Speeding Does Not Cause Accidents

Speeding Does Not Cause Accidents

Author
Discussion

Jon1967x

7,175 posts

123 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Phatboy317 said:
Jon1967x said:
Seems like a good argument for lower speed limits as inappropriate speed seems a very common cause of KSI without breaking the speed limit.
If the speed limit was 0mph then 100% of accidents would be in excess of the limit. But, by your logic, you would be using that as an argument for still lower limits?
And, conversely, if the limit was 300mph then zero accidents would be in excess of the limit so surely, by your logic, you would be arguing for higher limits?
Anywhere you sit along the line between those two extremes, the logic is the wrong way around.

The limit is simply a line drawn in the sand - it has at best a loose connection with whether a speed is inappropriate or not - even on the same road at different times.
A lower speed limit, strictly enforced, may serve to reduce the number of inappropriate speed accidents, however it cannot, even at best, reduce the overall accident figure by more than the original 8% claimed, nor the overall fatalities by more than the original 11% claimed.
Yet, elsewhere, claims are made of huge reductions in accidents and casualties being down to poorly-enforced 20mph limits.


Edited by Phatboy317 on Friday 31st October 06:11
I responded to the point that it was inappropriate speed and not speeding (ie breaking the speed limit ) that was more significant when a factor in accidents. That implies the speed limits are too high. It's really not too difficult to understand for most people and is not the only relevant factor.. See my earlier summary.

I'm getting very tired of this binary argument where something is either relevant or irrelevant - the world is analogue, full of factors, some we can control or at least influence and some we can't.






heebeegeetee

28,590 posts

247 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Jon1967x said:
I responded to the point that it was inappropriate speed and not speeding (ie breaking the speed limit ) that was more significant when a factor in accidents. That implies the speed limits are too high. It's really not too difficult to understand for most people and is not the only relevant factor.. See my earlier summary.

I'm getting very tired of this binary argument where something is either relevant or irrelevant - the world is analogue, full of factors, some we can control or at least influence and some we can't.
How do you know that the inappropriate speed is above the limit?

Phatboy317

801 posts

117 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Jon1967x said:
I responded to the point that it was inappropriate speed and not speeding (ie breaking the speed limit ) that was more significant when a factor in accidents. That implies the speed limits are too high. It's really not too difficult to understand for most people and is not the only relevant factor.. See my earlier summary.

I'm getting very tired of this binary argument where something is either relevant or irrelevant - the world is analogue, full of factors, some we can control or at least influence and some we can't.
I apologise for the first paragraph of my post - in retrospect it was a bit uncalled for.

But it does not follow that because speeds are occasionally too high for conditions that the speed limits are too high, because most of the time the speeds are not too high for conditions.
And you also seem to assume that people will generally drive at the limit even if that speed is too high for conditions.

It's true that there are factors we can control or influence and those we can't, however the trick is in knowing which ones we should be.



Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Jon1967x said:
Seems like a good argument for lower speed limits as inappropriate speed seems a very common cause of KSI without breaking the speed limit.
What do we reduce them to though? Inappropriate speed could be anything between the current limit and virtually zero - depending on the conditions. On one day it may be perfectly safe to drive at 60mph on a road - the next day 20mph may be pushing it.

Surely the better option would be better driver education on how to deal with poor driving conditions.

A speed limit is the maximum permitted speed in clear dry conditions. Unless we have automatic variable speed limits - the only option is to rely on driver judgement. The trick is to educate drivers so they make better judgements.

Edited by Moonhawk on Friday 31st October 08:21

singlecoil

33,307 posts

245 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
Jon1967x said:
Seems like a good argument for lower speed limits as inappropriate speed seems a very common cause of KSI without breaking the speed limit.
What do we reduce them to though? Inappropriate speed could be anything between 65mph and 5mph - depending on the conditions.

Surely the better option would be better driver education on how to deal with poor driving conditions.
I agree, very much so.

But the idea of hauling 30 million motorists in to be taught how to slow down where desirable strikes me as unworkable. But even if that were possible there would then be the problem of getting them to actually do it. It's one thing to teach people what the right thing to do is, but something else entirely to get them to put those lessons into practice.

As long as the urge to go faster is there, there will be people who can't resist. You can see the same thing with drugs and drink, they know they shouldn't be doing it, but they still do it.





emmaT2014

1,860 posts

115 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
singlecoil said:
Moonhawk said:
Jon1967x said:
Seems like a good argument for lower speed limits as inappropriate speed seems a very common cause of KSI without breaking the speed limit.
What do we reduce them to though? Inappropriate speed could be anything between 65mph and 5mph - depending on the conditions.

Surely the better option would be better driver education on how to deal with poor driving conditions.
I agree, very much so.

