Tuesday 8th August 2006

'Speed kills' policy unsafe: campaign

More will die on the roads warns safety expert

---

Rural limits to be reviewed

Road safety campaign Safe Speed called the Department for Transport's guidance for setting local speed limits "flawed and deadly because it is founded on bad science and tends to de-skill driving".

The rationale was as follows:

• Basing speed limits on average traffic speeds as suggested in the new advice tends to put around half of all drivers outside the law.
• At the foundation of the new guidance is the idea that reducing speed by 1mph leads to five per cent fewer crashes. The science employed is just plain wrong and the claimed speed accident relationship does not exist.
• Reduced speed limits, where they are unnecessary, de-skill driving, and if our drivers employ less skill, more of us will die on the roads.

Founder Paul Smith said: "The new guidance is based on faulty foundations and will ultimately cause road deaths to increase. If we want safer roads we must look at the psychological factors that underlie crashes. By tending to de-skill driving these proposals will make road safety worse.

"Department for Transport is clearly blinded by its own 'speed kills' propaganda and is not fit for purpose. It does not understand the process of safe driving and as such is not competent to devise road safety policy."

Links

• Safe Speed
• Related story: Speed limits to be reviewed

[Mr Whippy]

Doesn't using average speeds as a guide for the limit mean (no pun intended) that eventually we will end up with speeds around 0mph?

That was the whole reason 85th percentile was used, and now they are using illogical reasoning to somehow achieve something.

WHO is in charge? WHERE are the independent bodies calling these ideas complete bollarks?

It's madness!

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

Timberwolf said:

I always wonder what would happen if speed limits were abolished entirely, and replaced with (stiffer and more regularly applied) penalties for driving without due care and attention.

That would ultimately be all that is needed, because if your speed is excessive for the conditions anyway (including under the "old" limit) then dwdc(at) would cover all the bases wrt to speed anyway.

But that would cost money and empower people with decision making, something our government seems to be totally against

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

Bah who cares.

They won't enforce it with people anyway. Anymore vans and scamerati out and about and their profits will tumble if they are used for wide coverage even on quiet roads (ie, cost effective to monitor a quiet road??)
So they'll use fixed camera's, which can be seen, poor ability for siting in the sticks with no power source etc. Easy to vandalise etc.

Just not going to happen where it matters anyway.

Limit is 60mph now but I go 70mph+ where it's safe already, so I'm breaking the law now as it is. If it's lowered to 50 or 40mph I'll still be breaking the law so who cares? I'll just be breaking it along with even more people than ever

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

711 said:

Now we see what the new penalties in the Road Safety Bill were really about:

Get caught doing 60 in the new reduced limits, and the nanny state will have your license. This clarifies what we've always suspected - speed limits are simply one of several tools being used to force people off the roads, they have nothing to do with safety.

The more they(government) push me the more I'll push back.

It won't be long until there are enough people pushing bloody hard to give them a bloody big shock!

I think a systematic attack of all UK fixed speed camera's would be a good start... no Plod out there to catch anyone these days so nothing really stopping anyone doing what they like anyway

Dave

Edited by Mr Whippy on Tuesday 8th August 17:24

[Mr Whippy]

[redacted]

[Mr Whippy]

vonhosen said:

Doofus will break the speed limit still also & he'll be prosecuted if caught, just like he would if he was caught rewiring his house.

Classify Doofus.

From my experience I can rewire just as proficiently as many registered electricians because I choose to be good at what I do.

Perhaps if a registered electrician saw the work before I was prosecuted he could say "job well done", much like a Plod seeing a sportscar being driven well at speed may well leave them on their way.

But today it's blinkered prosecuting ignoring any facts. It's simple government nannying. You CAN do that, you CAN'T do that. We know best, you will obey. Don't break our random made up laws because we think we know what we are talking about.

Today speeding, tomorrow DIY, shortly it'll be sexual relations with an un-married partner... Orwells 1984 here we come!

Thanks but no thanks.

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

vonhosen said:

You can't expect barely adequate drivers who may only have adequate (within our current remit) judgement of speed & distance to suddenly have to deal with mcuh larger differentials. If those larger differentials are going to be present we need to be sure that those achieving the higher speeds are tested and competent to do so, in that they can handle the car safely at that speed, that their driving processes are sound & that they are observed to drive in a fashion that takes account of the weaker drivers legitimately on our roads, not merely possessing the bullish arrogant attitude that it is always someone else's fault, that is so often displayed by drivers on our roads.

Surely logic dictates all the above?

I don't want to die or kill someone, therefore I drive appropriately for the conditions to minimise or totally negate that potential. I take pride in my driving and try to better myself every day. Surely that should be a prerequisite for drivers? Pride in their driving, and taking it more seriously than A to B? If safety is paramount than surely attitude should be too?

