Fast and Safe

[Blakamin]

hmmm...

Germany - According to the German Federal Statistical Office in 1998, 7,792 citizens were killed in motor vehicle accidents, with 497,000 injuries reported. We estimate that 65,000 of the reported injuries were serious.

just a few more than australia.....


and here's a little sumfin from the european transport safety council... you pretty much only have to read the 1st 4 lines... in either column
http://www.etsc.be/documents/2rgb.pdf

[Mongoose]

You scale to compare apples with apples and to put things into perspective. Otherwise, you tend to get excited about things that don't matter in the big picture.

The best comparison basis is on total distance travelled. But this is hard to get good data for - so people tend to use population or total number of vehicles as an approximation.

Even with your theory you are still not comparing apples with apples, total distance travelled is but one factor(as you well know) so why just the one factor and call it a comparison? Is this the one best suited to your arguement, or do statasticians have other reasons for doing it this way?

[Blakamin]

and you can look at motorway deaths here ... so the germans aren't really that good considering the speed limit thing...
oohhh.. look another graph

[marty]

Otherwise, you tend to get excited about things that don't matter in the big picture.

.

like this thread.....

[Blakamin]

or people dying.....

[marty]

The best comparison basis is on total distance travelled. But this is hard to get good data for - so people tend to use population or total number of vehicles as an approximation.

i don't agree. distance is relative - aussies travel huge distances, but their comparable traffic whebn travelling long distance is low. nowhere is more than a day's drive for us.

[scumdog]

So what? You have to scale it for the number of people, amount of km travelled before you know whether the number is good or bad relative to everywhere else.

How about using figures from India and say South America and do a comparison?????????????

[Blakamin]

How about using figures from India and say South America and do a comparison?????????????

have a look at one of my links for turkey!!!! farqin hell!!!!

[spudchucka]

So you have to be objective about overall results and not make decisions and policies swayed by occasional spectacular or emotive incidents.

Spectacular or emotive incidents like the spike in the road toll in 2003 just a few years after the introduction of the highway patrol? You have been more than willing to make a decision that the highway patrol and rigid traffic enforcement was responsible for this spike. What gives? Why the double standard?

[spudchucka]

This is fair comment, but I don't agree with your conclusions. We already have a huge court system to deal with some 75,000 speeding tickets every month. After an initial settling down, I would expect few cases would go to court.

The advantage would be that safety rules would be based on fact, not political opinion. In court, fact defeats opinion.

I have no problem with rules and guidelines based on relevant safety facts. At the moment, though, they are mostly based on bureaucratic convenience and political opinions.

What experience do you base your expectation that the load on the court system would settle down?

It would settle down, after parliament passed or ammended laws to stop the rort that would result.

[spudchucka]

Yeah, but safety might be a matter of one's perception at times, and a young fella in a fast car may think that 140kmh is okay, but others may not, and then you've got to go through the whole system to resolve.
I just think it's too individual, and in order to most effectively manage to masses simplistic rules that cover the majority are needed.

What is safe to one person is reckless to another. If Alan is buzzing along at 120, quite safe in his opinion, his actions may actually be terrorising the elderly or learner driver cruising along at 98. If he was coming the other way the elderly or learner driver may struggle to accurately assess his approaching speed and turn into his path, thinking he was moving slower than what he actually was.

[Biff]

and you can look at motorway deaths here ... so the germans aren't really that good considering the speed limit thing...
oohhh.. look another graph

(To be read in a Sir Winston Churchill kinda voice.)

Thank you Blakamin. By producing those graphs (and an excellent piece of research may I say) you have confirmed that Brits, are indeed, the best drivers in Europe, possibly even the world.

I believe that we , as coalition forces, have whooped the German's arses, yet again.

I make three nil to us chaps. Anyone for tea ?

[scumdog]

What is safe to one person is reckless to another. If Alan is buzzing along at 120, quite safe in his opinion, his actions may actually be terrorising the elderly or learner driver cruising along at 98. If he was coming the other way the elderly or learner driver may struggle to accurately assess his approaching speed and turn into his path, thinking he was moving slower than what he actually was.

Exactly what I was trying to say in post 581

[Blakamin]

(To be read in a Sir Winston Churchill kinda voice.)

Thank you Blakamin. By producing those graphs (and an excellent piece of research may I say) you have confirmed that Brits, are indeed, the best drivers in Europe, possibly even the world.

I believe that we , as coalition forces, have whooped the German's arses, yet again.

I make three nil to us chaps. Anyone for tea ?

see how ya can twist any old piece 'o shit????

[Biff]

Alan,
There's no way on this planet that every man, cat, and his dog isn't going to try their luck if there's any chance of getting out of a fine and/or demerit points. Virtually every single one of them will be playing the fast and safe card, and not just once. Heavens no. You can bet that an awful lot of these individuals (myself included) will also go on to fight every single speeding ticket they ever receive. This would place a massive burden on an already over stretched judicial process. It just wouldn’t be practical.

This would also mean the government would have to find even more money in order to sustain, or improve, the courts system so they were capable of handling a constant barrage of individuals, all chomping at the bit, to stick one up the police/govt/system etc. The government’s prosecution costs (legal representation, evidence gathering etc) alone would be astronomical.

Money better spent elsewhere ? Like roads. Like safer roads. Like safer roads with plenty of nice sweeping corners and the occasional fast straight bit. Oh, and a tight right hander with positive camber that flicks you into a pub serving a real cool