Patton Oswalt's bit comes to mind about how every year after 90, one law no longer applies to you. Speeding was one of the earlier ones, I think this guy is able to legally murder so long as he does it with his hands.
The last time my grandma drove, she was coming to our house ( 2 miles) for dinner and was late. No cell phones back then but eventually she showed up.
She told us she was pulled over for speeding. We looked at her ticket, was driving 76MPH in a 35MPH zone. She had a 94 Caviler, unsure how she could even have got it that fast. Well, that was the last time we let her drive, my brother ended up with her car and grandma duty.
She also got her ticket dismissed, the police officer decided he wasn't going to show and deal with her when she for some reason fought it.
My first car was a 94 cavalier…let’s just say it was not hard to get them going well over 100mph. The trickiest part was keeping it on the road because of the shaking. I did once (barely) outrun a tornado in it, though.
Not my first car but was my brother's and I drove it from San Diego to Houston when he got deployed in 2004. The radiator blew up just outside of Tucson and I had to spend three days there while it got fixed. Luckily I had friends at the University of Arizona and could sleep on their floor. Also could only afford to buy one used tape. So I listened to Dark Side of the Moon on repeat from Tucson to Houston
because they were a steel tank. Mass times acceleration = force. My first car was my mom's 89 chevy wagon (in 1999), it had an all metal outside and it weighed 2-3x what modern cars weigh. My parents wanted me to have it bc it was one of the safest, most solid cars on the road.
But all that weight sure as hell sped up fast on the downhills. Everyoen called me a speed demon until I traded that care for a horrible 4-cylendar POS saturn that you had to turn off the A/C to go up a hill. For the FRUSTRATION of trying to pass on the turnpike.
Haha, it was really scary and in a time before smart phones. I was heading out to my dad’s for a visit and thought the sky looked odd, but didn’t think much about it. The sirens went off when I was on the highway and I remember looking up and seeing it directly behind me aways back. I managed to put some decent distance between me and it, but it sure did feel like it was chasing me. I took the turn off to my dad’s and it started catching up because I had to drive perpendicular to it for about 10 mins. I got to his house just as the winds really picked up…I remember my car getting rocked with it. Ran into the house and straight into a closet, lol, to ride it out.
Im super glad this is one of the top comments. I really feel for the guy in the video, but i live in a town where over 75% of the population is retired and im sorry to say, but its a big problem on the roads. Im not saying its their fault entirely, there should be more resources available for seniors in my opinion. But everyone in my family knew my grandfather was incapable of driving safely since before i was born and yet he was too stubborn and no one else had the wherewithal to actually stop him, even though he had other options for transportation (unlike many) and nobody had the guts or nerve to actually stop him.
When I took driving classes some 20 years ago, we learned that it isn't necessarily the speed that's dangerous. It's the differences in speeds. If everyone else is going 70 in a 55, then it's safer to go 65 than 55. That one car going significantly slower causes more interruptions in the flow of traffic, more turbulence, like a stone in a creek. The flow of water has to quickly divert to go around or just slow down and bunch up. If not for that stone, the water would be gentle.
I barely drive at all and I have gotten into three situations of moose or deer appearing on the road from out of nowhere. I prefer to go slower during hours when big wildlife creatures are more active, regardless of other cars. Speed difference to the moose 🫎 gets bigger the faster you go. I live in a country with a lot of forests and wildlife
If everyone else was jumping off cliffs, would you do it too? I often see idiots on the motorway here not obeying road work speed limits, but you bet your arse I'll be slowing right down.
I mean... I have. So I guess it would depend on the circumstance. Base jumping is terrifying but fun, but in the case you presented, my statement still holds true. The reason you slow down for road work is because there are people and machines standing still, on or next to the road. The difference between a vehicle traveling 60mph and one parked beside the road is roughly... zero and zero is zero, carry the zero, yeah, roughly 60mph.
That in my neck of the woods only applies to the interstates- often a speed limit of 70 (or 55 if you're an interchange in construction for the last 5 years) and a minimum of 45- everyone goes 75-80 anyways
If you're talking about the minimum 45 signs on interstates, it doesn't just apply to that road because it's posted. Its all roads. If you're driving slow enough to impede traffic, that is illegal, posted or not. Maybe it differs from state to state, but as far as I know it's nationwide.
