Slashdot Mirror

The study has been done dozens of times here in the US, by various state and federal agencies. They ALL say the exact same things, which are, briefly --

- Speed limits are set artificially low from the 85th percentile (the universally agreed-upon standard).

- Raising and lowering posted speed limits has no significant effect on driver speed.

- Usually (as in, well more than half), lowering the posted limit increases the number of accidents in an area. The reason is because there's always one or two doofuses who actually obey the limit, so they're going 40mph while everyone else is going 60mph and those slow-moving people now constitute a very unexpected obstacle. You can argue that they are being lawful but the law is still stupid.

- Raising the limit, likewise, tends to decrease the number of accidents.

http://www.safespeed.org.uk/speedlimits.html Here's a great site all about it.

Department of Transportation / Federal Highway Authority study on the subject.

      Even the government's own studies prove the speed limit is retarded and dangerous, but they stick to it.

Ask yourself why, and stop holding up this "for public safety" crap.

Breaking the law doesn't always mean you're wrong. The law. Is. Stupid.

Ability for travellers to self-police. If some guy is driving 60mph+ over the speed limit, likely you could have people report this driver.. Enough complaints and an officer will know where to respond.

Speed alone is, by far, the least common cause of accidents. However, inattention, making abrupt lane changes, not signaling, fatigue, intoxication, mechanical failure (usually due to poor maintenance habits), poor visibility are all far more likely causes. The speed the vehicle was traveling when this root cause occurred is secondary. Unfortunately, speed limits are much easier to enforce, so that's what lawmakers focus on.

http://www.roadsense.com.au/factsandfigures.html
http://www.motorists.com/issues/speed/Making_Sense .html
http://www.safespeed.org.uk/speed-doesnt-kill.pdf (PDF)

Except when it's artificially low just to get "free money". e.g. speed traps. When that happens, the limits aren't set by engineering recommendations but by the research that shows what limit generates the most tickets. There are local roads in many cities whose speed limit is set 30 (!) mph lower than what is determined safe by analyzing the road and conditions.

Anyway, "driving at what feels like safe conditions" doesn't necessarily mean that drivers are moving at 90mph or above, which seems to be the misconception here. Driving at the speed for which a road was designed isn't irresponsible. Driving significantly below it is. And no road is perfectly flat, and even if there's an effort to minimize blind spots that cause accidents, some are still there. That's where the crashes are going to happen.

Common situations like the ones I described in earlier posts are ones in which cars were moving at a prevailing speed of 70mph on a road perfectly safe for this speed to the AVERAGE driver (which by definition includes those with inflated self-opinions), except for a pack doing 50-55. Exactly. In the right, left and center lanes. (The speed limit on the road when I encountered the pack I'm thinking of? 65.)

The minimum was 45, so the slowpokes technically weren't doing anything wrong (they aren't likely to get a ticket) -- unless there's a "slower traffic must stay in the slow lane unless passing" rule. Which there was in this case.

They were driving slowly why? Because an old man in a white Crown Vic was driving slowly. No one was passing him even though other drivers, traveling at 65-70mph, were bunching up in legitimate passing lanes attempting to pass ... despite a law in force in the area stating that drivers must remain in the slow lane except when passing, which none of them were doing.

Some pages that have more to say about proper speed limit selection and driver behavior and what's mechanically safe/unsafe (stopping distances etc):

Speed Limits - A Case of "Majority Rule"

Speed Limits

The end result is that the standard of driving in this country has gone from quite decent to absolutely appalling,

and the death rate, which had been dropping for decades, has started to go up.

There's a debate on this sort of thing over here, including An interesting read.

What a dangerous idea

Couldn't agree more. Several incidents make me feel very reluctant to offer anything other than total condemnation for this one.