But the idea of hauling 30 million motorists in to be taught how to slow down where desirable strikes me as unworkable. But even if that were possible there would then be the problem of getting them to actually do it. It's one thing to teach people what the right thing to do is, but something else entirely to get them to put those lessons into practice.

As long as the urge to go faster is there, there will be people who can't resist. You can see the same thing with drugs and drink, they know they shouldn't be doing it, but they still do it.
Well it would be a good start if the current regulations were observed to give them a go.

There are plenty of people on here who post subjects asking why rgulations are not enforced or that penalties and enforcement are not sufficient or are not appropriate.
There are others who post the contrary, that enforcement is too strict and should not have taken place or should only be undertaken by 'real traffic policing'. Apparently 'real traffic policing' consists of a traffic officer on every corner stopping people, issuing no penalties and simply wagging a finger or giving penalty-free lectures and sending you on your way to be ever comliant from then-on.

The road traffic regulations are not optional and are there for good reason. While there is a great deal of tolerance given in the thresholds that have to be reached before enforcement takes place there are no sections of the regulations that give the driver options to ignore the regulations. A driver need not consider whether a speed limit is appropriate even though this consideration is now included in DfT guidance to highways autorities, the driver simply needs to consider whether a speed is appropriate AND that it is a speed that is lawful. So the driver need not, at any time, make a judgement of whether it is appropriate and safe to exceed the limit. You only need to consider whether it is appropriate to drive safely at the limit. If it is not don't drive at the limit.

The problem I have seen is that even driving gods have little or no knowledge of how to read a road in respect of the speed limit as well as not knowing that the vast majority of roads have no speed limit signs. They then get pi55ed-off because their lack of knowledge is penalised.

So the current situation need not be changed in respect of speed limits, it is the attitude of drivers to thise limits that need changing. If you continue to use the road as a sports arena then it is not acceptable or lawful to do that in the company of drivers who simply use it as a utility. There are places for sport so use them.

So there you go; driving gods and those who drive as a necessity should observe the same safety practice and road traffic regulations. No need for judging whether the limit is safe to exceed, simply don't exceed it.



Edited by emmaT2014 on Friday 31st October 11:04

Guybrush

4,328 posts

205 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Jon1967x said:
Phatboy317 said:
Jon1967x said:
Seems like a good argument for lower speed limits as inappropriate speed seems a very common cause of KSI without breaking the speed limit.
If the speed limit was 0mph then 100% of accidents would be in excess of the limit. But, by your logic, you would be using that as an argument for still lower limits?
And, conversely, if the limit was 300mph then zero accidents would be in excess of the limit so surely, by your logic, you would be arguing for higher limits?
Anywhere you sit along the line between those two extremes, the logic is the wrong way around.

The limit is simply a line drawn in the sand - it has at best a loose connection with whether a speed is inappropriate or not - even on the same road at different times.
A lower speed limit, strictly enforced, may serve to reduce the number of inappropriate speed accidents, however it cannot, even at best, reduce the overall accident figure by more than the original 8% claimed, nor the overall fatalities by more than the original 11% claimed.
Yet, elsewhere, claims are made of huge reductions in accidents and casualties being down to poorly-enforced 20mph limits.


Edited by Phatboy317 on Friday 31st October 06:11
I responded to the point that it was inappropriate speed and not speeding (ie breaking the speed limit ) that was more significant when a factor in accidents. That implies the speed limits are too high. It's really not too difficult to understand for most people and is not the only relevant factor.. See my earlier summary.

I'm getting very tired of this binary argument where something is either relevant or irrelevant - the world is analogue, full of factors, some we can control or at least influence and some we can't.
The conclusion that speed limits are too high is in itself possibly a conclusion arrived at using binary thinking. There is no speed limit other than zero which will stop people travelling too fast for the conditions; speed limits which are arrived at using the lowest common denominator will be ignored by the majority, because the majority are perfectly able to drive to the conditions and don't need to look at their speedo to decide whether or not they are driving safely. The worst drivers, who are drunk, drugged, no insurance, bad eyesight, no licence etc. are the ones who are those who are most likely to crash and restricting their speed won't do any good.

singlecoil

33,307 posts

245 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Guybrush said:
The conclusion that speed limits are too high is in itself possibly a conclusion arrived at using binary thinking. There is no speed limit other than zero which will stop people travelling too fast for the conditions; speed limits which are arrived at using the lowest common denominator will be ignored by the majority, because the majority are perfectly able to drive to the conditions and don't need to look at their speedo to decide whether or not they are driving safely. The worst drivers, who are drunk, drugged, no insurance, bad eyesight, no licence etc. are the ones who are those who are most likely to crash and restricting their speed won't do any good.
Will they? I rather doubt it. There is a certain amount of speed limit enforcement going on (you can read about some of it on this forum) and fines etc apply to speeders whether or not they happen to be better drivers than the ones the limits were set for.

