Speed Never Kills
Discussion
Only just thought this one up.
If you want to argue the case for driver training, instead of the simple Speed Kills mantra there's your catchy slogan.
Simply put my argument is this.
Take a car. Any car. Place it dead centre of a desert and make it go flat out.
When does it crash?
Well, if the desert is big enough it won't ever crash. You could fire the car into space at twice the speed of light and no carnage would result.
Speed does not cause accidents. It does not kill.
Someone please tell the ABD. Instead of trying to out-wit the Blairites, the whinging Nanny state and the T2000 bunch, just contradict them.
No statistics, No slogans, just a crushing blow with our good friend common sense.
Should get people going anyway....
>>> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 05:50
If you want to argue the case for driver training, instead of the simple Speed Kills mantra there's your catchy slogan.
Simply put my argument is this.
Take a car. Any car. Place it dead centre of a desert and make it go flat out.
When does it crash?
Well, if the desert is big enough it won't ever crash. You could fire the car into space at twice the speed of light and no carnage would result.
Speed does not cause accidents. It does not kill.
Someone please tell the ABD. Instead of trying to out-wit the Blairites, the whinging Nanny state and the T2000 bunch, just contradict them.
No statistics, No slogans, just a crushing blow with our good friend common sense.
Should get people going anyway....
>>> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 05:50
Crap. Firstly, if you were to drive flat out in a desert you would be very likely to roll the car due to the undulating grond and shifting surface, secondly blasting of into space in an automobile, even in your mates 2 litre Nova that does 0-60 in 6 secs 
would in time cause you to collide with one of the billions of peices of junk/rocks floating around up there. However, your statement would be correct, if it were that Speed itself doesn't kill, Inapropriate speed, and Inexperience kills!
would in time cause you to collide with one of the billions of peices of junk/rocks floating around up there. However, your statement would be correct, if it were that Speed itself doesn't kill, Inapropriate speed, and Inexperience kills!
Speed does not cause accidents. It does not kill.
You are quite correct in that speed does not cause accidents. Accidents are caused by inconsiderate/incompetent drivers, who either suffer from this affliction permanatly, or just through a moments lapse.
[devilsadvocatemode]
However speed does kill.
Imagine you are driving along at 90mph and a car pulls out in front of you. The resultant impact would most certainly result in death. Where as if the same car pulled out at the same distance and you were travelling at 20mph the impact would be survivable.
The scenarios above lay the fault of the accident on the t1t that pulled out infront of you. But because of your speed, only one of the scenarios would be survivable.
[/devilsadvocatemode]
farmboy said:
Speed does not cause accidents. It does not kill.
Imagine you are driving along at 90mph and a car pulls out in front of you. The resultant impact would most certainly result in death. Where as if the same car pulled out at the same distance and you were travelling at 20mph the impact would be survivable.
There wouldn't be an impact - by the time you got to where the car pulled out, the driver would be down the road in mcdonalds!!
Hutch
The problem lies with the desert scenario.
Where on the small island of the UK is there such a place?
Speed does not kill alone. Speed and the human element kills.
Humans are fallible. There is not a driver alive or that has lived that has never made a mistke whilst behind the wheel of a car or handlebars of a bike. Some pay the consequences dearly with the lives of themselves or of others. Some have luck on their side and get away with minor injury/damage or no injury/damage.
The main problem where speed is concerned is that inappropriate speed and mistakes can kill(it may not necessarily be the mistake of the speeder but some other human mistake encroaching into the speeders path) and the higher the speed, the more likely that will be the consequences when a mistake happens.
Where on the small island of the UK is there such a place?
Speed does not kill alone. Speed and the human element kills.
Humans are fallible. There is not a driver alive or that has lived that has never made a mistke whilst behind the wheel of a car or handlebars of a bike. Some pay the consequences dearly with the lives of themselves or of others. Some have luck on their side and get away with minor injury/damage or no injury/damage.
The main problem where speed is concerned is that inappropriate speed and mistakes can kill(it may not necessarily be the mistake of the speeder but some other human mistake encroaching into the speeders path) and the higher the speed, the more likely that will be the consequences when a mistake happens.
Speed isn't the cause of any of the accidents mentioned here.
Once the accident has been set in motion the speed certainly becomes a factor in determining the severity of it, but it's not a cause.
In all the cases mentioned driver error is the cause of the accident, and only driver error.
E.g. The bloke in the desert. If the surface is undulating so badly DRIVE SLOWER.
If you can't see the surface is ahead, realise you don't have enough information and anticipate that it will. Make sure you are able to stop or take evasive action within the distance you can see.
The two car collision could have been the fault of both drivers, or maybe just one.
One driver shouldn't have been hooning towards a junction where he;
a) couldn't see a car
b) could see a car, which may be about to pull out
c) didn't know the road well enough to slow down for an invisible junction
The other shouldn't have pulled out until the way was clear, if visibility was that bad he could have wound down the window and listened.
The point I'm making (albeit with extreme examples) is that a car on the road consists of a vehicle and a driver. This is set, you can't often change them without stopping.
Speed is a temporary property of the car, which it is the driver's responsibility to modulate.
If the driver fails then the speed can kill, but not before.
So why don't the gov treat the illness, not the rash?
Their 'strategy' is like pulling the leaves off a weed. It'll never die. You need to get to the roots.
The way the gov go on about speed you'd think it was absolute, and I know a couple of people who think it is!
These people believe that no matter what they do they won't crash the car if they're within the speed limit.
When one of them first hinted at this I didn't believe my ears, until an incident that winter on an icy roundabout proved his point. In all fairness, he didn't crash. The only damage was to my underwear.
He couldn't see how he was taking a risk by not slowing down!
Its not Speed Kills, it's not even Inappropriate Speed Kills it's Badly Trained Drivers that kill.
Edited because I can't type
Edited to agree with Madcop; but note that I'm trying to provide a debating point for the likes of the ABD that hits hard. You can't start an argument with J. Public with a well reasoned debate. You need a headline.
Edited to say that I'm all for a speed limit, as long as it doesn't take the P
s and isn't brutally enforced by GATSO
>> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 13:11
>> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 13:14
>> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 13:16
Once the accident has been set in motion the speed certainly becomes a factor in determining the severity of it, but it's not a cause.
In all the cases mentioned driver error is the cause of the accident, and only driver error.
E.g. The bloke in the desert. If the surface is undulating so badly DRIVE SLOWER.
If you can't see the surface is ahead, realise you don't have enough information and anticipate that it will. Make sure you are able to stop or take evasive action within the distance you can see.
The two car collision could have been the fault of both drivers, or maybe just one.
One driver shouldn't have been hooning towards a junction where he;
a) couldn't see a car
b) could see a car, which may be about to pull out
c) didn't know the road well enough to slow down for an invisible junction
The other shouldn't have pulled out until the way was clear, if visibility was that bad he could have wound down the window and listened.
The point I'm making (albeit with extreme examples) is that a car on the road consists of a vehicle and a driver. This is set, you can't often change them without stopping.
Speed is a temporary property of the car, which it is the driver's responsibility to modulate.
If the driver fails then the speed can kill, but not before.
So why don't the gov treat the illness, not the rash?
Their 'strategy' is like pulling the leaves off a weed. It'll never die. You need to get to the roots.
The way the gov go on about speed you'd think it was absolute, and I know a couple of people who think it is!
These people believe that no matter what they do they won't crash the car if they're within the speed limit.
When one of them first hinted at this I didn't believe my ears, until an incident that winter on an icy roundabout proved his point. In all fairness, he didn't crash. The only damage was to my underwear.
He couldn't see how he was taking a risk by not slowing down!
Its not Speed Kills, it's not even Inappropriate Speed Kills it's Badly Trained Drivers that kill.
Edited because I can't type
Edited to agree with Madcop; but note that I'm trying to provide a debating point for the likes of the ABD that hits hard. You can't start an argument with J. Public with a well reasoned debate. You need a headline.
Edited to say that I'm all for a speed limit, as long as it doesn't take the P
s and isn't brutally enforced by GATSO >> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 13:11
>> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 13:14
>> Edited by Dancing Moose on Saturday 23 November 13:16
Speed can kill, its a fact.
Whether or not its the primary cause in a third(33%) of accidents like the government claims, is another thing altogether.
Ive recently been in contact with the TRL(transport research lab) from whom our supreme overlords source their statistics.
I asked simple questions and got a reply, of sorts.
The questions were,:" Demonstrate the mechanism by which an increase in speed will automatically initiate an accident".
Speed kills or so were all told.
No answer was given to this question, either coz they havent got one, or they dont wish to give it.
My second question was.;" can you show me the figures for speed as the initiator in accidents?".
As we all know, the government and certain cretins(Brunstrom for example) quote this "one third" Krap regularly.
It might surprise you that the answer to the second question that they gave me was, and i quote.;" we do not have any definitive figures for speed as an initiator in accidents".
Hmmmmmmm.
So wheres this 33% cobblers coming from then?
Its funny that the government sources its stats from TRL but then they say we have no figures...
Of course the answer is that speeding dosent contribute to anywhere near the amount of crashes that we are being told it does.
At the moment, on another forum, we are starting a campaign to email the minister for transport,and our local MPs, with a view to gaining as much evidence as possible to support our stance, that speeding isnt dangerous per se, that speed cameras are for cash etc.
We also wish to gain further evidence of speeding by those who are actively campaigning for more gatsos, Mr Brunstrom of N wales police for instance.
Hopefully, if we can get enough people sending emails and participating in this, we can get something done.
The ppess for instance would love to tear ol Brunsy a new backside for exceeding the limits he loves to prosecute us all for.
If you wish to help, the forum is on uk speedtrap guide.
Whether or not its the primary cause in a third(33%) of accidents like the government claims, is another thing altogether.
Ive recently been in contact with the TRL(transport research lab) from whom our supreme overlords source their statistics.
I asked simple questions and got a reply, of sorts.
The questions were,:" Demonstrate the mechanism by which an increase in speed will automatically initiate an accident".
Speed kills or so were all told.
No answer was given to this question, either coz they havent got one, or they dont wish to give it.
My second question was.;" can you show me the figures for speed as the initiator in accidents?".
As we all know, the government and certain cretins(Brunstrom for example) quote this "one third" Krap regularly.
It might surprise you that the answer to the second question that they gave me was, and i quote.;" we do not have any definitive figures for speed as an initiator in accidents".
Hmmmmmmm.
So wheres this 33% cobblers coming from then?
Its funny that the government sources its stats from TRL but then they say we have no figures...
Of course the answer is that speeding dosent contribute to anywhere near the amount of crashes that we are being told it does.
At the moment, on another forum, we are starting a campaign to email the minister for transport,and our local MPs, with a view to gaining as much evidence as possible to support our stance, that speeding isnt dangerous per se, that speed cameras are for cash etc.
We also wish to gain further evidence of speeding by those who are actively campaigning for more gatsos, Mr Brunstrom of N wales police for instance.
Hopefully, if we can get enough people sending emails and participating in this, we can get something done.
The ppess for instance would love to tear ol Brunsy a new backside for exceeding the limits he loves to prosecute us all for.
If you wish to help, the forum is on uk speedtrap guide.
deltaf said:
So wheres this 33% cobblers coming from then?
'When examining overall contributory factors, those with a significant speed element, e.g. not judging other's speed, skidding, following too close, in a hurry, etc account for around 30% of contributory factors' - from the Department for Transport on this website.
'When examining overall contributory factors, those with a significant speed element, e.g. not judging other's speed, skidding, following too close, in a hurry, etc account for around 30% of contributory factors' - from the Department for Transport on this website.
So skidding is caused by speed? Um no. Skidding is caused by breaking to hard, which is caused by a driver not leaving themselves enough room to avoid a situation. In fact skidding can be almost totally independent of speed. If you panic brake on a winters morning from 20 its possible to skid. Or on wet mud in summer. True you won't go very far, but it may well be far enough to run something over.
The same is obviously true for following to close (not enough room). Its independant of speed. If you try hard enough (as many do) you can get close enough to a car to be a danger at any speed (if only by distracting the driver of the car ahead).
'In a hurry' - more likely to mean the driver is worried about a meeting, hence driving dangerously and/or without concentrating. IMHO.
'Not judging another's speed'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you're driving defensively surely this is an aside? You shouldn't be interacting with another vehicle, let alone where its doing anything silly. Try not to be on the same bit of road at the same time (by that I mean the 9x5ft area of tarmac, not the M1).
I readily admit excess speed is dangerous in the wrong circumstances, and many of the above points can be used to demonstrate that. What I'm saving is trying to stop speeding isn't the answer. Its a start, but at the moment its not working.
Drive along ANY road you like at 1mph below the limit and if there are cars behind you just watch them bunch up/overtake.
That's not a statistic or an opinion, its a cold-hard fact.
I managed a good few miles last year, most of them on or about the limit and that's what happened, all over this country and others.
FunkyNige said:
'When examining overall contributory factors, those with a significant speed element, e.g. not judging other's speed, skidding, following too close, in a hurry, etc account for around 30% of contributory factors' - from the Department for Transport on this website.
So, from the website is the admission that their own stats are b
ks NOT Judging Speed - not speeding
Skidding - So possibly caused by road conditions, poor tyres, late reacting to a dangerous situation (not necessarily speeding then)
Following too close - This isn't speeding either unless I have no idea what following too close is. Again, poor judgement
The problem with niges argument is this: Do you actually believe the governments figures?
I dont!
Their stats can be made to read whatever they like as we all know.
This is why we should all be questioning the figures, and not just accepting them.
Mr B Liar and chums just thrive on us doing nothing and listening to the tripe they spout.
The fact that most of the posts ive read on here are anti speed camera and anti dumb limits goes to prove that yes, youre thinking for yourselves, but as with a lot of this governments policies, its one surrounded by spin and disinformation.
By the way, if you fancy a look at the real causes of accidents, its buried in a sleep related docket.
Alternatively have a gander at the West Midlands accident review for 99 to 2001.
Makes veeeeery interesting reading, speed as a primary cause of accidents for these years comes out at a grand total of?......4.3%
Slight piscalculation from ol Tony Blur on that score do ya not think?
Its these kinds of figures we need to be stressing, not the governments own.
As i put in a previous post, get onto the transport minister, flood him with e mails, and yer local yokel Mps too.
If enough of us get vocal enough, then theyll have to scratch this itch.
I dont!
Their stats can be made to read whatever they like as we all know.
This is why we should all be questioning the figures, and not just accepting them.
Mr B Liar and chums just thrive on us doing nothing and listening to the tripe they spout.
The fact that most of the posts ive read on here are anti speed camera and anti dumb limits goes to prove that yes, youre thinking for yourselves, but as with a lot of this governments policies, its one surrounded by spin and disinformation.
By the way, if you fancy a look at the real causes of accidents, its buried in a sleep related docket.
Alternatively have a gander at the West Midlands accident review for 99 to 2001.
Makes veeeeery interesting reading, speed as a primary cause of accidents for these years comes out at a grand total of?......4.3%
Slight piscalculation from ol Tony Blur on that score do ya not think?
Its these kinds of figures we need to be stressing, not the governments own.
As i put in a previous post, get onto the transport minister, flood him with e mails, and yer local yokel Mps too.
If enough of us get vocal enough, then theyll have to scratch this itch.
farmboy said:
Speed does not cause accidents. It does not kill.
However speed does kill.
Imagine you are driving along at 90mph and a car pulls out in front of you. The resultant impact would most certainly result in death. Where as if the same car pulled out at the same distance and you were travelling at 20mph the impact would be survivable.
[/devilsadvocatemode]
But this is a perfet example of bad driving. Who in their right mind drives approaches a junction at ninety unless they can see for certain there is nobody going to pull out?
The trouble is, a numpty will drive through at 60, even overtake through the junction at 60, without thinking about the danger of someone pulling out.
Someone who drives according to the conditions might drive through the same situation at 50, 40, 20, whatever, ensuring they have room to stop. Then on a dead straight road with no junctions they are pulled up for doing 85, and we are told this is necessary because if hypothetically they had continued this speed through a blind junction it would have been dangerous.
When the numpty has his accident of course, it goes down as speed related and yet more speed traps go up on the clear stretch to ensure nobody can get away with driving according to conditions.
Gassing Station | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff