Speeding, is it the real issue?

[Conquiztador]

"Speeding, is it the real issue?"

No.

[Winston001]

"Speeding, is it the real issue?"

No.

I suppose we could argue the core issue is brutal bodily harm and at the extreme, death. Caused by people using motor vehicles. So speed is merely one element.

That's not much help to the parents of a 5 yr old killed by a 40kph car outside a school.

Our car's and bike's power far exceed the margins of our streets and roads. But more crucially, our abilities as human beings are primitive in the microseconds when reactions are required. We aren't up to it.

Many posts here talk about bad driving, low skills, inexperience etc. Yet the reality is the only way to learn these skills is to spend hours and years driving in all sorts of weather and conditions. And that can't happen without mistakes. Sad awful tragic mistakes on rare occasions.

So...the one simple control to limit those mistakes is to restrict speed. It is easy to understand and easy to enforce. The slower you go the more time you have to react.

[Virago]

...Many posts here talk about bad driving, low skills, inexperience etc. Yet the reality is the only way to learn these skills is to spend hours and years driving in all sorts of weather and conditions. And that can't happen without mistakes. Sad awful tragic mistakes on rare occasions]...

Putting on my Old Fart's hat, I reckon it's all but impossible to convince many young 'uns of that. They're shit hot, ten foot tall, and bullet proof. They've got the skills, borne out by how fast they can go - they can drift a car, or get their knee down on a bike. It takes old age to realise that true road skill comes from restraint and wider situational awareness... - ...and why am I wasting by breath. I was young once - sigh.

Sadly, there's no perfect driver. The years of improving road-craft invariably meet the senility coming the other direction...

...So...the one simple control to limit those mistakes is to restrict speed. It is easy to understand and easy to enforce. The slower you go the more time you have to react.

And that's it in a nutshell. Not only greater reaction time, but statistically less dire consequences if you do crash.

[Scuba_Steve]

So...the one simple control to limit those mistakes is to restrict speed. It is easy to understand and easy to enforce. The slower you go the more time you have to react.

theoretically but it's been shown not only that most people self limit when given the chance but also restricted speed limits increase the chance of an accident/death.
1 because focusing on a speedo isn't safe in any way shape or form, & 2 because people start to "daydream" at slower speeds, especially those ones being rolled out now that are well below sensible & even the slowest drivers are starting to exceed. Remember over 80% of deaths are below the speed limit

[GTRMAN]

theoretically but it's been shown not only that most people self limit when given the chance but also restricted speed limits increase the chance of an accident/death.
1 because focusing on a speedo isn't safe in any way shape or form, & 2 because people start to "daydream" at slower speeds, especially those ones being rolled out now that are well below sensible & even the slowest drivers are starting to exceed. Remember over 80% of deaths are below the speed limit

Where has it been shown?

1stly it's been shown that 1-2 drinks improves driving in most people.
but more importantly you would appreciate 6mths no driving & 800$ fine for having a bundagerg ginger beer or lemon & lime bitters, some cough syurp or even just that banana thats been sitting in the sun would you???
The problem isn't those staying under the limit, the problem are those 2, 3, 4x the limit. Lowering the limit isn't going to magically stop them, incase you hadn't picked up on it yet they're already over the current limit. All zero would do is screw over the rest of us & make another huge money grab for the Govt.
If you wanna be prosecuted every time you have a Bundaberg & drive Just send me 800$ every time you do it. That way you get what you want, I get money, & everyone else isn't screwed by the Govt for more money from effectively what will be another scam. It's a win, win, win

It was a UK study I think? (somewhere in Euro anyways) I saw it in paper form (might have been that science mag?).

It wasn't straight "drinking makes you a better driver". But what it came down to was, a couple of drinks wasn't enough to inhibit your driving ability (lets face it driving isn't exactly genius territory, tho with the amount that can't do it you'd think it was) but it did relax the drivers so when they went through the random SURPRISE obstacle driving simulation they avoided the obstacle rather than panicking & hitting it or sending the vehicle outta control like they did when sober.

I'll go on the search & see if I can find it for you.

Again, where has it been shown?

Without showing the evidence of these ideas it reads a bit like "It's been shown that a couple of drinks makes you a better driver - Therefore I can drink and ride" "It's been shown that riding under the limit makes you daydream and lose concentration - Therefore I can go as fast as I want because I am more engaged in the activity at the time"

Not attacking you personally Steve but in an informed debate you have to be able to back up your statements

[GTRMAN]

Effects of Raising and Lowering Speed Limits - http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html

SPEED KILLS - OR DOES IT? - http://www.investigatemagazine.com/july00speed.htm this might be the article you are thinking of Steve

European Commission, Directorate-General Transport and Energy Study on speed - http://ec.europa.eu/transport/road_s...f/speeding.pdf

[Scuba_Steve]

Where has it been shown?

Again, where has it been shown?

Without showing the evidence of these ideas it reads a bit like "It's been shown that a couple of drinks makes you a better driver - Therefore I can drink and ride" "It's been shown that riding under the limit makes you daydream and lose concentration - Therefore I can go as fast as I want because I am more engaged in the activity at the time"

Not attacking you personally Steve but in an informed debate you have to be able to back up your statements

these are all from independent studies, not manipulated statistics (which still fail to show speed as a problem)
If you want to test the speed one just go out & watch you speedo, see how safe it is, or sit behind that car doing 80 & tell me you're mind doesn't start to "drift" making you have to force yourself to concentrate due to the numbingly slow speed your stuck at.

I'm still trying to find that "couple drinks" study but like I mentioned I saw it in paperback & due to it's nature I'm not likely to find it on many if any "official channels" it's not the kind of study Govts & lobby groups champion.