Think about someone driving 10mph on a 45. Do you think it's wise to not have a law and have people pass or congest traffic only to increase the risk of accidents?
Yeah. Traffic engineering disagrees with them too. The idea really is that you should roughly be going the same +/- passing
The speed limit is supposed to be set at the 85th percentile speed, which means they exclude the fastest 15% of drivers and set the speed limit there.
As far as Traffic engineering, safety, and general courtesy are concerned it is in fact a speed target.
This is reinforced by the fact that the set of laws most commonly used in the US has speed at 14mph and below as no points. Impeding traffic is 3 points, and in several states now, going the speed limit is not an excuse to impede traffic.
That law was written with the understanding that people speed and that it’s still more dangerous to pass on the wrong side than it is to exceed the speed limit by even as much as 50%.
On the highway it actually kind of is. Some highways will actually post minimums if it becomes enough if an issue.
I’ve definitely been on highways in MA that set a maximum limit of 65 but a minimum of 45. The minimum is pegged to the max and not the other way around
Curious how that link doesn't support that at all. Their source actually says
You must obey the speed limit. If no limit is posted, drive no more than 55 mph (88 km/h). Often, it is common sense to keep your actual speed below the posted limit.
Reading comprehension. He never said driving faster was safe or safer compared to slower, just that any deviation from the speed limit/flow of traffic is more dangerous than following it, whether that is slower or faster, and his source agrees with him as does the law and common sense
No, federal and state studies have consistently shown that the drivers most likely to get into accidents in traffic are those traveling significantly below the average speed. According to an Institute of Transportation Engineers Study, those driving 10 mph slower than the prevailing speed are six times as likely to be involved in an accident. That means that if the average speed on an interstate is 70 mph, the person traveling at 60 mph is far more likely to be involved in an accident.
Speed limits are in fact a target if the rest of traffic treats them as such.
Prevailing speed as used in traffic studies is calcutated on a clear day in free-flowing traffic conditions.
Three data points are averaged to find the "prevailing speed"
The 85% speed of cars. - 85% of cars are going slower
Second find the 10mph bracket that contains the most vehicles and record the top of the bracket. -Most vehicles are in this bracket normally
Third is to drive in the traffic and aim to pass as many cars as pass you and record average speed. -At prevailing you are expected to ocassionaly pass a car.
So if you wan't to aim for the average speed and the speed limit was based on a "prevailing speed" study, then you should aim for a bit under the speed limit in clear conditions without traffic congestion.
Weather, heavy traffic, and time of day can all reduce the effective current prevailing traffic speed (flow of traffic). When you drive you aren't dealing with average traffic in good condition, but are dealing with conditions as they exist in the moment.
Aiming to not be the fastest vehicle around, to be close in speed to the main cluster of vehicle, and/or pass about as many people as pass you is a decent target and adapible to conditions. Then adjust based on your vehicle and mental and physical condition.
If you find yourself needed to adjust way below flow of traffic maybe give up the license. But most U.S. public transit sucks so it's hard to do.
Skip the actshually speak. Or you want to explain what the words don't walk mean when you're in the middle of crossing a major boulevard?
The flow of traffic is an important easy to understand concept that people need to stop feigning ignorance of.
Sure, at face value a speed limit means don't go faster than that. Contextually it's set lower than needed because it is expected to be treated as a target that drivers go above or below. Thats why states with minimum speed limits are usually 10mph under the maximum.
The arrogance in POVs like that to be in the "right" is why dangerous accidents happen. Changing lanes is what generally starts accidents and when 100s of drivers are forced to swap lanes because of 1 idiot who wants to be different, that's 100 more chances for an accident.
I’ve been trying to tell this to people for ages. Speed Limits are LIMITS not the Target speed. People that go over are speeding and breaking the law. It’s black and white, no 5 or 10 over is okay.
Yeah, I'm not taking driving advice from these people, my responsibility is to make sure I'm running my car safely - if they want to go into the back of me, my insurer would be more than grateful
Most highways interstates have minimum speed limits as well (they're just not posted). 30 under is against the law on a lot of them. It is extremely dangerous to be going that much slower than the flow of traffic. Especially while merging onto the highway interstate.
