RANT: Speeding and Crap Drivers

[dabigginger]

Why is it we're told that speeding is the cause of accidents etc. etc. IMHO it is the biggest load of rubbish. Loads of drivers are getting penalized for small speeding violations. 12 points in the space of a few years and it's bye bye driving license. So many people are dependant on their license for commuting and suchlike.

True, I do believe if you can't see a speed camera from a few hundred feet away, you just aren't paying attention and deserve the points, but with so many being sneakily hidden away, more and more people will be finding the points totting up.

The only accidents that I can think of that can be attributed to speeding are:

-Taking a corner too fast and losing it
-Taking a corner too fast when there is a junction just after
-Going too fast in the wet, aquaplaning and losing it

Except for that, speeding does not cause accidents. It only increases the damage resulted from an accident and if people paid more attention, then accidents would be reduced. Putting speed cameras up everywhere takes peoples attention from the road and focuses it on their speedo.

IMHO, most accidents are caused with people not paying attention. i.e.

-People on mobile phones not looking where they are going
-People changing lanes without looking properly
-People pulling out from junctions without looking properly
-People following too closely
-People focusing on something else, CD player, reading a map etc.

I lose count of the number of times I see the above happening and I see it every day! I'm sure we've all seen the dimwitted driver following no more than a car length behind the one in front. If the car in front were to hit the anchors, the person following wouldn't even have time to think "oh, crap" let alone physically be able to hit the brakes.

Now, I'm not saying we shouldn't have speed limits - we certainly do, but I think a much more common sense approach should be taken, like before all of these automated machines started popping up everywhere. If we replaced every camera with a traffic cop, I genuinely believe the road would be a much safer place.

Feel free to agree, disagree, comment, rant!

[Walloper]

You are not told that speeding is the cause of accidents.
It is simply a common factor which complicates the result of accidents.

If you bump someones motor at 5mph you will probably get away with a shouting match.
Hit them at 40 and you will have a insurance claim and possible legal issues.
Develop the same principle to hitting a person.
Now you have broken bones/cuts/ bruising V death or 'life changing injuries'.

Here @bcf the consensus are vehemently against the suggestion that speed has anything to do with accidents.

But then folk thought the world was flat for thousands of years.

We are asked to keep our speed down not only to prevent the accidents attributed to over speeding but more so to reduce the consequential effects speed has in any accident.

Speed is cool. But useless in town.

***Shields Up***
____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair

[Kickstart]

[Didge]

[Walloper]

Well perhaps the people need to re-word the argument.
But you cannot say that speed is NOT an important common factor which adds to the severity of an RTA.

I know some on here can though.

Here is an idea....



Let's all not overspeed for a year or two....
See if the figures/stats change.
See how many Scammera Butterships continue to thrive.
Oh but then that would be too easy.
____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair

[Fallout]

I think speed is a key factor in accidents. There's always another factor which combines with the speed to create the accident though.

For example, we know if you hit a kid at 50mph in a 30mph zone, the kid is gonna end up a splat on the road. It still requires the kid to be wandering into the road though. So the speed isn't to blame, but it makes the accident worse.

If you're caning it down the outside lane on the motorway, and someone pulls from the middle out in front of you, there's more likely to be an accident the faster you're going. It still requires a numpty to not check his mirror, but your speed is gonna increase the chances of rear ending him.

I dont think it's fair to say speeding causes accidents in it's own right, but I do reckon if we didn't speed there would be much fewer accidents, because we'd all have more time to react to numpties doing numptyish things.

Having said that, I will never give up my right to speed.
____________________
Fallout

[repiV]

Thinking about the injustice and absurdity of the whole stupid system makes me angry, so usually I try not to.
The idiots who blindly chant "speed kills!!!1111" no matter how much evidence you throw at them are even worse.

