The best way to stop most road deaths

[JumboBeef]

No Speed itself doesn't kill it's Irresponsible behavior of the driver behind of the wheel driving at stupid speeds,

I disagree.

You are travelling down an empty motorway and you have a blow out/fox runs across in front of you/there is something in the road. If you are travelling at 60mph you have a damn sight more chance of controlling it and avoiding a crash than you do at 100mph (no matter how good you are).

An irresponsible driver at 20mph in an urban area is going to kill less people than an irresponsible driver at 40mph.  Speed and driving like a nutter are two different things: the difference is speed can make a normally good driver a killer.

Speed killed my friend and her daughter: if the other car hadn't been speeding, it wouldn't have lost control on that bend, end of story.

[redhand]

No Speed itself doesn't kill it's Irresponsible behavior of the driver behind of the wheel driving at stupid speeds,

I disagree.

You are travelling down an empty motorway and you have a blow out/fox runs across in front of you/there is something in the road. If you are travelling at 60mph you have a damn sight more chance of controlling it and avoiding a crash than you do at 100mph (no matter how good you are).

An irresponsible driver at 20mph in an urban area is going to kill less people than an irresponsible driver at 40mph.  Speed and driving like a nutter are two different things: the difference is speed can make a normally good driver a killer.

Speed killed my friend and her daughter: if the other car hadn't been speeding, it wouldn't have lost control on that bend, end of story.

Rubbish the driver was an idiot but he could have been doing anyone of a dozen different things that would have caused the accident. from tuning his radio in to talking on the phone to reading a map. I followed an idiot up the m56 at 65mph recently she was wandering all over the inside and middle lane of the motorway and forcing everyone to get out of the way. The reason for this erratic driving??, she was talking on her mobile whilst applying her makeup using the rearveiw mirror as a vanity mirror.

[Wireless]

Just a tad bit insensitive regarding Boddle's loss me thinks.

You can't catch the idiots, unless you have a big brother state with a camera on each corner (maybe we're getting somewhere near), but you can enforce speed limits in certain high risk areas to cater for the idiots in society.

Unless you've picked up the broken bodies yourself, many times, you're in no position to make sweeping statements.

Speed Kills.

[JumboBeef]

Rubbish the driver was an idiot but he could have been doing anyone of a dozen different things that would have caused the accident.

The police stated it was SPEED which caused the crash.  The other driver was done (and sent down) for it.  It all went through Court and the COURTS and the POLICE stated it was EXCESSIVE SPEED which caused the other driver to lose control on the bend:  he wasn't doing anything else, his car was legal and well looked after, he just was going too DAMN FAST.

Trust me: SPEED KILLS!

[mike142sl]

You are travelling down an empty motorway and you have a blow out/fox runs across in front of you/there is something in the road. If you are travelling at 60mph you have a damn sight more chance of controlling it and avoiding a crash than you do at 100mph (no matter how good you are).

This is exactly the point when the phrase SPEED KILLS is used. Arguing that 1mph can kill is missing the point entirely and statements like

Most accident that kill don't involve speed just poor judgement on the behalf of the driver

need backing up.

FACT is the faster you are moving the less time you have to respond, just look at how far down the road you travel when braking from different speeds - and that's when you are expecting to have to brake. Non of us can expect the unexpected but FACT is you have a far better chance of responding at lower speeds - it's probably why the speed limits are what they are and  mostly where they are.

[Rich_P]

What ever happened to the saying "Drive accordingly to the conditions of the vehicle and the road"? 

My understanding of speed limits is to help try to prevent clowns racing through areas that should be driven at slower speeds, because as people have commented there are some rather silly folk who race about in the country lanes and end up coming head to head with other vehicles.  Sometimes though, "revenge" can be sweet as the charging vehicle dives off into a ditch or something to avoid having a head on with a big tractor.  :lol:

[lambert]

Speed does not kill in and of itself. If you travel at 100 mph you don't die. This is a fact.
If you are however hit by a sufficiently massive object moving at a sufficiently high speed you will die.
 
What causes such an impact is an almost infinite variable.

[JumboBeef]

Drinking and driving does not kill by itself.
Texting and driving does not kill by itself.

Speed, drinking and texting increases the likelyhood of an accident/death.

[V8MoneyPit]

What ever happened to the saying "Drive accordingly to the conditions of the vehicle and the road"? 