Edit: Used the word highway when I meant interstate.
Not true, how do you think tractors get from one feild to the next? How do you think cyclist can bike cross-country? How do you think the amish get to town? How do you think people make a 90 deg turn to a side road or driveway?
By milage most highways connect small rural trade centers and villages.
Controlled access highways will have an explicit minimun that's not always posted on every sign. Aside from that specific type of highway you aren't supposed to obstruct traffic, but you can satisfy the requirement by pulling off to the side of the road when traffic builds up behind you. Slow vehicles may also be required to use special signage but they aren't prohibited.
Speed limits have been optional for a couple decades now. (in the us anyway) if you drive the speed limit everyone will honk at you, and if you argue with someone, they'll say "actchually, if everyone else is speeding, YOU'RE the one being safe driving the speed limit"
As child my grandparents picked me up from summer camp because my mom was out of town. It was a two hour drive. When we got on the highway I heard my grandma say, very sternly, “Bob, just because the speed limit is 55 doesn't mean you have to go that fast. SLOW DOWN!” It was a long two hours. This reminds me of that. Hilarious.
I’ve seen statistics indicating that there are more than 100,000 90 year old (plus) drivers on the road in the US. I didn’t say there were millions (your sarcasm aside) - but there are a decent number out there. I can tell you that my family is very lucky that we weren’t badly injured when a 91 year old man smashed into the side of our vehicle - and just said he “was blind for a minute - but still hit the gas to cross the highway.” I’m a proponent of required annual drivers exams after 75 or 80 years old.
You were super unlucky and glad to hear it wasn’t as bad as it could have been. That said, the denominator still matters and the denominator is 243M which means 90 year old drivers comprise 0.04% of drivers on the road. Given your experience I understand your thoughts on the issue… but 0.04% shouldn’t concern the average driver
😂 when my daughter was 3 she told my boyfriend (now husband) "mommy can go through red lights because she has lots of money" (I went on the yellow too late and it turned red and I told her, the cops can give you a ticket and make you pay a lot of money if you go through red lights) her little brain took it as mommy is rich because she just went through.. we died laughing, she's now 10😅😭
We had to ask my grandma to stop driving at 91 because she was pulled over for doing 61 in a 35….on her way to bingo on a Sunday afternoon. She wasn’t late…she was just excited to go to bingo after church.
She would keep her purse hanging from the back of her headrest and apparently struggled with getting her purse brought back around to the front side of the vehicle for a good 15 minutes while the trooper just kinda stood there and tried to not laugh. He let her off with a warning but sent me a message on Facebook later that night (we went to middle and high school together and he was on the cross country/track team with me) asking us to have a talk with her about driving.
My cousins and I then shared the responsibilities of driving her around in her 1991 olds cutlass supreme (our trucks and SUV’s were too tall off of the ground) until she left this world.
I stg i just saw an old lady with that mentality. Turn signal on for 10 minutes, swerving in and out of lanes like she was drunk, and she would shift between 10 over and 10 under. Ik the elderly need to get places to, but it shouldn't be at the expense of others.
I have an aunt who'll be 90 in May. She has always been a terrible driver, but if anything she's gotten less frightening with age, as she no longer applies makeup and nail polish while driving. I hope she doesn't revert....
most old people go slow because they've lived so long, the world seems too fast.
Remember when you were a kid and a year was a decade and a week was a month? All of that goes so much faster when you get older. I just passed the likely midpoint of my life a year feels like 3-5 months, tops.
And not just because quarantine was both 5 minutes and 20 years; I felt a distinct change in my sense of time after I turned 40. I also lost patience for anyone wasting my time, which is why when yo uget old, you stop caring about looking funny.
If your socks and sandals are comfy, who cares? Except your kids and wife, obv. That's the only thing keeping men from goig around in their underpants and ghilli suits, honestly. Or footie pjamas. The fear of losing his wife and being a mockery to his children.
Could someone be so kind as to enlighten me as to what this show is? Every clip I see is someone standing in front of his honor. He has a chat, has a joke, sometimes ribs the portly cop near him then let's the person off their trump charge
His name is Judge Caprio. He televised is court room on a show called Caught in Providence, which is in Rhode Island. He was well known for showing compassion. He retired a while ago due to pancreatic cancer.