1) Driving along the outside lane of the M25 a somewhere around 70 when an electrical fault in the ignition switch killed all the electrics including the indicators, ignition, etc. As the car slowed I hit the hazard lights and, not wanting to stop in the outside lane, started to pull over toward the hard shoulder while my wife frantically tried to gesture our intent to the continual stream of vehicles that were illegally passing us in the other two lanes. OK so it doesn't sound too bad on paper but it was bloody hair raising at the time and if people hadn't been paying attention it could easily have turned into a pile up.

2) Friend of mine cornering on his motorbike when an alarm immobiliser fault killed the ignition. Sudden loss of power while leant over on a bike? Broken ribs and trashed Suzuki.

3) Me and wife on RD350LC circling the roundabout at the M25/A2 junction. As we're crossing the lights an articulated lorry jumps the red light and pulls across our path. No way to stop, only way out was to dump it into second, whack the throttle open and cut across the cars in the two lanes to our right that were (luckily) driven by people who reacted fast enough when they noticed what was going on.

Anyway, the point is that sudden losses of power or unexpected changes in vehicle behaviour are, in certain circumstances, potential death not only for the driver but those around him/her who may not be expecting the vehicle in front to stop for no apparent reason. If I'd had a speed limiter acting on 3 above and hadn't been able to accelerate out of the way, the artic would have killed both of us.

For that other old favourite the speed camera, check out this article Safespeed.org and head for the bit marked "One third of roads fatalities are now caused by speed cameras".

Perhaps you need to check the facts.

Germany's autobahn fatality rates are lower than the USA's equivalent, although overall the rates are slightly higher.

The UK's rates are about half those, and one of the lowest in the world. This is attributed to a higher standard of driving and more widespread use of seatbelts and motorcycle helmets.

Gareth

Anyone interested in issues surrounding driving in the UK, esp. the anti car madness which is around at the moment, should have a look at SafeSpeed. Lots of interesting information regarding cameras, police targets, why driving fast isn't necessarily dangerous, etc.

but there is no doubt that if drivers know they will get caught the roads would be a safer place.

You may find this interesting.

Not according to my copy of the highway code:

80mph thinking distance 88 feet braking distance 478 feet overall stopping distance 566 feet 4.8 secs

Your theory about the car in front is complete nonsense and the reason why so many multi car pile ups happen.

And lastly, if I am already travelling at 10mph over the speed limit then you have no business tailgating me you complete asshole. If there is a car up in front of me that I can't get past the gap I leave in front is no business of yours.

If you have equal braking abilities of the car in front of you,

The chances that your SUV pile of crap can stop in four times the distance I can stop is not that good. I have 18" brake disks that can stop the car dead in 80" at 80mph without losing control of the car. They are the same type of brake as fitted to the XKR that won the Trans Am the other year. So I can stop dead in less space than you think is sufficient.

The reason I am leaving 200 yards in front of me is because there is an asshole with an SUV tailgating me, so I have to leave at least enough room in front of me to stop while applying the brakes slowly enough that the SUV-asshole does not end up embedded in my tail pipe.

Conclusion: People are tailgating you because of your poor driving. You are causing frustration in general, and I pray that you are NOT in the left lane when doing this (it is ILLEGAL). This will only increase road rage and accidents behind you. A general rule is to be able to count 2-3 seconds between the time the car in front of you passes a landmark, and you do. This is usually 2-4 car lengths at highway speeds. Of course adjust for the type of car you drive and the car in front.

2-3 seconds is the thinking time. If the car in front hits a stationary vehicle you are leaving no time for braking, let alone error. Tailgating is always illegal and dangerous. Leaving sufficient room to stop before you hit the car in front is not only not legal, it is a requirement, you are the one breaking the law if you don't.

Conclusion, if you are tailgating a Jaguar XK8 and it is going slower in response rather than faster it is because I have been trained on the police driving course and I know what I am doing, I am slowing down because there is a potentially dangerous situation, you are the potentially dangerous situation so if you keep your distance the way it says in the highway code you might find I go faster.