My understanding of speed limits is to help try to prevent clowns racing through areas that should be driven at slower speeds, because as people have commented there are some rather silly folk who race about in the country lanes and end up coming head to head with other vehicles.  Sometimes though, "revenge" can be sweet as the charging vehicle dives off into a ditch or something to avoid having a head on with a big tractor.  :lol:

I sometimes wonder whether people would drive at more appropriate speeds if there were no speed limits. In the example I gave earlier, he was driving at a speed based on the limit signs, not the road conditions.

I guess the limit signs are there to help people who struggle to make the correct judgement of what speed they should be doing. Frankly, if they need that type of help, they shouldn't be allowed on the roads at all.

[SteveGoodz]

Speed killed my friend and her daughter: if the other car hadn't been speeding, it wouldn't have lost control on that bend, end of story.

I'm sorry for the loss of someone you obviously miss but it's not possible to say that had the other driver been doing the speed limit he wouldn't have still caused the collision and killed your friend. Unless you are saying that it's not possible (due to the laws of physics) to get around that corner at more than 50mph (in which case the limit should be set well below that and maybe the local highways authority should shoulder some of the blame) then the reason the driver lost control was lack of ability and that lack of ability might just as well have manifested itself at 30mph as it did at 60 (or whatever).

Speed may well have been a contributing factor but the over-riding reason for the collision was driver error.

[SteveGoodz]

Rubbish the driver was an idiot but he could have been doing anyone of a dozen different things that would have caused the accident.

The police stated it was SPEED which caused the crash.  The other driver was done (and sent down) for it.  It all went through Court and the COURTS and the POLICE stated it was EXCESSIVE SPEED which caused the other driver to lose control on the bend:  he wasn't doing anything else, his car was legal and well looked after, he just was going too DAMN FAST.

Trust me: SPEED KILLS!

You have to be mistaken about the reason the driver was imprisoned. There is not custodial sentence for speeding ~ causing death by careless or dangerous driving yes; but not speeding.

[JumboBeef]

it's not possible to say that had the other driver been doing the speed limit he wouldn't have still caused the collision and killed your friend. Unless you are saying that it's not possible (due to the laws of physics) to get around that corner at more than 50mph (in which case the limit should be set well below that and maybe the local highways authority should shoulder some of the blame) then the reason the driver lost control was lack of ability and that lack of ability might just as well have manifested itself at 30mph as it did at 60 (or whatever).

Speed may well have been a contributing factor but the over-riding reason for the collision was driver error.

Can I make something clear please? 

The road is (was: it has been years since I was there) a 50mph with fast bends.  You can drive most of it at 50mph safely. I can't remember what speed this person was doing (it was eight or so years ago now) but it was considerably more than 50mph.  He went into the corner too fast, understeered and ended up on the wrong side of the road, directly in the path of my friend's car.

The POLICE and their accident investigation department (whatever they are called) stated (in Court) that excessive speed was the cause of the accident.  Nothing else, just excessive speed  I haven't said it, they did.

Speed may well have been a contributing factor but the over-riding reason for the collision was driver error.

OK, I will agree with you: driver error, by driving too bloody fast!

You have to be mistaken about the reason the driver was imprisoned. There is not custodial sentence for speeding ~ causing death by careless or dangerous driving yes; but not speeding.

If you kill someone through speeding (and this person killed two), you damn well should end up in jail.  I cannot remember what he was charged with, and it was years ago, but I do remember he was sent down and the cause of the accident was excessive speed.

Death by dangerous driving?  I can't remember.

[SteveGoodz]

FACT is the faster you are moving the less time you have to respond, just look at how far down the road you travel when braking from different speeds - and that's when you are expecting to have to brake. Non of us can expect the unexpected but FACT is you have a far better chance of responding at lower speeds - it's probably why the speed limits are what they are and  mostly where they are.

I understand what you're trying to say but in the strictest sense you're wrong. The TIME it takes you to react to a situation is generally the same irrespective of speed, although it varies with concentration levels. The DISTANCE you travel in that time is, of course, different and increases with speed which is why ALL advanced driving organisations adopt the mantra from Roadcraft (the Police bible on driving) that you should never drive so fast that you cannot stop safely, on your own side of the road, in the distance that you can see to be clear.

Putting that into real world terms it means that as you increase your speed you have to a) look further ahead and b) anticipate what may happen at bends, junctions, etc., further up the road. I train a lot of drivers to pass the both IAM and RoSPA's advanced tests (all ages from all backgrounds) and the single biggest "fault" they have when we start is being reactive to situations rather than thinking about what others might do and becoming pro-active.