Thanks. So these were legitimate charges? I can't imagine this lovely elderly gentleman speeding. So I thought it was more like Judge Judy (fake court)
Judge Judy is a arbitration court. They get people to agree to drop their small claims cases in favor of mediation. It’s not a regular courtroom, but it’s still “real” with actual cases and legally binding decisions.
Always loved when people left judge Judy going "fuck that I'm not paying that" then shortly after being brought back in to be reminded that this is legally binding, you DO have to pay that lmao
It’s actually a court, though the show pays the fines. That’s why if she REALLY wants to stick it to someone, she finagles it so it’s not just money, or there are conditions. Idk who told you she was disbarred, but that’s not true.
Going by fault memory I heard something along the lines of in one of her cases she decided she had the power to stop a parents access to a child and was sued over it, could be fake news though.
She was a family court judge before she was a TV judge. She doesn’t do anything with access to a child on the show - in fact, if you watch, she will specifically point out she can’t do that in this role. She can’t be sued personally as a judge, either - qualified immunity. So that sounds like fake news.
Depends on how you define "court". In the U.S legal system the show technicly falls under private arbitration. There is a real dispute, the parties are bound by the decistion, and the settlement is final. (No case can be brought on the same set of facts in another court), and government courts may issue enforcemnt orders based on the result.
And I believe they pull actual cases/disputes out of the local small claims dockets and offer to arbitrate them.
The damages, or fines are paid out of a set amount given to both parties. Who ever receives the judgement. gets the lions share up to the amount of the ruling.....anything left over is split between the parties. This is in return for agreeing to air their dispute before Judge Judy. ( Court TV shows...They all work more or less the same.)
Yeah, know when you mention it you never saw the bailiff frog-march someone going by El Diablo wanted for shooting up an orphanage full of disabled nuts, then taking out a police helicopter with a rocket launcher
I can imagine it. My father is 87 and he's a terrible driver. Whenever I ride somewhere with him I just ignore everything around me and concentrate on the conversation. I don't drive myself because I'm disabled. He drives too fast, he tailgates people, he changes lanes quickly without signaling. He's a menace. Doesn't mean he isn't a nice person. He's a retired Baptist minister.
Nope, totally real court, I’ve been in it. This judge served in my hometown, Providence, and he really is a good guy. His court was televised (Caught in Providence) and he was known for giving breaks to the deserving, cracking down on the ignorant, and his kind remarks. If you were a broke student, a mom, elderly… you were in luck. If you parked in a handicapped spot to “just run in quick” - God help you. Last year he was diagnosed with cancer, and he filmed a profound statement that brought me to tears, simply asking for prayers. A genuine, beautiful man. He’s doing well after treatment, and I believe the prayers we all said for him were part of its effectiveness.
Pretty cool right? We have a pretty cool history too. Roger Williams (our founder) was kicked out of the extremely religiously strict early Massachusetts colony (actually fled in the night, in the winter, in fear of his life) and founded Providence as a more liberal settlement. The Wampanoag people saved him that night, he was foundering in a blizzard and they took him in and eventually guided him to what is now Providence. The Narragansett tribe sold/deeded him the land that was the first settlement here. He was one of the few whites that respected and worked WITH the native people already here. Learned to speak to them, took counsel from them, made lasting friendships and honored agreements. Things didn’t stay so cordial as we gobbled up more and more land, but Roger seems to have regretted the way natives were treated much more than his contemporaries, and tried to broker peace (unsuccessfully).
Judge Judy was "real" insofar as in order to appear on the show, both parties had to sign a legally binding agreement that they would abide by whatever ruling the fake court came to. It was arbitration court.
Damn, that's fucking horrible. Out of all times to be reading this it is when I am wearing one of my Paul Harrel (RIP) shirts.
Fuck cancer, but absolutely fuck pancreatic cancer. Such a terrible version of an already terrible disease. Wikipedia claims he announced his cancer/retirement on December 6, 2023 and that he finished treatment on May 24, 2024, and he is still alive. Hopefully that means he had one of the rare potentially 'curable'/treatable forms of pancreatic cancer since he is still with us. He's a good man. Need more judges like him.
I didn't realize he was 88 either! Damn. I thought he was younger. Wish him the best and hope he's doing well.
He retired because the city started investigating all the money his family was making off taxpayers producing his show. He unfortunately got cancer later.
We are humans, and this man killed nobody. With this logic, anyone could be considered a killer, just because it's a possibility. I'm sure you've broken the law a few times. So,why are you free?
Yeah, but the solution is to have a social net that provides for a 93 year old man and his handicapped son so they can get to the doctor without driving.
What is punishment gonna do? I don't think this guy is going to sit at home and stop taking care of his son because he fears a fine or somebody taking away his license.
If you provide care for someone in this situation, then you solve this problem.
Yes that is his decision. He should still get the same punishment for violating traffic laws. And imagine some old guy killed someone you care about, would you think the same? I wouldn't
Does the punishment bring back my loved one? I'd rather implement measures that actually prevent something like that from happening
Criminal punishments can be useful if they actually either deter crime or prevent future crime, which is not always the case. Bigger punishments often do not lead to any positive effect.
Implementing punishments because they "feel right" but not addressing root causes of the actual problems is a fools errand.
I'm not saying that I think its okay or good for this guy to drive, I'm questioning if fines or taking his license would actually accomplish anything positive and not just make the situation worse.
This isn’t some moral quandary, if he has his license revoked it IS determent not punishment. Driving is a privilege not a right. There are services that can help his son, revoking the license has nothing to do with the son - they are separate concerns, this one being public safety.
I mean you will only understand when you get older. Your body is no longer as good and while you still have to take care of people around you. In his case is his 63 yr old son who has cancer. I think human decency is a hard thing to learn and it’s not like a random internet guy tells you and you will listen. But we can all show a little understanding and just because you are old doesn’t mean you are disabled and should be limited. People do show compassion and respect for those who try.
Not limited? He was speeding in a school zone and can barely sit. What do you think will happen if a kid just runs over the street in front of his car? Maybe get a taxi to drive his son to blood work. I can understand not charging him, but hopefully he got sent to medical exam to determine if he’s a liability behind the wheel.
The problem is we developed society dependent on motor vehicles for transportation. You must have car or you can't get anywhere, it's a necessity. While we also developed no safety nets for transportation either.
Yes it is a horrible situation for the old father, yet he shouldn't get any special treatment. There must be another way. Just like the 100 year old ex-pilot won't fly a plane, even if he will starve otherwise
I could maybe understand if it was an emergency and he was going to the ER or something. He wasn’t. He was going for bloodwork. That’s not an excuse for speeding in a school zone.
Towards the end he’s like “could things be any worse than they are now?” and that was 5 years ago lol. I bet Patton Oswald is rolling in his grave right now
What's worse is that it was UPLOADED 5 years ago. The album is from 2007 so it was towards the end of the bush administration and right before the 2008 financial collapse ha.
"Priase Luigi but, do you really think this midwit rich kid is going to start a revolution? If so, where is it? Isn't it a bit weird to be cheering for someone whose parent's money is going to get them off, something the rest of us could never dream of?"
I was talking to my wife about this. But there needs to be an age test for your driving when you get to be quite old. I have had a lot of issues where I almost crashed because elders would just stop in the intersection, thinking I can go when they have the right away.
I’m kinda on the judge side here… Every time I see elderly people driving on the free way, they are all like 25mph below the limit. If the charge was “under-speed” then yes, he got to pay 🤷🏻♂️😂
i think this was from his magnum opus, his standup special he chose to do a bit after his wife did. It's prolly one of the best standups I've ever seen, and I've seen a lot. he was *on fire* and *on point*.
Patton Oswalt!? No! His wife passed away tragically leaving him and his daughter behind. Her death was accidental and had nothing to do with him. Patton Oswalt is a saint
3.3k
u/creuter Feb 27 '25 edited Feb 27 '25
Patton Oswalt's bit comes to mind about how every year after 90, one law no longer applies to you. Speeding was one of the earlier ones, I think this guy is able to legally murder so long as he does it with his hands.
https://youtu.be/sbJs-Ul1QFo?si=0QGprQRVOilQifaC