Safe Speed Forums

While I'm sorting you out some evidence (because I like these 'disputes'), what do you make of these figures...

Proportion of vehicles 'speeding' at sample sites: ~60% on most road types.

Proportion of injury crashes with excessive speed as a contributory factor: 12% (includes inappropriate speed within the speed limit)

So is 'speeding' more than 5 times safer than not speeding?

(Interestingly, it is estimated that under 2% of drivers are drunk, yet 25% of crashes include drunk driving as a contributory factor.)

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

edited

We've done that, accident reports are merely the opinion of the reporting officer, and (obviously) they won't stick their neck out if they don't have a good idea.

When you see the accident reports for single-vehicle-leaves-carriageway which state no contributory factors whatsoever, you'll get the gist.



How did you get to that?

edited

Are you seriously suggesting that I, or anyone else, should make decisions before looking at all the facts available, and all the situation, from a position which none of us can at present? That we people should provide answers before they've looked at the question?

Isn't that the mistake that too many politicians make at the minute?

Are you making the same mistake?



As Peter has posted (and you have ignored), I have written down some ideas (which obviously



Am I?

What is this script? Where can I find it? What does it say?

Do you deny speed is an issue in *all* accidents?



But missed vital flaws in the data, like the lack of data on non-injury and unreported accidents when it comes to making bold claims like "20 zones are more dangeruos than 30 zones".



What script?



I'm making a difference now, thanks. What are you doing?

Its very easy to make assertions like all of that, yet you provide nothing to back that up.

edited

Given that that is at least a start, what incentive have I to answer your question

I will not hypothesise on the answer to a question asked when I am hypothetically in a particular position, when I am not in the position to assess the question, the issues it raises, the full picture of data that would be available and so on. The answers can come after the deliberation and consideration, and as this is all dependant on me being in a hypothetical situation, and cannot do that unless and until that hypothetical situation arises and I am in a position to answer the question.

BTW, the Paxman style doesn't suit you.

edited

Why's that an incentive to me?

And Paul hasn't answered the question either (and indeed, he's not able to for the same reason I can't, and I sure he sensible enough not to predetermine his answer before he can look at all the data that would become available to him).

Indeed, alot of what he suggests on the link he posted earlier is simply outside of the constraints.

And surely what proposals I have made (even though it is outside of constraints) are worthy of more than "not interested, given you are so demanding for an(y) answer?



Who's Paxman?[/quote][/quote]

You've never heard of Jeremy Paxman? Jesus!

edited

Umm, shouldn't we all calm down a bit

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

edited

Maybe you could be helpful an explain how far they do answer your question?

Have you read them?

I don't think you're doing Paul any favours here.

edited

Yet you've already declared your not interested in whats been given.




You'd think you could at least get basic things like that right.



I don't understand what part of my response you fail to understand.



Wrong




Where do you think they come from then?

Do you have any idea whatsoever of what you speak?



And I've explained why, and you ignored it.



But he doesn't claim there is any one solution!



But that forms a part of the answer to a point!



Peter was referring to the entry in my abortive blog, which you admit you have ignored.






Do you think your ranting a support reflects well on Paul (not that he is responsible for any of it, of course)?



I think I've made my position quite clear.

Maybe you can read what has been offered, and then maybe we can proceed from there. Or you can prattle on indefinately, choice is yours.

FFS guys, this pissing contest isn't getting either of you anywhere.

_________________
Less Kodak, more Kojak.
In times of deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act.

It's fashionable to deride the contributory factor data because it is inconvenient. It's true that the data and the way it is gathered leave a lot to be desired. But contributory factor data has similar and consistent messages irrespective of method and country. Exceeding the speed limit is ALWAYS a minor factor. Inattention is ALWAYS a major factor. Observation failure is ALWAYS a major factor.



60% speeding / (much less than) 12% 'speeding' as a contributory factor.

If 'speeding' was dangerous, shouldn't it be more prevalent in the crash stats than the non-crash stats? Drunks are...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety

Indeed, please either leave it or take it to PM.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Usually minor shunts. Cars can be written off because of the crumple zones caving in after prang at 10 mph - per some inusrance company report in the papers a bit back.



We do have a pedestrian & cyclist fatality rate that is rather poor compared with many continental countries.[/quote]

But then - they fine [edestrains who jay-walk! The 9 year old in Schaffhausen was charged with causing an accident through stepping off in front of traffic at a crossing. There - you have to wait from the green man to appear and it's not media hype - happened to me when I was aged 14 and visiitng those Swiss "rebels"



Also - they designed their roads to incorporate decent cycle lanes. More or less segregated. Cyclists rarely come into conflict with cars as a result - and Germany has some interesting stats in relation to areas flowing abundant with these lanes to its skimpier provisions.



But on the other hand - if accidents were as common place as you appear to suggest - then all premiums should be sky high die to claims - and the insiurance companies say they are receiving less claims for easy fixes, more for written off crumple zones at low impact and this varies - but Vauxhall appear sturdiest per the this type of slight shunt - and the usual medium/serious appear to run steady -



But my customers ... does not matter if there is a camera there or not - if they have stolen a car or youngsters concentrating more on chatting to pals than on COASTing it - they'lll still have an accident
.

Oh - and by the way hitting someone at 27 mph does not make them any less injured or dead - if you hit or they fall badly to be blunt.

It is the behaviour, the attitude, the COAST skills which bring about the change in reaction required to avoid any collision course - and novices are slower at spotting them. They are also the ones who do not "feel" the speed as keenly as they do with experience.

Thus the spinal cord of safety led driving has to move towards promoting the idea that sharp observarton and hazard perceception skills are "cooler" aspirations than pushing a car to its limit.


Most drivers on here drive below 30 mph when appropriate.... But some of the 30 mph urban duals have no pelicans or zebras or any obvious hazard

However on the A14 - a 70 mph 3 laner linking the M1/M6 to the M11 and the East - I have driven past signs warning me to expect pedestrians to be crossing this motorway type road




I think the general conclusion on the board was that some roads should be 20 mph, some should remian at 30 mph and a handful of existing 30 mph raised to 40 mph and 50 mph and some of the 50 mph/ 40 mph and even a couple of single carriage NSLs downgraded to 30 mph....

Basically - the fault lies with speeds set inappropriately on a lot of roads and this is in fact an issue which Meredydd Hughes plans to address.

_________________
Take with a chuckle or a grain of salt
Drive without COAST and it's all your own fault!

A SMILE is a curve that sets everything straight (P Diller).

A Smiley Per post
FINES USfor our COAST!

Approach love and cooking with reckless abandon - but driving with a smile and a COAST calm mind.

I couldn't even figure out what the question was...

_________________
Paul Smith
Our scrap speed cameras petition got over 28,000 sigs
The Safe Speed campaign demands a return to intelligent road safety