Better training is the only solution to the (generally) poor quality of driver on our roads.

[datalas]

Just a word of warning guys before things get decidedly out of hand (I can see the warning signs flashing up)

I think the key point we all need to appreciate is that speed in and of itself doesn't kill anyone, however it is a contributing factor, that is to say it is one of a dozen variables which can easily make the difference between life and death.

Clearly, there are things that can be done to affect the other 11 and great pains should be taken to be wary of them.  However, speed is perhaps the one factor we can have more control over than the others,  there is always the possibility to slow down; however the options for "not losing grip" or "not having something break" tend not to be so predictable, if in doubt, drive slower it's always an option.

Anyhow,  I'm not going to preach, but remember that in an accident there are a thousand factors which make it lethal or otherwise, the specifics vary from each accident to accident and from each victim to victim.  In a world where there are no absolutes we have to make generalisations,  and one of the convenient generalisations that can be made is that regardless of the circumstances speed rarely makes things better.

[JumboBeef]

I agree.

Also, there are 3,000 people killed on the roads each year.  What would happen to that number if everyone was limited to 10mph?  It would drop to almost nil.  What would happen if the speed limit was doubled (ie: 140mph)?  That figure would go right up.  The one thing which is varible and directly affects accidents figures?  Speed.

I don't want a falling out.  I choose not to speed.  Everyone else can do what they want (as long as it's not near me and mine).

[lambert]

Interesting fact. The number of road deaths has stayed fairly stable for the last 15 odd years despite the number of road users going up lots.

[Boddle]

Drinking and driving does not kill by itself.
Texting and driving does not kill by itself.

Speed, drinking and texting increases the likelyhood of an accident/death.

 Unfortunately you are very badly wrong there, Both Text or using the phone and drink driving are and bigger causes for accidents at this moment in time than speeding is.
 not to sure of the figures but last I heard phone use was nearly 20% of accidents drunk drive(which may or may not include speeding) 10% Speeding was about 5% most incidents are cause by people drive without due care and attention. Hence my earlier statement about better training and more sevear penaties for the use of mobile phone along the line of dangerous driving EI a minimum of 2 year ban £1000 fine a retest and 6 points on your licence for 2 years when you get back driving.

 Please note if the phone is found to be the cause of an accident you be done for dangerous driving now.

 Phone usage does not just kill those involve in the incident, it has taken many lives of those who where on the other end when the accident happened, People have been unable to live with that fact afterwoods and taken there own lives.

[SimonHarwood]

The main factor is not paying proper attention to the traffic. This can be by not looking at the road at all (while sending or reading text messages) or by concentrating on other things while talking on the phone, sorting out which CD to put on next, re-tuning your radio!, etc. If you are speeding it means that you have less time to react when you start paying attention again and find that you are about to hit someone... assuming that you start paying attention before you hit them.

When driving, the act of driving should have your undivided attention.

[TDi90]

Who aggrees with me that if this goverment pays more attention to reducing the speed down to 70 mph in cars by fitting a speed limiter.

i can tell your a trucker  ;)
ridiculous idea.  :shock: [-X

[freelanderpx54]

Jumbobeef - your example shows that speed kills and I agree. BUT, speed itself does not kill, it takes other factors. You need to take into account things like driving experience, type of car blah de blah.  If Lewis Hamilton was recorded on film as avoiding a particularly nasty accident spot then he would be regarded as a hero because of his driving style. However, if a gifted chav ( fairytale time I know) did the same manouvere (sp) and lost it would be a completely different story.

We all drive under the banner of "There but for the grace of god I drive" and fortunately we get home BUT sometimes we don't and it is the reasons we don't that we need to examine. Statistics can be warped to mean what we want

Imagine,, the time period is Jan to March 2007. Crime is running at 100 incidents in inner city Salford. But in Worsley, it is running at 1 incident

Fast forward to Jan to March 2008. Crime is running at 101 incidents in inner city Salford but in Worsley it is running at 3 incidents


Based on those figures, Inner City Salford has seen a crime rise of 1% but Worsley - an affluent area has seen a rise of 300%



Where would you buy a house based on statistics?

