, at night or in the rain you are supposed to drive slower still.

wussyanarchist | March 8, 2006, 2:59am | #

I think it proved a very vital point about the reasons and constitutional grounds for alot of our laws.
I mean look at the autobahn in Germany...
The one I really like is the seat belt law. Here is a $100. ticket because we don't want you to get hurt. WTF????
A woman can choose to kill her unborn baby but I can't decide whether to wear a fuckin seatbelt??
And don't even get me started on the Patriot Act..