RE: Government blamed for increase in road deaths
Discussion
Oooh i'm aged between 16 and 24.
Had a big slide today coming off a roundabout, I can only assume there was oil or diesel on the road as I wasnt speeding (heavy traffic) although I did take the correct route around the island whereas everybody else cuts into lane 2 to go straight on (traffic calming roundabouts really, but big ones with designated lanes) so assume I got caught out by the residues left by a lorry (who also take the correct route around the island to get the swing angle for the trailers). No damage to the car, and happened at such low speeds it was more startling than scary, still it managed a 270 degree spin even at 25mph.
I blame the gov't myself.
Had a big slide today coming off a roundabout, I can only assume there was oil or diesel on the road as I wasnt speeding (heavy traffic) although I did take the correct route around the island whereas everybody else cuts into lane 2 to go straight on (traffic calming roundabouts really, but big ones with designated lanes) so assume I got caught out by the residues left by a lorry (who also take the correct route around the island to get the swing angle for the trailers). No damage to the car, and happened at such low speeds it was more startling than scary, still it managed a 270 degree spin even at 25mph.
I blame the gov't myself.
?? Bloody useless TSC and their equally useless statistics/conclusions! Does this take into account the annual increase in population and as someone hinted at earlier, does it include non-impact road deaths too?? (Bloke died in a petrol station forecourt just around the corner t'other day, poor chap, just flaked out in the driving seat). The demographics would make interesting reading.
Tyre Tread said:
Further to my ealier post I have been pondering what would happen to the number of road deaths if it was announced that as from midnight tonight any pedestrians that were hit whilst on the road would be held responsible.
There'd be a huge increase in deaths of pedestrians, because only bad drivers have problems with pedestrians and so your idea would be giving the opportunity for bad drivers to become worse.I also believe a significant number of pedestrians are killed on the pavement.
A process which produces 'events' at random intervals and which in a year averages 1900 such events has a standard deviation roughly equal to sqrt(1900), that is about 43.5.
Two standard deviations from the mean is usually regarded as the point at which something becomes significant, in this case that's 87 events. Since the difference was 50 odd thats well inside what would be regarded as significant.
Nothing to see here. Move on.
Two standard deviations from the mean is usually regarded as the point at which something becomes significant, in this case that's 87 events. Since the difference was 50 odd thats well inside what would be regarded as significant.
Nothing to see here. Move on.
Maybe because of the crappy weather - be it snow/ice/rain it's all seemed to be on the increase.
I don't know about you but I find weather effects my driving more than who happens to be PM + Any political changes take god knows how long to have an effect any way - it certainly wouldn't be evident yet. Odd thing to comment on.
I don't know about you but I find weather effects my driving more than who happens to be PM + Any political changes take god knows how long to have an effect any way - it certainly wouldn't be evident yet. Odd thing to comment on.
On road death numbers coming down, this figure is misleading. Collisions are UP, but So is SURVIVING due to almost universal use of airbags. Very serious injuries have shown a rise; where a driver would previously have been killed they now are VSI instead. We haven't got any better at driving, but the cars have got better at crashing. Sadly no good news for bikers; it's still poor.
0a said:
My own feeling is that the downward trend since the 60s has been predominantly down to improvements in vehicle safety/pedestrian protection.Maybe the continued recession combined with the shortlived scrappage scheme explains a sudden dip then levelling out in the casualty rate?
Or else it's all within the range of normal fluctuation.
Louise Ellman, chair of the Transport Committee. "It is shocking that road accidents are the main cause of death amongst young adults aged 16-24."
Is this shocking? She does realise that there has to be a "main cause of death amongst young adults aged 16-24" doesn't she?
Given that the number by which deaths have increased is so small that it's statistically irrelevant and that this age group is not particularly vulnerable to death from other causes except suicide this story seems like not much of a story.
What it does do is help ramp up support for the reduction of rural speed limits. This crappy statistic WILL be quoted in defence of those proposals.
Is this shocking? She does realise that there has to be a "main cause of death amongst young adults aged 16-24" doesn't she?
