Why (car) accidents happen....?
- Thread starter GrumpyGregry
- Start date
Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
400bhp
Guru
It would seem that way.
In reality it's much more tricky.
Enforce the limit in some areas and motorists will speed up in other, potentially more dangerous and inappropriate areas.
I'm not sure if it's covered in the report but IIRC most accidents occur within a couple of miles from home. We should make motorists leave their cars 2 miles from their house.
In reality it's much more tricky.
Enforce the limit in some areas and motorists will speed up in other, potentially more dangerous and inappropriate areas.
I'm not sure if it's covered in the report but IIRC most accidents occur within a couple of miles from home. We should make motorists leave their cars 2 miles from their house.
mangaman
Guest
I agree - but the report downplays "inappropriate speed for the conditions" by ignoring it as the cause of most fatal crashes - losing control of one's vehicle, eg at a corner. They class this separately, but it is clearly driving too fast for the conditions.
The report is therefore a bit of a waste of time, and smacks of apologists for speeding.
Your conclusion, however, about more policing - I would be totally in favour of, but it aint going to happen under this coalition. Police numbers and resources will fall.
I would target inappropriate speeding / tailgating etc, by having random, unadvertised cops by the road - hidden - and radaring and videoing you.
The IAM report doesn't change anything - it's always been my view.
Speed cameras are a useful adjunct and I would increase their number in towns and cities, along with a 20 mph limit which the fixed cameras could enforce.
It would only need a few mobile stealth cops to hide out in country lanes capturing the really dangerous drivers if they popped up at a different spot at random. The deterrent would be the uncertainty rather than an increase in the number of traffic police.
mangaman
Guest
You can't.
In the age of austerity and reduced police time.
a) more fixed camers in towns and cities
b) more average speed cameras on major roads
c) a small group of police to be more subtle about capturing the real killers on unregulated small roads
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
technology, in car speed limiters would do it, with your maximum speed increasing and decreasing as you pass through designated zones. Receiver/black box in each car and transmitters on every road that enters, or leaves, a given speed area. Reinforce transmission via satnav technology...it all exists already, would be a relatively cheap and effective solution. Change car speedos to reflect your speed as a %age of the limit you are within. In the case of an accident the black box data is available for investigative purposes. Roadside black box data checks, or even automated downloads, retraining for those found to be spending too much time at 100% and too much time on the brakes.
Once you've done that then you can start tackling driving standards within the speed limits.
400bhp
Guru
[QUOTE 1519854"]
1. You didn't raise a problem. You said that if you enforced speed limits people would speed where speed limits aren't enforced..
2. No-one is going to do 50 up a cul-de-sac because you've just put a camera or two on their favourite inner-city rally route.
[/quote]
1. That's a problem.
2. That's an unrealistic example. You put a camera or 2 and it means people will speed between the cameras-or on rat runs, etc etc.
1. You didn't raise a problem. You said that if you enforced speed limits people would speed where speed limits aren't enforced..
2. No-one is going to do 50 up a cul-de-sac because you've just put a camera or two on their favourite inner-city rally route.
[/quote]
1. That's a problem.
2. That's an unrealistic example. You put a camera or 2 and it means people will speed between the cameras-or on rat runs, etc etc.
400bhp
Guru
I agree that this is a solution. However we live in a capitalist society and I don't think this will happen, not in my lifetime.
Capitalism could work in another way though-if insurers use such devices to lower premium rates.
mangaman
Guest
If you're answering me - I was promoting what I feel would decrease the numbers of KSIs on the roads in a realistic and deliverable fashion in the current financial climate.
I assume you've noticed there's a recession around, and a coalition committed to cutting the police.
i was suggesting the most cost effective method
I agree with MrP - more average speed cameras over longer distances would be cheap and useful.
More fixed cameras in towns - ie a camera everywhere when you enter a built up area - would seem cheap and useful.
You could then have a reduced number of traffic cops - eg less on motorways if all motorways had average speed cams - and redeploy them to hide out on the real killer areas. Country A roads, for example
You didn't actually raise a problem, and you hadn't factered in massive police cuts.
400bhp
Guru
MacB
Lover of things that come in 3's
- Location
- Farnborough, Hampshire
Agree and agree, young drivers can already get reduced premiums via black box type solutions and agreements on limitations of when the car can be used. Similar technology is in use in lorries, I think it really is just a question of time. It'll start as you suggest by being an option to reduce premiums and expand from there.
mangaman
Guest
There's so many holes in this but I CBA otherwise I''ll be on here all night.
Lovely - thanks mate.
I'm sorry I've raised issues you can't be arsed to reply to.
Your presence on this forum adds so much I feel.
I just hope you never leave.
stowie
Legendary Member
Although speed may be easy to detect, I suspect it is hard to determine if a car was travelling under the limit before an accident. Even so, the figures for when speeding was a known factor are worrying - remove this illegal activity and less people die. The figures, far from indicating speeding isn't an issue, indicates to me that many motorists are woefully poor at judging appropriate speed.
The problems with speed don't just manifest themselves in fatal statistics though. Speeding makes roads unpleasant for pedestrians and cyclists, it makes the simply task of crossing a road much more difficult - to the point that some urban multilane roads divide whole communities.
I would fix average speed cams on any multilane urban road - if one has to have them (and that is somewhat more than doubtful) then at least restrict their negative impact on the local environment as much as possible. Cutting down speed to the posted 30mph from 40mph or above has an extra-ordinary impact on the accessibility of roads. Not only that but less serious accidents decrease as the all road-users have more time to react. I happened to have the dubious pleasure of cycling around Monument way in Tottenham tonight, and, on a 30mph road, I am not lying when I say some cars must have been doing more than 50mph. Why do we accept this?
The problems with speed don't just manifest themselves in fatal statistics though. Speeding makes roads unpleasant for pedestrians and cyclists, it makes the simply task of crossing a road much more difficult - to the point that some urban multilane roads divide whole communities.
I would fix average speed cams on any multilane urban road - if one has to have them (and that is somewhat more than doubtful) then at least restrict their negative impact on the local environment as much as possible. Cutting down speed to the posted 30mph from 40mph or above has an extra-ordinary impact on the accessibility of roads. Not only that but less serious accidents decrease as the all road-users have more time to react. I happened to have the dubious pleasure of cycling around Monument way in Tottenham tonight, and, on a 30mph road, I am not lying when I say some cars must have been doing more than 50mph. Why do we accept this?
