|
Carbon dioxide posted:
What the gently caress is going on in South Carolina, Montana, and Mississippi?!
|
# ? Apr 28, 2017 21:28 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 01:48 |
|
Blue Footed Booby posted:What the gently caress is going on in South Carolina, Montana, and Mississippi?!
|
# ? Apr 28, 2017 21:31 |
|
Carbon dioxide posted:
Georgia joins Florida as America's wang. Texas is the rear end in a top hat with hemorrhoids, making LA, MS, and AL the taint. Makes sense. edit: Blue Footed Booby posted:What the gently caress is going on in South Carolina, Montana, and Mississippi?! Montana is definitely because they have that "no speed limit during the day" law. MS, and SC are probably because of really lovely roads, and it's full of drunk rednecks. Bird in a Blender has a new favorite as of 21:38 on Apr 28, 2017 |
# ? Apr 28, 2017 21:36 |
|
Carbon dioxide posted:
Ahh, so the poorest states didn't just vote for Trump, they're also drunk/poo poo drivers.
|
# ? Apr 28, 2017 22:13 |
|
Living in MS for grad school, can confirm that no one knows how to drive here. No blinkers, merging abilities, or desire to drive within 20 mph either side of the limit.
|
# ? Apr 28, 2017 22:48 |
|
CharlieWhiskey posted:Ahh, so the poorest states didn't just vote for Trump, they're also drunk/poo poo drivers. Poor states have poor infrastructure and poo poo cars, who would have thunk
|
# ? Apr 28, 2017 23:03 |
|
Pretty useless because it's not on per million miles driven basis. And not choropleth.
|
# ? Apr 28, 2017 23:14 |
|
I'd be interested to see how much Wyoming fluctuates. I figure one head-on collision with fatalities would skew their numbers pretty strongly E: I'm Ohio east of West Virginia
|
# ? Apr 28, 2017 23:16 |
|
Some of it probably has to do with people driving in city traffic generally moving slower so accidents are less likely to be fatal to people in either car, as opposed to highways or stretches of open road. It doesn't explain everything on the graph though. Now I have a hankering to pick the Ask Me About Being a Traffic Engineer thread back up again.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2017 01:52 |
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Montana is definitely because they have that "no speed limit during the day" law. MS, and SC are probably because of really lovely roads, and it's full of drunk rednecks. No longer true, actually - while Montana has on the books the "General Speed Law" that used to govern highway speeds (that is, a speeding ticket can be written for any vehicle travelling at 'speeds unsafe for the conditions'), there is a day-and-night speed limit on all highways and interstates now. Bear in mind this was only brought about when federal road funding was threatened to be revoked unless a limit was put in place. Instead, blame should be cast on Montana's incredibly lax DUI laws - a DUI is not a felony offense until the fourth within five years. As an additional fun fact, open container laws weren't state-wide until about 2009 - prior to that, it was per-city or per-county.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2017 02:10 |
|
CapitanGarlic posted:No longer true, actually - while Montana has on the books the "General Speed Law" that used to govern highway speeds (that is, a speeding ticket can be written for any vehicle travelling at 'speeds unsafe for the conditions'), there is a day-and-night speed limit on all highways and interstates now. Bear in mind this was only brought about when federal road funding was threatened to be revoked unless a limit was put in place. Isn't there still a state that doesn't have open container laws? I want to say...Arkansas?
|
# ? Apr 29, 2017 02:23 |
|
trapped mouse posted:Isn't there still a state that doesn't have open container laws? I want to say...Arkansas? I thought it was Texas where everybody in the car could be actively drinking so long as the driver wasn't.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2017 02:29 |
|
Nuevo posted:I thought it was Texas where everybody in the car could be actively drinking so long as the driver wasn't. It was the last time I was there, but that was years ago Edit: whoops, looks like it wasn't legal then either
|
# ? Apr 29, 2017 02:33 |
|
trapped mouse posted:Isn't there still a state that doesn't have open container laws? I want to say...Arkansas? It's Missouri, and it's good.
|
# ? Apr 29, 2017 05:19 |
|
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 00:38 |
|
Synagogues of Satan is a GREAT band name.