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
emmaT2014 said:
No need for judging whether the limit is safe to exceed, simply don't exceed it.
Who even suggested such a thing?

Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
singlecoil said:
Will they? I rather doubt it. There is a certain amount of speed limit enforcement going on (you can read about some of it on this forum) and fines etc apply to speeders whether or not they happen to be better drivers than the ones the limits were set for.
Yes - even the govenment's white paper on setting of local speed limits recognises the fact that if speed limits are set too low - they don't encourage self-compliance. They even go so far as to say that drivers speeding may be indicative that a speed limit has been set too low and consideration should be given to increasing it.

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploa...

Section 19.
Unless a speed limit is set with support from the local community, the police and other local services, with supporting education, and with consideration of whether engineering measures are necessary to reduce speeds; or if it is set unrealistically low for the particular road function and condition, it may be ineffective and drivers may not comply with the speed limit.

Section 26.
Where there is poor compliance with an existing speed limit on a road or stretch of road the reasons for the non compliance should be examined before a solution is sought. If the speed limit is set too low for no clear reason and the risk of collisions is low, then it may be appropriate to increase the limit.

Anyone know of a single example of a speed limit being raised?

Edited by Moonhawk on Friday 31st October 14:31

v12Legs

313 posts

114 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Guybrush said:
The conclusion that speed limits are too high is in itself possibly a conclusion arrived at using binary thinking. There is no speed limit other than zero which will stop people travelling too fast for the conditions; speed limits which are arrived at using the lowest common denominator will be ignored by the majority, because the majority are perfectly able to drive to the conditions and don't need to look at their speedo to decide whether or not they are driving safely. The worst drivers, who are drunk, drugged, no insurance, bad eyesight, no licence etc. are the ones who are those who are most likely to crash and restricting their speed won't do any good.
The majority? Really?

If I saw any evidence of the majority of drivers only exceeding "inappropriate" speed limits, and then only cautiously, you might have a point. But what I see is endemic speeding right across the board, in addition to a generally poor level of driving competence.


Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
v12Legs said:
But what I see is endemic speeding right across the board, in addition to a generally poor level of driving competence.
Yet we have:

a. Comparatively safe roads compared to most other countries in the world. Our fatality rate in 2012 was 3.5 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants - placing us joint 10th out of 189 countries - and some of those ahead of us are microstates or islands - rather than large western countries. For comparison Norway and Denmark have rates of 2.9 and 3.0, whereas France is 4.9, Belgium is 7.2 and the USA 11.6 (over three times higher).

b. A casualty rate that has dropped pretty much year on year since the 1970s and currently stands at it's lowest level since records began in the 1920s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...

I'd say that in general the standard of driving in this country is pretty good compared to other countries I have driven in. You get the odd loon and the MLMs could do with a slap - but i'd rather drive in the UK than anywhere else I have visited so far.






v12Legs

313 posts

114 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
Moonhawk said:
Yet we have:

a. Comparatively safe roads compared to most other countries in the world. Our fatality rate in 2012 was 3.5 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants - placing us joint 10th out of 189 countries - and some of those ahead of us are microstates or islands - rather than large western countries. For comparison Norway and Denmark have rates of 2.9 and 3.0, whereas France is 4.9, Belgium is 7.2 and the USA 11.6 (over three times higher).

b. A casualty rate that has dropped pretty much year on year since the 1970s and currently stands at it's lowest level since records began in the 1920s.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_...

I'd say that in general the standard of driving in this country is pretty good compared to other countries I have driven in. You get the odd loon and the MLMs could do with a slap - but i'd rather drive in the UK than anywhere else I have visited so far.
Other countries have worse road safety records, so we don't need to do anything about ours.

Sorry, I don't subscribe to that argument at all.

heebeegeetee

28,590 posts

247 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
v12Legs said:
Other countries have worse road safety records, so we don't need to do anything about ours.

Sorry, I don't subscribe to that argument at all.
But you could wonder why we're never thanked or recognised for doing our bit; instead we only ever get berated.

Don't get me wrong, I often despair at the driving in the uk, but it has to be said we possibly are the most courteous by far. We all know that a flash of the headlights at a junction means 'go ahead' to the other driver, I'm sure we're all familiar with this.

Whereas on the continent a flash of the headlights only ever means one thing - 'get the fk out the way' - and that's the same all over.

I'd say the french and Germans are really good with their lane discipline but by gum they do like their tailgating. And the Belgians are just plain god-awful at everything with a casualty rate to show for it.

We've seen how the likes of OBTC on these threads feels about the driving standards of the uk, we've seen how he's done his level best to berate us; even when his own figures show our record to be bloody brilliant he still tells us we're god awful because apparently our 'planning and management' are poor.

i don't think I've sever seen the road safety fascists recognise our great record. All they ever do is scare monger and try to make out that you're taking your life in your hands every time you to take to the roads, which is just palpably untrue.