I've been riding since April - commuted through London for a few months until I got a more local job, went for weekly hoons with guys on sportsbikes who've been riding for years and went for long rides on my own at every opportunity.
Each and every time I rode, in any of these situations, I completely ignored speed limits and rode based on my own judgement.
The most relaxing rides were my trips down to Devon, 100-130mph pretty much all the way but the roads are fairly straight, open and devoid of traffic - definitely the safest riding of all.

Generally without incident - pretty much all of the scary moments were due to idiots in rush hour city traffic. Then I had a nasty lowside, been on crutches for over three months now and got another month or two to go. But guess what? I was within the speed limit!
Ironically if it had been a much faster corner, it probably wouldn't have happened because I'm not comfortable cranking the bike right over at high speeds.

"Speed kills" is bullshit. Bad driving/riding kills.

[dabigginger]

[ZZr]

have ya not read the bike press speed is responsible for about 5%
of accidents
____________________
bikers know why dogs stick their heads out of car windows

[Walloper]

OK I agree speed is responsible for 5% of accidents.

It entirely depend how you weight your argument.

If you have ZERO speed you will not have the accident.
How is that for lateral thinking?

It is not the speed that hurts you.
It is sudden deceleration from 'certain' speed/s to zero/+ that chafe.

Cut, sliced chopped or mashed.
Common denominator in the equation/s is speed.
I have not known an accident involving a moving mass not to have speed as a factor.
How the speed is controlled is the cause of the accident.
How do we control Speed?
Scammeras.

Because not everyone who drives/rides can be expected to react correctly in an emergency that could be have averted an accidentk, but since they were moving too fast to enable proper control of the vehicle then the result is an accident.


____________________
W-ireless A-rtificial L-ifeform L-imited to O-bservation P-eacekeeping and E-fficient R-epair

[Didge]

Here's a few things for the 'SPEED KILLS' merchants:-

It's time to get angry. Department for Transport (DfT) is following a road safety policy that they no longer believe in because they would rather save face than save lives.
I'm quite sure that they used to believe that 'speed cameras saved lives', but in the last few years that's changed.
In May 2005 they decided that speed camera side effects needed to be researched.
In December 2005 they discovered that neglect of a statistical bias had exaggerated the main benefit of speed cameras by 400%. The claimed '100 lives per year saved at speed camera sites' is downgraded to 25 lives saved.
In June 2006 they discovered that the ongoing beneficial trend in road crash serious injuries was just a feature of the way these crashes are reported. Hospitalisation statistics don't show the same trend. Road deaths don't show the same trend.
In September 2006 they discovered that the proportion of injury crashes involving any speeding vehicle nationally was only 5% - not the 'one third' that they had previously claimed.
In 2007 it gets nasty.
In January the new funding for speed cameras was announced as grants given to local authorities. They quite deliberately chose not to ring fence the funding in the full knowledge that this will lead to a budgetary squeeze that will help speed cameras to fade away. There's also a transfer of responsibility for cameras away from DfT and towards local authorities - that's because DfT don't want the flak.
In March we learned via Freedom of Information request that the speed camera side effects research (announced in May 2005) had been axed. It is inconceivable that the side effects DON'T cost more than 25 lives per year, meaning that speed cameras are making road safety worse. But DfT doesn't want to hear this, which is the only possible reason for axing the most important research.
So here's the truth. Speed camera policy has failed catastrophically. Department for Transport KNOWS that it has failed but won't admit their deadly mistake and pull the plug. They seem to be hoping that speed cameras will fade away over the next five years, yet they know that the policy isn't working and is costing lives. If that's not a reason for road users to get angry, I don't know what is.

From here:-
https://www.safespeed.org.uk/

And a very good article from the Telegraph here:-
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/motoring/main.jhtml?xml=/motoring/2007/06/23/nosplit/mfspeed23.xml

[Hetzer]

Road 'safety' policy is led by lying scum, who are effectively murdering thousands of motorists each year.

A sane person shouldn't have cause to think it could happen.
____________________
"There's the horizon! Ride hard, ride fast and cut down all who stand in your way!"

[Walloper]