[Lord Shagg-Pyle]

I've never been a great believer in statistics, especially relating to a 'discussion' such as this. Figures can be 'massaged' to suit which ever situation.
As one of those that picks up the pieces, both in the actual and metaphorical sense, I would say that the use of speed does kill, usually combined with other factors, which has already been mentioned.
When I worked in Norfolk, the A47 Acle Straight was known as a dangerous killer road. The road in fact was perfectly safe. It just lay there being driven, as opposed to leaping up and stabbing someone.
It only became a dangerous killer when you put humans on it, either on foot or in a vehicle.
The causes of the greater majority of accidents, or incidents as they are now known in Emergency Service parlence, is the human factor. Lack of experience, bravado, cockiness are all factors to be taken into consideration, along with health, age, state of intoxication etc etc.
I'm not a great believer in fixed speed cameras. I personally think it would be best to take a step back to the time when there were no cameras, but plenty of Traffic Police armed with lazer speed guns, going out and hiding up to catch people. Call me a Facist Pig if you like, but nobody ever knew where they would be, hence it was more of a deterrent.
Also when not 'gunning' someone, the patrols would be on the roads booking those who chose to drive like idiots, use phones etc etc.
Limiting all vehicles would create more problems than it is worth. It would lead to more frustration and more bad driving.

Alternatively, we could take the laid back approach. If everyone chilled out and decided to live a less hectic life, we would feel forced to drive everywhere quickly.
Ask yourself what is causing you to rush about? I see it with colleagues at work. There are so few officers there to deal with the jobs coming in that everyone is under pressure to get stuff down quickly. This leads to stuff not being investigated properly, which leads to hassle from the bosses and Public. This in turn leads to more rushing from job to job, which causes more prangs.

Me? I drive according to the law of the land and the law of L S-P, namely "the job will still be there when you get there".

Drive safely according to your ability, the condition of the road and condition of your vehicle. That way you won't have a nasty flourescent BMW pop into your rear view mirror.

Have a nice day, y'all!

[crazymac]

LSP, I agree wholeheartedly about getting shot of the cameras and putting much more traffic cars on patrol. As you say, they can spot the eejits and book em, rather than some piece of metal and glass that just takes a piccy of someone and sends a standard letter that gets tied up in beaurocratic nonsense for a couple of months!

I've been nicked once by a camera, it was on the motorway in a restricted speed area and all I did was follow all the other cars at the same speed, I assume we all got done! I am now anal about following the restricted limits on Mways! yes it drives the ones behind me crazy, but I don't get a ticket!

I've also been stopped 3 times by mobile radar units and each time I have been let off with a caution after the car has been checked out etc. That is proper policing in my book!

(this is in 23 years of driving incidentally! so not bad I suppose??)

[Lord Shagg-Pyle]

I've also been stopped 3 times by mobile radar units and each time I have been let off with a caution after the car has been checked out etc. That is proper policing in my book!

(this is in 23 years of driving incidentally! so not bad I suppose??)

Thats not bad odds really.


I saw a report the other day, about the intention to cut down a 200 year old oak tree, that is situated at the apex of a bend. The tree has apparently caused numerous deaths over the years, as it has been hit by numerous cars which has resulted in deaths.
So,obviously the tree is to blame. It must be removed to prevent any more deaths! Naughty tree! Of course the other way to deal with it is for drivers to slow down in bad weather, therefore not slide off the bend and hit the tree.
Ridiculous state of affairs.
I got called to a bike accident in the early hours of this morning. A guy was speeding, went into a roundabout too quick, possibly lost it on some gravel/road debris on the exit and off he goes and bowls off down the road like a tumbleweed in a gale. He was stretchered away.
Causes? Speed, and the unknown entity of 'foreign objects'.
I picked a 6" heavy duty bolt off the road the other day. Its scary whats lying about out there.

[Tommo]

It was on the radio the other day that they can now jail someone for 14 years (iirc) for killing someone whilst your on the phone. Now this scares me, i never talk on the phone whilst im driving but i could see my self answering it if it was to be very important, if only to say 'ill ring you back'. now at this moment if a kid stepped out im knackered! jail for 14 years, my whole life ruined.

I suppose my point is that there arent many of us who havent broken the rules in exeptional circumstances, be it an urgent journey to casualty or late for somthing important when we have exceeded the speed limit where we saw fit.

So as was mentioned earlyer about someone going too fast round a bend and hitting an oncoming car, killing the occupants. Everyone saying he should have his head chopped off for being the scum of the earth, when really it could have been anyone of us who lost control around that bend that we werent expecting. 