If we let cretins on the road that is the fault of the testing system! If we let good drivers become bad drivers over time through poor policing spotting deteriorating standards, then that is a fault in policing. Or letting genuinely bad drivers onto the roads and their abilities are never checked either by trafpol or 10 year testing, then we have a big problem too.


I suppose we need to start to look at what the roads are for then.

If we are to suppose the worst drivers are the majority and work to their level, then I can see why speed limits need to be lower, but they won't *protect* the safety of anyone. They are just guides. Ignorant drivers will still be a huge danger to themselves for many other reasons than their speed.

The way I see it is there will never be truly safe roads until we make the drivers inherently safe. Making them go slowly only reduces the severity of their mishaps, but they will still make them!

Which is more acceptable? A few big accidents, or lots of smaller ones?

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

vonhosen said:

But it costs far more & takes years to make meaningful changes.

I honestly think that compulsory retesting for all casual drivers would be a bigger vote loser than cameras for any government, because the majority of drivers aren't enthuasiasts & don't want to have to pay for continual training & retesting. They'd see that as far more restrictive & a burden.

They've had over a decade of speed camera's, and a good 5 years of really forcefull speed monitoring, and there has been no meaningful changes in KSI or road deaths *considering* road safety improvements, car safety improvements and medical care improvements.

Every day the natural flow of traffic on most roads is at a speed which exceeds speed limits. If these limits are broken today they will be tomorrow. How will anything change if they are already widely ignored?

And all in all you've answered the question. Policiticans wanting to sustain their gravy train jobs and secure more of our taxation for wasteful management on their behalf, means that we get a sub-standard service back.

If people *actually* knew that speed camera policy wasn't effective then they probably WOULD support driver training. The whole government angle on speed is that it kills, they use death to force through inadequate and cheap policy on the shoulders of outrage!
It's quite clear that if people were not fed the crap they are about road safety, and actually had an objective view of the facts and figures they may be less willing to accept what is going on around them!

As long as my safety comes second in line to the government securing their position in power, I will continue to ignore their stupid laws and regulations in all walks of life! Let common sense prevail, not complete ignorance!

Thanks

Dave

Edited by Mr Whippy on Wednesday 9th August 14:31

[Mr Whippy]

vonhosen said:

Speed limits have helped achieve where we are today (the safest roads of any major nation), they are a control measure within a total roads policy and shouldn't be seen in isolation.

So why change them?

Why did they install camera's?

Why reduce the risk to tolerable levels if it's already very low.

As it is there has been no statis, so statistically we can't detect any trends anyway. Perhaps this is the point of the re-classification of many roads, to distort statistics to the point that an assesment of speed monitoring and policing and the effects on safety cannot be fully made.

Stupid idiotic illogical government.

I honestly hope some nice freedom fighters from the Middle East go blow the Houses of Parliament up, get rid of all the nincompoop policy makers in one go!

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

vonhosen said:

Mr Whippy said:

Why reduce the risk to tolerable levels if it's already very low.

Because there is pressure that current levels are not good enough. It'll never be zero but it's considered too high.

Hmmmmm...

Is it more a matter off make a big fuss, give it a buzzy tag line "speed kills" and create a climate where there is a pressure to reduce road deaths.

I wonder why the government continue to let people smoke and drink when thousands more die from liver disease and heart disease and associated cancers from smoking.

It's odd that people will take a real risk with something that has the potential to kill them, yet the government lets them take those risks and responsibilities! Good stuff in my view! Yet a tiny proportion who die from driving accidents vs the above (even tinier from speeding OVER the limit) means that the majority have that responsibility of choosing a safe speed taken away...

Odd...

Humans eh...

Dave

Edited by Mr Whippy on Wednesday 9th August 16:47

[Mr Whippy]

Yes, road deaths will never be acceptable, EVER!

I think we should have blanket speed limits of 5mph because no one can be trusted!

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

eliminator said:

Politiciant won't do the right thing as they fear the public hating training / re-testing
In other words they fear not being re-elected
Somthing to think about, that

Thats about the size of it.

We get an inferior service, as in all other walks of life where the government we elect is meant to provide for us, simply because their fear of loosing power grows beyond their pride to do a good job while they are there!

Nothing will change until people stop voting for cretins like Labour three times in a row of course... they think the general public love them and the things they do!

Dave

[Mr Whippy]

vonhosen said:

jasandjules said:

vonhosen said:

What did they do at the ballot box ?

Many showed their disdain by not voting at all.

And where did they that wasted opportunity to speak get them ?

Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 10th August 16:31

It would have got them the same shower of sh1te whoever they voted for though wouldn't it.

Their all barmy ignorant commies these days

Dave