Slow drivers are indeed dangerous too. In fact if you are not keeping pace with traffic or slowing down traffic by driving really under the speed limit the cops can pull you over and ticket you for dangerous driving because you can cause accidents that way.

:)

My buddy just moved to Houston, he reports that Texans literally don't even give a crap about drinking and driving. You'd be verbally castigated for driving if you've even looked at a glass of wine recently around here, apparently they ask "Did ya kill anyone?" Texas sounds weird to me (around here is weird too).

I 100% disagree with this. A slow driver on a freeway, for example, that is going significantly below the speed of traffic is MUCH more dangerous than someone going faster than everyone else. In a heavy traffic area, like New York where I live (or California where I used to live), you won't necessarily see a slower moving vehicle until the person ahead of you avoids it and you end up slamming on your breaks to avoid a collision and causing the 20 people behind you to do likewise, causing a traffic jam. Slow drivers, in congested areas, are VERY dangerous. You should always drive the general speed of traffic, plus or minus 5 miles an hour from that is fine.

Motorcycles don't require a front plate, which was 100% satisfying when I lived in Germany and all the speed trap cameras take the picture from the FRONT of the vehicle :D

This has been born out by several studies of the data.

Northern and southern cali drivers are very different. LA drivers are much worse and will just drive through red lights and other traffic signals... SF drivers just tend to be a little oblivious and try to merge itno people.

Maybe that's not common in Texas, but I thought it was common most places already. Shit, around where I'm from, if a cop asks you (generally speaking) if you've been drinking and you reply that you want a lawyer, they can automatically take your license and book you for driving under the influence if you insist on a lawyer, no further questions asked. This is allowed through the DMV because of MADD. You can try to get your license back from the DMV, but that telephone conference is ridiculous. All the cop has to say is that you were under the influence, over the telephone, without providing any proof. Your word against his/hers. The only way to win that is if the cop can't make the telephone conference. So, even if you are found not guilty in a criminal court, you will most likely lose your license through the DMV, which then shows up on your driving record.

I'd question that personally. Without seeing the studies it's hard to say, there's aggressive and there's aggressive. Some forms of aggressive driving probably aren't dangerous. However, one of the pitfalls of studies of that nature is how they determine who is and is not an aggressive driver.

Not to mention the cases where an aggressive driver causes an accident that he or she isn't directly involved in. Such as causing a driver to slam on the brakes and get hit by the idiot that's riding his bumper.

There is also the issue of what constitutes causing an accident is driving slowly enough that people take risks to get around a driver counted as causing an accident? Because that's sort of questionable, that should be counted against aggressive drivers and not slow drivers.

But, overall it wouldn't surprise me if it were technically true, I'd just caution people from reading too much into it as the kinds of crashes that aggressive drivers tend to have are more dangerous.

It's not a high speed that's the problem so much as the speed differential. If everyone is traveling 65 MPH and one driver is traveling at 50, the differential causes problems as others are forced to make moves to get around that driver to maintain their own legal speed or else all traffic slows to well below the safe limit (which leads to unsafe maneuvers to get around the pokey vehicle). A differential in the other direction is also not the safest thing around but I'll wager that it's not quite as bad since the fast driver isn't forcing others to react so much as he is reacting to the slower drivers traveling at the posted limit. How we choose to react in either case is key.

And what you say about aggressive driving is certainly true. Speed and 'aggression' are not necessarily linked, though, and we can see one without the other. This is why I'm not a fan of the typical speed trap, since it only measures one metric - speed - and doesn't do a thing about the aggressive and dangerous habits that are the actual problem. But speeding is the low-hanging fruit of traffic enforcement so all sorts of data are presented to support the notion that 'speed kills', and to keep the revenue train rolling. But if everyone were to travel at 15 MPH over the limit, that doesn't mean that it's unsafe; it may actually be safer if everyone does so since the speed differential problems don't materialize. Likewise if everyone drives near the limit or all drive well under it.

Either way, I'm just glad we moved out of a huge metro area to now live in Green Acres. Driving is so calm and relaxed now...