I could list a dozen times that ive done somthing stupid on the road, maybe a dodgey overtaking manouvre or pushing it a bit around a tight bend. But lucky for me on those occasions the road wasnt that bit slippyer than it usually is or whatever else can push you past the limit of control.

They are called 'accidents' for a reason. everyone is fully aware of the damage that can be done by their actions, no one sets out to take a life. Imagine having to live with yourself after causing a fatal accident, worse than anything the government can do to you.

I was amazed when i watched that advert that said you could hit a kid at 40mph and there was a 20% chance they would live. that is phenominal. i always figured if they hit you at 25mph you were brown bread. no excuse to go faster like but i found it interesting.

[V8MoneyPit]

.....everyone is fully aware of the damage that can be done by their actions.......

Unfortunately, I'm not sure that's true though. When you see the way many people drive, it is patently obvious they have little or no idea of what they are capable of inflicting with their car.

Just yesterday morning, we were being followed by a small van. The driver was all over the road as he caught up with us. We passed a cyclist. He then did the same, but by then he was far too close to a blind bend. When he caught us, he was driving far too close, so I slowed down to allow more stopping distance (making allowince for his stopping distance as well as mine  :roll:). At which point, he just drove even closer! then we got to roadworks signs and I slowed. When we got to the traffic lights he still hadn't slowed and he had to swerve out to avoid running into the back of us! ........ All this time he was rabbiting on his mobile  he didn't even take it away from his ear as he swerved out behind us  :shock:

[Wireless]

Use hands free with auto answer and you'll never be justifying the emergency nature of your call to a court.

I'd still be quite happy having my maximum speed limited to the road I'm on by satellite control of the speed limiting device, I see nothing wrong with this at all.

I don't think the majority of collisions can be called accidents, since someone is virtually always to blame, this is the thinking behind emergency service parlance moving to calling vehicle collisions 'incidents', rather than 'accidents', RTC rather than RTA.

I've been driving 26 years and only ever had a Parking Ticket, and even that was contested and revoked.

I agree with crazymac, I religiously follow restricted speed limits on Motorways, and remember driving on the A53 through the small village of Baldwins Gate, which has an unusual 30mph limit that starts well away from the village, I had this Audi up my arse looking to overtake for about 1/4 of a mile, and I refused to speed up, then we rounded a blind bend and there was the mobile speed camera vehicle sat there waiting for impatient Audi drivers.  Lo and behold, the Audi decided to drop back through the rest of the village.

I can honestly say that the only dodgy thing I've ever done behind the wheel is wear a pair of driving gloves when I was 17, but this only lasted 10 minutes because;

1. my hands started to sweat
2. there was a lack of feel whilst steering
3. maybe driving gloves didn't suit the Austin Allegro anyway

[JumboBeef]

It was on the radio the other day that they can now jail someone for 14 years (iirc) for killing someone whilst your on the phone. Now this scares me, i never talk on the phone whilst im driving but i could see my self answering it if it was to be very important, if only to say 'ill ring you back'. now at this moment if a kid stepped out im knackered! jail for 14 years, my whole life ruined.

If you don't have a hands free, switch the phone off.  No call is that important!

Just think how we all lived just 15 years ago or so and none of us had mobiles yet we all still got to work, got home and did everything else without being no more than 10 second away from the nearest telephone.

[andycwb]

Who aggrees with me that if this goverment pays more attention to reducing the speed down to 70 mph in cars by fitting a speed limiter.

So everyone is driving in a catatonic state because they have their foot to the floor and nothing is keeping their interest on the road.

I will emigrate before I have a speed limiter on my vehicle.

[Wireless]

Interesting, when people wish to retain the right to break the Law, which is either because they feel they should be trusted not to, or because they are better drivers than the rest of us and are better able to set their own speed limits when they feel like it.

Anyone prone to a catatonic state behind the wheel really needs to take more breaks from driving, since if LGV drivers can manage an 8 to 10 hour day at 56mph, I'm pretty certain the rest of us can manage 70mph for a couple of hours in a car using cruise control.

Threatening to leave the country does no good either, since there's plenty if immigrants wanting to get in.

[frosty]

 To be brutally honest id rather you all went out and hand crashes, just not ones where anyones injured/killed... works been bloody quiet the last couple of weeks and the old finances are suffering! so if a few of you could just pop round this way and have a few little shunts, itd be appreciated!