130kmph instead of 120kmph on motorway

You would save even more lives if you just ban cars.

No, people are mostly aware of that. Where your proposal falls down is that when you actually think it through, you find it will deliver almost no travel-time advantage for a lot of expenditure. Where VSLs are implemented, the travel-time advantages come from lowering speeds during congestion, not raising them. A VSL algorithm will only apply the highest speed-limit when there’s almost nobody on the road, so pretty much by definition, this new speed limit would benefit almost nobody.

I was doing 120 the other day in a 120 zone. I pulled into the slow lane and came up on a car that was doing 60 or 70.

If I was going any faster would have slammed into the back of them.

Overtook them looked into the car and noticed they were watching a large screen while driving. Maybe watching a movie. This is one of the reasons I don't speed to often. Absolute selfish fuckkn dopes on the road. I wouldn't mind 130 but you will have gobshites like that making it dangerous.

In Germany they mostly follow the rules it's in their cultural psychology. They also enforce it. So it's an not a valid comparison.

In Ireland following rules not so much. A lot drive 20-30 over the posted limit.

Not a comparable example due to the very very lenient requiremenst to obtain a FULL drivers license in the US.

If the US had even some of the same requirements we have to get a full license their would be violent protests on the streets lol

Certainly not! For instance, the outside lane of M roads is often stacked up with "N" plate drivers merrily cruising along whilst the other 1 - 2 lanes are free… And these are drivers who have had to take at least 10 hours of driving instruction and a theory test..so what hope do those who haven't any formal lessons or theory tests have of being safe on higher speed roads..?

People don't excessively speed only on one stretch of road. It's a habit. That'll do it everywhere. So it's a culture or habit of speeding that's needs to addressed.

I doubt anyone wanting to do 130 and no more is actually getting caught that often. Probably 130 indicated is 120 on the GPS.

You just see too many doing 120+ already to believe it's being enforced in any numbers.

You’re correct about the standards of testing, but it’s irrelevant, unless those licencing standards where loosened at the same time (they weren’t). The US fatality rate was already far higher than ours, but it’s the change in the rate that matters here.

There was no change in licencing, no change in driving population, and the period pre-dates the use of smartphones (a major cause of highway accidents). Meanwhile, cars got a little safer, and seat-belt adoption increased. Everything in the country stayed the same or improved in terms of safety, except that the permitted speed increased… and traffic fatalities went up (by every measure). Unless you can show a better reason for this increase in accidents, then the lifting of the limit is the most probable cause of it. Objectively, the measure made driving a more dangerous activity.

There is no “US” driving licence. Licence testing is done independently by the states: some states used to be good, but most are far too lenient by our standards. But the reason you can no longer change those “good state” licences for an Irish one isn’t because their testing now sucks, it’s because all states now allow a no-retest exchange of licences from any other state (Unlike the EU, you cannot drive on an out-of-state licence for very long in the USA). So, as we can’t tell if, for example, a Massachusetts license holder actually sat the (acceptable) MA driving test rather than the (stupidly easy) Ohio or Oklahoma one, we stopped accepting any US State licence.

I would be in favour of lowering the limit on motorways to 110 KPH.

There was a car up my ass with those bright fuckin led lights So indicated into the other lane. It was a very dark stretch of road at night time obviously. U wouldn't be expecting a car to be going that slow in a 120 zone.

Theres is irony about complaining about lights and slow speed when you were holding someone up and perhaps need to upgrade to those lights.

I'd point out that some vehicles are legally limited to slower speeds on motorways and legal on a motorway. You should always anticipate them.

Expecting everyone to be at 120 is flawed. In indeed in your example only one car of 3 was at 120.

If you think I'm ragging on you I'm not. It's just pointing out some details of your scenario. Worth a review.

As you say this a good reason not to have increased speed limits on motorways. The safe drivers won't go any faster, but the unsafe,unaware drivers or those not observing the traffic ahead of them, or whose journey is more important than others will. That less time to react and more incidents at higher speeds,

If you were going at 120kph and about to overtake a significanttly slower car in the inside lane, I dont understand why you pulled in behind them at speed.

As described it, it sounds like you endangered yourself and occupants of another vehicle, to allow a bully pass you. You should never change lanes unless it's safe to do so, and that includes when you have someone come up behind you like you describe.

Maybe you over dramatise it but it sounds to me like driving without due care and attention.

Note there are no slow and fast lanes on a motorway. Inside lane is the driving lane and outside lanes are overtaking lanes only, not driving lanes.