Also don't get hung up on the word "better" I probably could have used a better word there.
The couple of drinks didn't magically improve their driving skill as per say, but it also didn't decrease it, that remained the same. All the couple drinks did was when the random surprise was thrown at them in the simulation, they didn't panic they remained calm & avoided disaster something they failed to do when fully sober.
So there was no detrimental effects (as far as driving went) to a couple drinks but there was a positive effect should something go wrong while driving

[scumdog]

these are all from independent studies, not manipulated statistics (which still fail to show speed as a problem)
If you want to test the speed one just go out & watch you speedo, see how safe it is, or sit behind that car doing 80 & tell me you're mind doesn't start to "drift" making you have to force yourself to concentrate due to the numbingly slow speed your stuck at.


The couple of drinks didn't magically improve their driving skill as per say, but it also didn't decrease it, that remained the same. All the couple drinks did was when the random surprise was thrown at them in the simulation, they didn't panic they remained calm & avoided disaster something they failed to do when fully sober.

I find I can go for yonks without glanceing at my speedo and rarely do I find myself changing speed by much, you get a 'feel' after a bit of what your speed is.

And substantiate what a couple of drinks consists of??

Sure, one or two glasses might not adversely affect your ability to drive - that's why there's a 'breath/blood alcohol limit'

BTW: Funny how the guys I 'meet' that have an EBA reading of 783 or 1072 etc invariably tell me they have only had 'a couple of drinks'!

[FJRider]

Also don't get hung up on the word "better" I probably could have used a better word there.
The couple of drinks didn't magically improve their driving skill as per say, but it also didn't decrease it, that remained the same. All the couple drinks did was when the random surprise was thrown at them in the simulation, they didn't panic they remained calm & avoided disaster something they failed to do when fully sober.
So there was no detrimental effects (as far as driving went) to a couple drinks but there was a positive effect should something go wrong while driving

What better word could be better ... than better ... ???

What people also forget ... booze slows your reaction times down. Travelling at 100 km/hr ... you cover around 28 metres distance a second. Even with a good reaction speed sober ... with a few drinks, you could cover that distance before you even make a decision ... to do something. Another half second before something starts to happen (be it directional change or slowing).

A half second is another 14 metres closer to the object you may end up hitting. And that is not taking into account that the object may be travelling at the same speed towards you. Their reaction times may not be as great as yours though .... (although you might hope better than yours)

[Scuba_Steve]

I find I can go for yonks without glanceing at my speedo and rarely do I find myself changing speed by much, you get a 'feel' after a bit of what your speed is.

And substantiate what a couple of drinks consists of??

Sure, one or two glasses might not adversely affect your ability to drive - that's why there's a 'breath/blood alcohol limit'

BTW: Funny how the guys I 'meet' that have an EBA reading of 783 or 1072 etc invariably tell me they have only had 'a couple of drinks'!

Yea it's not you clientele's "couple of drinks" (tho they may be telling the truth just not using the standards scale) this was couple of standard drinks & again not your clientele's "standard". Which if I was right & this was UK study, does mean the couple of drinks was a total of 20ml pure alcohol contained within as against the 25.4ml it would be here.

[Berries]

The slower you go the more time you have to react.

I don't think that is going to be catchy enough for the next advertising campaign somehow.

[Akzle]

BTW: Funny how the guys I 'meet' that have an EBA reading of 783 or 1072 etc invariably tell me they have only had 'a couple of drinks'!

i'm guessing you're a patched up blue-gang member.

it's not funny. when you forcibly detain people with the implied threat of incarceration, monetary penalties and general "i'm paid with your money to fuck you aroundery", they're hardly going to roll up and say "ohyup, i'm pissed ossifer, btw there's a dead hooker in the boot and my concaine stash under the seat."
because saying that is only slightly stupider than willingly providing the evidence that you're going to use against them in the next breath, so to speak.

FWIW the alcohol vs driving ability study i saw was televised some years ago, there was debate as to whether it was directly linked to the booze or whether it was "I've been drinking so i better drive real good so no-one thinks i've been drinking"

the other thing, and i think statistics do back this up, is that drunk people in crashes suffer less injuries, because they're more relaxed, so at the time of impact their muscles aren't locked up and they just "go with the flow", resulting in less injuries.

[scumdog]

i'm guessing you're a patched up blue-gang member.

it's not funny. when you forcibly detain people with the implied threat of incarceration, monetary penalties and general "i'm paid with your money to fuck you aroundery", they're hardly going to roll up and say "ohyup, i'm pissed ossifer, btw there's a dead hooker in the boot and my concaine stash under the seat."
because saying that is only slightly stupider than willingly providing the evidence that you're going to use against them in the next breath, so to speak.

FWIW the alcohol vs driving ability study i saw was televised some years ago, there was debate as to whether it was directly linked to the booze or whether it was "I've been drinking so i better drive real good so no-one thinks i've been drinking"

the other thing, and i think statistics do back this up, is that drunk people in crashes suffer less injuries, because they're more relaxed, so at the time of impact their muscles aren't locked up and they just "go with the flow", resulting in less injuries.

Wa-wa-fuckin' wa, cue cracked gramaphone record....



After long consideration of what should be the appropriate response to the above post I settled on this one.





Fuck off...........

[Kickaha]

After long consideration of what should be the appropriate response to the above post I settled on this one.


Fuck off...........

Ah fuck, he's on whiskey again

[scumdog]

Ah fuck, he's on whiskey again

Hell no, I'm too mellow for that right now!

But I think I'll have one now, maybe a Speyburn