Montana - So good it deserves it's own thread.

Montana - So good it deserves it's own thread.

Author
Discussion

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,857 posts

240 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
The Montana experiment. In a nutshell they removed the speed limit on the freeway and fatalaties instantly dropped and when they reinstated the limit the fatality rate increased. Would any of our "speed is everything" posters care to explain how that could be as I'm a little confused.

Surely if they removed the speed limit fatalities would go up? Or is the assertation that speed limit compliance is important to safety actually misleading?

I'm waiting

petros

2,441 posts

230 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
Speed restrictions in this country are all to do with raising revenue and nothing to do with reducing the number of accidents

Deltafox

3,839 posts

233 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
Bliarout said:
I'm waiting


Itll just be like old times back on the cscp funroom!

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,857 posts

240 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
I have a feeling it will be very in here

Still, it might make for interesting debate should anyone be so inclined and if it dies a death it will have proved a point anyway

vonhosen

40,290 posts

218 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
1934 in the UK the 30 speed limit in built up areas introduced. Reduction following year in fatalities = 841

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,857 posts

240 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
Stick to the question in hand please, why do you think fatalities dropped in Montana?

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
Is it true?

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
..and if so what are the stats?

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,857 posts

240 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
2 sMoKiN bArReLs said:
Is it true?
Montana, definitely.

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
Well, there's less than 1m people living in the fourth largest state.

(147,000 square miles)

vonhosen

40,290 posts

218 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
What were the figures for Montana ?

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
Got it!

It's to do with the sound produced by cars at certain speeds & moose collisions:

Moose are talented communicators, though some sounds they make are at low frequencies that are inaudible to the human ear. The bull and cow moose share only a few sounds in common. Some of the colorful calls they use include: squeaks, smacks, seeking calls, distress calls, snorting, gnashing, moaning or wailing, hiccups, and roars.


2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
Moose are equipped with special skills and qualities. For example, moose generally walk or pace slowly but they are capable of trotting at a speed of up to six miles per hour, and in rare cases at much higher speeds for brief spurts.

They generally don’t jump an obstacle, but check it out and then rear up on hind feet and thrust themselves over the hurdle. To move through deep snow, they may snowshoe by elevating their hooves and spreading their dewclaws. Moose are also powerful swimmers that move through water with a pacing, or fast-walk stroke, and with the whole body submerged.

vonhosen

40,290 posts

218 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
1996 they changed the daytime speed limit to safe & prudent.

Figures in 1996 = 114 deaths.
Figures for 1997 = 140 deaths.

>> Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 28th March 22:44

ulakye

163 posts

229 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
I'm sure this has been discussed on here before.

If I remember rightly the experiment ran for only a short period of time which wasn't long enough to determine if the fall was significant or simply a statistical anomally.

vonhosen

40,290 posts

218 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
June-Dec 1998 average with no daytime limits = 8.0 deaths per month
June-Dec 1999 average when 65/75 limits reintroduced = 7.8 deaths per month



>> Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 28th March 22:52

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
*Interesting side bar: During this 6 year period, Montana’s rural interstates daytime speeds (no speed limit) were consistently lower (on average 5–10 mph and more) than the speeds being reported on many sections of Southern California’s 65 mph posted urban interstates

That's interesting...people actually drove slower as a result of no limit!

So: that would correlate that more speed = more deaths?

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
..I still prefer the Moose theory

2 sMoKiN bArReLs

30,274 posts

236 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
...and do you remember Montana Red Dog?

BliarOut

Original Poster:

72,857 posts

240 months

Tuesday 28th March 2006
quotequote all
vonhosen said:
1996 they changed the daytime speed limit to safe & prudent.

Figures in 1996 = 114 deaths.
Figures for 1997 = 140 deaths.

>> Edited by vonhosen on Tuesday 28th March 22:44


And so you should the limit remained at 55 during that period, the interesting stats are in 1999

1996 114

1997 140

1998 113

1999 102

Last 12 Months
W/No Daytime Limits


101 Low

2000
After Speed Limits


143 High


That's what I love about the "stick to the limit" arguement, always quoting misleading stats.

So, would anyone like to try to explain it seeing as it happened. Surely it's a bit of a paradox don't you think? What if removing our motorway limit actually saved lives? Think about that before answering, what if it saved lives?