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 00:49 |
|
Imagine four balls on the edge of a cliff…
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 00:50 |
|
flosofl posted:Synagogues of Satan is a GREAT band name. Orphaned Land cover band? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AbCliCQnBUo
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 00:52 |
|
Bird in a Blender posted:Montana is definitely because they have that "no speed limit during the day" law. No, they do not. They haven't had that for years. The law was that you had to keep to a "reasonable and prudent" speed, until 1998 when a guy ticketed for going 102mph appealed all the way to the state supreme court which ruled that that was unconstitutionally vague. So for the time between that decision and when the legislature passed a 75mph limit the next year, Montana had no speed limit at all, although you could still get ticketed for reckless or careless driving. And as for "because," Montana's roads were safer during the "reasonable and prudent" era. http://mediatrackers.org/montana/2014/12/02/montanas-speed-limit-make-highways-safer CapitanGarlic posted:No longer true, actually - while Montana has on the books the "General Speed Law" that used to govern highway speeds (that is, a speeding ticket can be written for any vehicle travelling at 'speeds unsafe for the conditions'), there is a day-and-night speed limit on all highways and interstates now. Bear in mind this was only brought about when federal road funding was threatened to be revoked unless a limit was put in place. Again, no. When the Feds passed the 55mph limit in 1974 and threatened states with pulling their highway funding unless they implemented that limit, Montana did so, but set the fine for speeding at $5. Drivers would just keep $5s in their glove compartments to hand over to the cop along with their driver's license. When the Federal limit was repealed in 1995, Montana reverted to the previous 'reasonable and prudent' standard. Then that law was ruled unconstitutional in 1998, and the legislature set a numeric limit the following year because the alternative was no speed limit at all. Phanatic has a new favorite as of 01:08 on Apr 30, 2017 |
# ? Apr 30, 2017 01:01 |
|
Wait... did we miss it? Or was the election the end and now we're in hell?
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 01:51 |
|
MrUnderbridge posted:Wait... did we miss it? In your heart, you know the awful truth.
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 01:53 |
|
The thing is that the rapture already happened but nobody was selected to go with it.
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 03:05 |
|
HardDiskD posted:The thing is that the rapture already happened but nobody was selected to go with it. The apocalypse is coming, bigly.
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 03:11 |
|
Phanatic posted:No, they do not. They haven't had that for years. The law was that you had to keep to a "reasonable and prudent" speed, until 1998 when a guy ticketed for going 102mph appealed all the way to the state supreme court which ruled that that was unconstitutionally vague. So for the time between that decision and when the legislature passed a 75mph limit the next year, Montana had no speed limit at all, although you could still get ticketed for reckless or careless driving. So much for the tolerant left.
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 11:15 |
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:The apocalypse is coming, bigly. Trump fits the bill pretty well for the antichrist tbh
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 12:21 |
|
|
# ? Apr 30, 2017 23:16 |
|
This is the only one of these anybody really needs if you ask me.
|
# ? May 1, 2017 00:05 |
|
AKA Pseudonym posted:This is the only one of these anybody really needs if you ask me. This never gets old.
|
# ? May 1, 2017 00:11 |
|
Memri TV is some of the most bullshity bullshit to ever get on the internet.
|
# ? May 1, 2017 02:44 |
|
|
# ? May 2, 2017 09:12 |
|
What would a sub be if not a sandwich? also it's missing an axis for open faced sandwiches, wherein your opinion on whether pizza is a sandwich would fall
|
# ? May 2, 2017 09:16 |
|
someone awful. posted:What would a sub be if not a sandwich? I like this. We can also put toast and tacos on that axis.
|
# ? May 2, 2017 09:22 |
|
Platystemon posted:I like this. As well as sushi.
|
# ? May 2, 2017 10:22 |
|
|
# ? May 2, 2017 10:26 |
|
Pizza, toast, sushi, cake, vodka, etc... are all in that bottom right square.
|
# ? May 2, 2017 10:27 |
Why. Why.
|
|
# ? May 2, 2017 10:32 |
|
The shake weight of political ideology. what if my chart could include meta-ideology oooh
|
# ? May 2, 2017 10:41 |
|
HerStuddMuffin posted:Pizza, toast, sushi, cake, vodka, etc... are all in that bottom right square. It still states "food enveloped in a food", which disqualifies open-faced sandwiches and pizza, but includes calzones and possibly sushi (at least rolls). Hmm. someone awful. has a new favorite as of 11:12 on May 2, 2017 |
# ? May 2, 2017 11:09 |
|
Haggis is a sandwich. A sausage is a sandwich. A jelly doughnut is a sandwich. A chocolate liquer is a sandwich.
|
# ? May 2, 2017 11:31 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 01:48 |
|
someone awful. posted:It still states "food enveloped in a food", which disqualifies open-faced sandwiches and pizza, but includes calzones and possibly sushi (at least rolls). Hmm. Surely it should be 'enveloped in large sections of carbohydrates" so sushi wouldn't count, and neither does a breaded schnitzel. You'd have to put a limit on fat content of the outside to eliminate pies.
|
# ? May 2, 2017 11:49 |