Given that the number by which deaths have increased is so small that it's statistically irrelevant and that this age group is not particularly vulnerable to death from other causes except suicide this story seems like not much of a story.
What it does do is help ramp up support for the reduction of rural speed limits. This crappy statistic WILL be quoted in defence of those proposals.
Edited by Hatchoo on Thursday 19th July 11:38
There are a lot of good points on this thread- the state of the roads, poor road policing, the whole "speed kills" nonsense (inappropriate speed kills- not just generalised speed)
I have been caught, paid fines...but ALL on clear dual carriageways at 85-90mph with good visibility and light traffic in a well maintained vehicle....the people that do 30-40 mph through town centres that are LITTERED with people and kids "because that's the limit" are the problem.
The same people that sit at 45mph on national speed sections of road and then when they reach the town village that drops to 30mph they don't even drop their speed! Where's the sense in that?
But the singlemost problem I see is nobody "cares" about the standard of their driving. I enjoy driving, and so, pride myself on being a good driver- a responsible driver and continue to try and improve where I can. Most people don't give a st whether they are a good driver or not, they are selfish and don't care what pains or issues they create for people around them on the roads- they only care that they get where they want.
Going back to the fog scenareo- how many do you guys see in fog or dim lighting flying about with no lights on? I have actually travelled with some of these idiots:
"mate, it's a big foggy eh- not want your lights on?"
"why- I can see far enough"
"yeah, but nobody else can see you!"
"that's their problem"
NO- it's your fking problem! I'm not a biker but if there's one thing that helps avoiding other's stupidity it is to make sure you are seen....
Right, better go cool off- I could go on all day....
I have been caught, paid fines...but ALL on clear dual carriageways at 85-90mph with good visibility and light traffic in a well maintained vehicle....the people that do 30-40 mph through town centres that are LITTERED with people and kids "because that's the limit" are the problem.
The same people that sit at 45mph on national speed sections of road and then when they reach the town village that drops to 30mph they don't even drop their speed! Where's the sense in that?
But the singlemost problem I see is nobody "cares" about the standard of their driving. I enjoy driving, and so, pride myself on being a good driver- a responsible driver and continue to try and improve where I can. Most people don't give a st whether they are a good driver or not, they are selfish and don't care what pains or issues they create for people around them on the roads- they only care that they get where they want.
Going back to the fog scenareo- how many do you guys see in fog or dim lighting flying about with no lights on? I have actually travelled with some of these idiots:
"mate, it's a big foggy eh- not want your lights on?"
"why- I can see far enough"
"yeah, but nobody else can see you!"
"that's their problem"
NO- it's your fking problem! I'm not a biker but if there's one thing that helps avoiding other's stupidity it is to make sure you are seen....
Right, better go cool off- I could go on all day....
RoadRaider said:
Very serious injuries have shown a rise; where a driver would previously have been killed they now are VSI instead.
Doesn't seem to be reflected in the stats, serious injuries follow much the same trend as deaths;I think it'd probably make more sense if they lumped them together with deaths. In a serious crash death vs major injury probably has a great deal more to do with luck and the promptness of medical attention than it does to road safety.
MadDog1962 said:
Lies, damned lies, and statistics...
This story is just more crap from the anti-car lefties. They won't be happy until they get the red flag act re-introduced and the motorway limit is 50mph.
you're being too generous there - 50??? That's just lunacy!!! Cars should go no faster than the average human can run ... EVER!!!This story is just more crap from the anti-car lefties. They won't be happy until they get the red flag act re-introduced and the motorway limit is 50mph.
If you drive to fast, you get fined, 'cos doing so will cause an accident. Cause/have an accident, and it's highly unlikely you'll get a summons at all unless it's a biggie. Lady rear ended me on the M4, wrote my car of. No injuries. Cops just happened to be a few vehicles behind. Ascertained we were both insured, MOT, driving license, not been drinking/drugs. Made sure we exchanged insurance info. Lady admitted she was going to fast, and couldn't stop. Cops not interested in issuing any sort of traffic offence/summons whatsoever.
Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff