"Speed kills"

[jrhnewark]

Just watching Cars, Cops and Criminals and I've got to have a bit of a rant...

They're covering a story about a young girl who was in a car, driven by a young bloke, which crashed. Her best friend, who was in the car with her, said "I know we're going to crash" and another young bloke had a bet on with the driver that he would give the driver a tenner if he could "make it to Barnsley in 10 mins".

The sentiment of the programme is that speeding kills people.

They've also been covering motorbikes, which is a whole different story...

... but am I the only person who takes the - ooh, common sense - approach that it's not speed that kills people, it's crap judgement?

Doing 90mph on the motorway is a rather different ball game to doing 90mph on a country road...

(The other thing that gets on my nerves is the constant moaning from police on all these programmes about "young male drivers". Save the moaning - I'm picking up the bill for others' poor driving and judgement on my insurance every year, based solely on my age and not my capability or experience. I'm 21 - I passed four years ago and I've done 20,000 plus miles a year since.)

[Lord Nikon]

I completely agree with you, it's not speed that kills, it's the inappropriate use of speed, combined with an inability to control a vehicle at speed that kills.

[Angua]

The Isle of Mann has no speed limits outside of the towns. The police can and do pull over people who are driving dangerously regardless of their speed. In Montana USA following the national change to the 55mph speed limit they had no speed limit at all outside towns for a couple of years and accident rates went down. More than doubling when speed limits were re-introduced.
American National Motorists Association

[Derek]

Originally Posted by jrhnewark

but am I the only person who takes the - ooh, common sense - approach that it's not speed that kills people, it's crap judgement?

It's crap judgement that makes them think they are better drivers than they are and they can drive faster than is safe.
As far as messages go "speed kills" is pretty simple and to the point.
"speed kills, sometimes, mostly on winding roads, not always on motorways and it depends on the weather and your abilities as a driver" tends to lose something.

Originally Posted by jrhnewark

The other thing that gets on my nerves is the constant moaning from police on all these programmes about "young male drivers"

Hmmm, maybe it's just the Police being a bit moany in general. It couldn't possibly be that young male drivers are more likely to involved in serious accidents and when they do invariably their cars are loaded with other teenagers and when the carnage occurs it might be better for them to have had a moan beforehand rather than go to parents doors at 3 in the morning and telling them their 17 year old isn't coming home again ever.

Originally Posted by Lord Nikon

I completely agree with you, it's not speed that kills, it's the inappropriate use of speed, combined with an inability to control a vehicle at speed that kills.

None of which is succinct enough for the information campaigns that are necessary if inappropriate use of speed is to be tackled.

We all know it's a marketing strapline designed to effect a change in people's behaviour ... what's the point of pretending not to understand it? Pedantry for its own sake is a bit pointless IMO.

---------- Post added at 09:24 ---------- Previous post was at 09:20 ----------

Originally Posted by jrhnewark

They've also been covering motorbikes, which is a whole different story...

I loved the bit where the arrogant twit they pulled over for doing 130mph down country roads asked the copper 'are you a biker?' (for which read: 'I know what I'm talking about and you don't. If I want to go 130 I will 'cos I think I'm safe. Get lost, copper').

The traffic cop's comeback was pure genius ... words along the lines of, "No, I'm not a biker, I'm just a policeman who doesn't like attending fatals involving bikers."

[Kymmy]

It's neither crap judgement nor speed that kills, it's normally the impact between your body and the car.. Less speed and less impact, better judgement and possibly no impact, you can't totally discount one for the other..

[haydnwalker]

I don't like paying over the odds for my insurance - just like everyone, old and young! I'm paying as much now as I did when I first passed my test nearly 10 years ago!

We all know that its inappropriate and misjudged use of speed that kills people (along with the huge crunch after the accident ), and as Chris says, its just a strapline designed to make people think and slow down.

And again, we know that "young male drivers" are more likely to be involved in accidents...and the main reason is....*fanfare* showing off to mates inappropriately! Surprised? No...I thought not

On a side note: I'd like to congratulate the Scottish Government on using funding to create some of the best roads I've driven on in my life. The quality of the country roads is far better than England by a country mile!

[Escapee]

My cousin has recently been on a Bikesafe course, as many of you will be aware these are conducted by police motorcycle riders. He had an accident a few years ago that put him in hospital for many weeks, and since then he has become a more sensible rider. (Captain Slow) One of his reasons for taking the course was to build up his confidence again, and increase his skills so he doesn't go too fast into a corner and end up in hospital again.

He was very surprised that when they had the first debrief the officer criticised him for stopping behind traffic on a dual carriageway at 70mph instead of 'making progress'. He said after this he followed instructions and in national speed limit areas he rode as fast as it was safe to do so, and in a few places touched an indicated 85-90mph.

I have heard 'stories' from other riders on these courses where 3 figure speeds have been obtained whilst being followed by the instructor. Quite often last year (not see them this year) police officers on bikes could be seen at the local bike meeting cafe, they seemed friendly enough walking around for a chat and were putting the message across to be safe, have fun but stick to the 30, 40 and 50s.

It does however come across as a bit of a double standard when we have motorways with average speed cameras, that will ticket you if you are exceeding the limit and are the only vehicle on the road.

I guess common sense has gone and it's the price we pay for technology.

[haydnwalker]

The limits are limits though....doesn't mean any of us have to agree with them

I like the way France does speed limits. On dry days its higher than night times/rainy days.

It makes more sense than motorway = 70mph in fog (when I'm driving down it at 40 in fog I see people passing me at double that)

[Escapee]

Originally Posted by haydnwalker

The limits are limits though....doesn't mean any of us have to agree with them

I like the way France does speed limits. On dry days its higher than night times/rainy days.

It makes more sense than motorway = 70mph in fog (when I'm driving down it at 40 in fog I see people passing me at double that)

I agree that variable limits are a great idea, but the cynical side of me says it would never happen on a large scale because variable limits cost money to implement.

I believe many of the national speed limit roads that have been reduced to 50mph, have been done so because of a small minority who ride/drive dangerously. It's financially attractive to reduce the limit and park up the camera van to catch a greater number of offenders driving safely but over the new low speed limit than it is to leave the limit as it is and catch those that are dangerous.

[haydnwalker]

Originally Posted by Escapee

I agree that variable limits are a great idea, but the cynical side of me says it would never happen on a large scale because variable limits cost money to implement.

Good point well made Cost is the driver for everything in the world....unfortunately

That's not cynical, it's practical and perfectly reasonable. Governments don't have a bottomless pit of money to spend.

The thing about the 'empty motorway late at night' argument is, the lack of traffic reduces the risk of collision but doesn't eliminate all accident risk. There does also need to be an allowance made for variable skill levels amongst the motoring population. Lewis Hamilton might well be able to drive safely down the M1 at 4am at 120mph, but Barry Chav who passed his test 6 months ago would be in mortal danger doing the same journey in his mum's Corsa at 100mph.

A means of rating different drivers to go at different speeds - and checking it without stopping them - would also be prohibitively expensive.

Actually I have a question:

On the M25 there are road works and a limit of 50mph is enforced by those average speed cameras, the ones which are dotted throughout the route checking the time it took for you to cover a distance to work out your speed.

Now I go into the left most lane and am doing 50mph but traffic to the right of me is always overtaking and traffic behind sometimes seem to be slowed down by me.

What's going on? Do those speed cameras not work, or only work after a certain speed? Why is all the traffic to me right doing over 50mph? They can't all be getting tickets.

A car's speedo can under-read by as much as 10% and speed cameras often don't record an offence unless the recorded speed exceeds the limit by 10%+1. so, worst case, when you think you're doing 50 you're only doing 45, and the cars that are passing you would have to be doing a true speed of 57 to get prosecuted. Therefore the speed difference between you and the car passing you could legitimately be as much as 11mph ... maybe even more.

[Osem]

Originally Posted by Damien

Actually I have a question:

On the M25 there are road works and a limit of 50mph is enforced by those average speed cameras, the ones which are dotted throughout the route checking the time it took for you to cover a distance to work out your speed.

Now I go into the left most lane and am doing 50mph but traffic to the right of me is always overtaking and traffic behind sometimes seem to be slowed down by me.

What's going on? Do those speed cameras not work, or only work after a certain speed? Why is all the traffic to me right doing over 50mph? They can't all be getting tickets.

The likelihood is that some of those going past you will indeed be getting tickets but I'd imagine most are relying on the fact that car speedos aren't 100% accurate and IIRC are set on the low side for that very reason. If you're driving along with your speedo showing exactly 50, you'll actually be doing more like 47 and some drivers will happily, therefore, add a few MPH reckoning that a) their actual speed will be somewhat lower than that inidcated and, possibly, b) calculating that fines will only be generated by the cameras when a certain level above the 50mph limit is reached e.g. 55mph.

Getting back to the subject. Speeing in iteself doesn't kill but it does compound the effects of errors of judgement (even minor ones), tecnhnical failures etc. and that's what can kill. Any driver who doesn't understand that fact and act accordingly is in denial IMHO. We don't drive in isolation and good driving is not about testing your own limits and those of your vehicle, it's about anticipating and making proper allowance for the actions and limitations of those around you as well as the prevailing conditions. Until cars are equipped with foolproof ESP (extra sensory perception as opposed to electronic stability programme) good driving isn't ever going to be about travelling as fast as possible just because you can.