I waited to post this response so that I didn't risk distracting from the original discussion, which has now died down:
Yes but I think this statement confuses integrity and doing the right thing. There are many places back where I used to live where local residents managed to lobby their road speed limit down to 25mph, because they had children. This in my opinion is irresponsible lobbying - a car will kill a child at 25mph anyway, so if your concern is the road, either move to a quiet road or keep your children out of it, instead of turning something meant as a way to get somewhere into a dubious playground.

In this case the law is at odds with what's right, and most people see that - and don't drive 25mph on this road. Because no one drives 25, police enforce the older speed limit (45mph) - either because they also find the speed limit on a major road absurd, or because they'd have to pull over everyone - maybe even the residents who got the speed limit reduced. In either case this willful breaking of the law is in fact a demonstration of integrity. The speed limit is inappropriate, and so the majority of people disobey it to enforce a more reasonable standard. This is an essential part of American democracy, believe it or not.

To use an extreme example, segregation in the US ended mostly because it was ignored and increasingly unenforced. One might mistakenly call those that brought segregation rude or lacking integrity for breaking the law or failing to enforce it; the truth is they stood out as those of the most moral character in their communities by doing so. I raise such an extreme comparison only to make the point painfully clear: The law and morality are not always the same.

The posted speed limit at my complex is an amazing 5mph. Do I drive 15mph? Yes. Would I with or without speed bumps? Also yes. Are the speed bumps a ridiculous attempt to force this "5mph" rule upon everyone here? You bet.

 

I agree with your assesment of integrity vs. lawfullness. In Texas the speed limit must be set at the 80% (not sure of the exact percentile) of what people actually drive on that road way. They must do traffic studdies to justify what speed limit is set etc. There are other factors that could influence the speed limit, but to just lower it because you want to would result in a non-enforcable speed limit.

On the other hand, I feel driving 15 MPH in a apartment complex to be unresponsible. In that situation you could find yourself with a child running out in front of you from the blind side of a parked car. By the time you saw the child they would be under your car. And before you say the parents should keep their kids from running out into traffic, you should stop and think about how they do keep them from running out there, but it is that 1 time the kid does not listen and gets away that can ruin two families lives. But 5 MPH may be a little extreme, and no, speed bumps are not the solution.

 

I suppose you'd have to see the apartment complex to see why 15mph makes sense, but I'm glad you see where democracy plays a role in mindful protest of unreasonable law.

 

Yup, I feel the situation should dictate the resasonable speed, and the way most appartment complexes are laid out around here a lower speed is better, but if they were more condo style, I could see a higher speed being reasonable.

 

I don't like speed bumps.

BUT IMO we need them in my neighborhood. It has a 25 mph speed limit. The street is on a slight hill. And we have a small public park at the end of the street. By the time cars get down to my end of the street some are doing 45 to 60 mph at times! The police come out 4 or 5 times a year and write tickets. The word in this small town spreads like wild fire so they don't usually get big offenders. The speed bumps would at least give those that want to speed a work out of there ball joints and struts.

 

Personally, I'd prefer speed triggered, cameras. The offenders are easy enough to identify.

Bob Wilson