Moonhawk

10,730 posts

218 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
v12Legs said:
Other countries have worse road safety records, so we don't need to do anything about ours.

Sorry, I don't subscribe to that argument at all.
Where did I say that?

I'm all for increasing safety on the roads.

I think the highway code should be on the national curriculum, I think more cold be done in relation to road markings, cat's eyes etc on unlit roads. Junctions could be made clearer with better visibility (sometimes something as simple as cutting a bush or hedge is enough). Pedestrians could be held to account for their actions (jaywalking law?).

There is loads that can be done without continually bashing drivers over the head and dropping speed limits wholesale as if they are a fix-all solution.

As the poster above states - we should also be proud of our record on roads safety - and should highlight the fact from time to time - instead of continually putting our country down. We are fast enough to whine when we come out bottom of the pile - why not champion areas where we come out near the top?

Edited by Moonhawk on Friday 31st October 18:17

Phatboy317

801 posts

117 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
v12Legs said:
If I saw any evidence of the majority of drivers only exceeding "inappropriate" speed limits, and then only cautiously, you might have a point. But what I see is endemic speeding right across the board, in addition to a generally poor level of driving competence.
It may look like that to you, but then you really only notice the bad ones, don't you?

In reality, on average, only around one driver out of every twenty-five will be involved in a serious accident during their lifetime.


Edited by Phatboy317 on Friday 31st October 18:29

robinessex

11,046 posts

180 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
EmmaT2014 wrote

'The problem I have seen is that even driving gods have little or no knowledge of how to read a road in respect of the speed limit as well as not knowing that the vast majority of roads have no speed limit signs. They then get pi55ed-off because their lack of knowledge is penalised.

Really ? Every single road in the UK has a speeed limit. Some don't need signs, see a current edition of the Highway Code re speed limit indication. Seems you lack the basics of what is required to drive in the UK. How about you surrendering your licence as unfit to drive?

WD39

20,083 posts

115 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Similar situation near me. 3 accidents in a year on NSL single carriageway road. Call for lower speed limit, so it's now 50mph. Except, ALL the accidents were head on's whilst overtaking. Nothing to do with speed.
If you are overtaking on a single carriagway NSL you are probably speeding,or perhaps the oncoming vehicle,one half of the collision,was speeding.

In my county the traffic police have highlighted many times to anyone who will listen, the four main factors involved in accidents involving a fatality or serious injury.

1)Drink Driving...2)Speeding...3)Hand held mobile phone use...4)Young (under 25)drivers.

Our village is soon to have a legal 30mph speed limit. We fought long ang hard to achieve this. Why ?
Drivers are simply travelling far too fast through a very narrow and tight village road with blind 45 degree bends at each end.

Crazy.



Edited by WD39 on Friday 31st October 20:22


Edited by WD39 on Friday 31st October 20:24

Dammit

3,790 posts

207 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
v12Legs said:
Other countries have worse road safety records, so we don't need to do anything about ours.

Sorry, I don't subscribe to that argument at all.
^This wasn't Moonhawk, it was Heebeegeebies who decided we'd reached perfection, so didn't need to try anymore.

jaf01uk

1,943 posts

195 months

Friday 31st October 2014
quotequote all
robinessex said:
Similar situation near me. 3 accidents in a year on NSL single carriageway road. Call for lower speed limit, so it's now 50mph. Except, ALL the accidents were head on's whilst overtaking. Nothing to do with speed
Ladies and Gentlemen I give you 120 miles of average speed cameras on the A9, a road famous for low average speed and high amount of frustration overtaking accidents!!!

WD39 said:
If you are overtaking on a single carriagway NSL you are probably speeding,or perhaps the oncoming vehicle,one half of the collision,was speeding.
Absolute rubbish and generalisation, you need to elaborate on your thinking with that one...!

WD39 said:
In my county the traffic police have highlighted many times to anyone who will listen, the four main factors involved in accidents involving a fatality or serious injury.

1)Drink Driving...2)Speeding...3)Hand held mobile phone use...4)Young (under 25)drivers.
They are making it up then, national statistics do not agree!


WD39 said:
Our village is soon to have a legal 30mph speed limit. We fought long ang hard to achieve this. Why ?
Drivers are simply travelling far too fast through a very narrow and tight village road with blind 45 degree bends at each end.
What's the bets it will be locals who get caught speeding!
WD39 said:
Crazy.
I totally agree, there seems to be a lot of 1 and 2 month log ins in these discussions with blank profiles?

PS Emma, at work I can go at any speed I deem appropriate, does that fry your brain? Or would you rather I slow down going to 999's?