DriveSmartBC - Speed Kills, Or Does It?

[skidmark]

"Speed Kills!" is a popular road safety slogan that we hear often. It's pretty simplistic and when I look around me on the highway I am convinced that drivers either don't believe it or live in a world of denial. Speed alone doesn't kill, but combine it with poor driving skills or a bad decision and it definitely makes a bad situation worse.

The most obvious drawback of speed is that the faster you go, the more likely some road user is going to get hurt or killed when things go wrong. Energy increases as the square of the speed and our bodies can only deal with sudden changes in energy to a certain extent. Exceed that threshold and we tend to come apart at the seams.

The faster you go, the less time you have to deal with issues. These issues may be caused by you or they may be caused by another road user. Either way, if you are going too fast to react and recover, it's going to hurt someone.

"Go with the flow." Yes, I agree that is a good idea until the flow exceeds the speed limit. I like to obey the rules of the road and we have some drivers who are unsafe at speeds above the limit.

Perhaps the next time the news tells you that a collision was a result of speed, think that it probably means inappropriate speed made a driving error unrecoverable.

Reference Links

Follow DriveSmartBC on Twitter

[jlenko]

Originally Posted by skidmark

"Go with the flow." Yes, I agree that is a good idea until the flow exceeds the speed limit.

Unfortunately, the majority of traffic flow in Metro Vancouver IS exceeding the speed limit.

If you're not speeding to keep up with the flow, you're the minority obstructing the flow.. which is worse?

[ImKai]

speed does kill it honestly giving out tickets increasing insurance won't do anything people will just pay it and live on with there lives, they should do a new law like speeding over 65+ will be banned from driving for a year then i bet everyone will listen to the law but yeah that might sound stupid but it will save lifes anyone eles agrees?

[BrRsn]

Originally Posted by ImKai

speed does kill it honestly giving out tickets increasing insurance won't do anything people will just pay it and live on with there lives, they should do a new law like speeding over 65+ will be banned from driving for a year then i bet everyone will listen to the law but yeah that might sound stupid but it will save lifes anyone eles agrees?

No.


Look at the death penalty. That's the worst penalty you can get (equivalent in a sense to your speed nazi-like response that anything over 65 = instant ban from driving) for a crime, and if your theory had any credibility, places with the most harsh penalties would have the lowest crime rates.

America has capitol punishment/death penalty, Canada does not. Case closed.

By the way, do you really think the new "more than 30km/h over the speed limit, get impounded" law has really reduced speed violators by that much? Kind of the same thing, no?

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by dhillon09

By the way, do you really think the new "more than 30km/h over the speed limit, get impounded" law has really reduced speed violators by that much? Kind of the same thing, no?

Nope:

An unprecedented nineteen drivers in Kootenay National Park got a taste of British Columbia’s tough driving laws this past May long weekend when their vehicles were seized for excessive speeding, leaving many families roadside waiting for a tow.

[...]

Read more...

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by jlenko

If you're not speeding to keep up with the flow, you're the minority obstructing the flow.. which is worse?

See, and I get called a troll for that...

[Ferra]

Originally Posted by skidmark

"Go with the flow." Yes, I agree that is a good idea until the flow exceeds the speed limit. I like to obey the rules of the road and we have some drivers who are unsafe at speeds above the limit.

So do you consider ALL speed above the limit unsafe? And you NEVER go pass the speed limit when you are driving?

Higher speed kills, but driving at a speed significantly higher OR lower than the traffic average speed kills more

[zulutango]

Speed never kills...just the sudden stop when the speed ends.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by zulutango

Speed never kills...just the sudden stop when the speed ends.

So reduce your chances of stopping suddenly. One way to do this is to go with the flow.

[Rich Sandor]

An experienced driver with good judgement and car control can usually safely speed, and slow down for slower traffic and pass safely. An overconfident driver will not know the boundaries of grip and reaction time available to him. The problem is you cannot tell the two apart until one crashes, and you cannot write a different set of road rules for the experienced driver, the overconfident driver, and the timid driver.

So, we have to conform, reasonably, to the lowest common denominator: The timid driver.

Even if we mandated rally racing schools for all new drivers, in 50 years we might have glorious drivers, BUT we still have to share the road with bicycles and pedestrians.. and you can't have a 100kph zone down Robson street no matter HOW good a driver you are. Speed differentials between cars are not the only differentials to consider here.

[jlenko]

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

The problem is you cannot tell the two apart until one crashes,

The overconfident one usually has an "N" on the back

[firebird79_00]

is it 30 or 40 over you get your car taken away? i thought it was 40

[lowside67]

40.

[GG]

i think they should reduce it to 30, 40 is still too risky

[vafanculo]

Speed doesn't kill... Reckless driving kills

With the new 40 over law, I generally see people around me drive within 40km of the limit.. But not necessarily safer.

I still see alot of zig zagging, talking/texting, and no signal changes. I love the idea of the 40 over law on regular 50km/hr roads, but on highways I think that should be changed to allow for a higher overage.

What's funny tho, and I don't think I'm the only one that does this, is I have a tendency to add 30km/hr to every speed limit sign.. and that is my limit for that stretch.

They should crack down on more running yellows/reds, and focus less on speeding, especially on highways.
Posted via RS Mobile

[sebberry]

I think the 40km/hr over threshold is yet another knee-jerk reaction by the "speed kills" group.

I'd much rather see someone doing 120km/hr northbound in the 80km/hr Malahat speed section than 90km/hr through downtown Victoria.

Both offences are treated the same under the law but 90km/hr through downtown streets is far more likely to have disastrous consequences.

Most people doing 120km/hr coming off the Malahat don't crash. It's the one or two who do something else stupid who do.


As for the "go with the flow" bit...

We're taught that going with the flow is safer because it allows you to maintain a larger space margin in front, to the side and behind your vehicle.

If all the vehicles are travelling at the same speed, dangerous irregularities in the flow of traffic stand out more and can be more easily prepared for and avoided.

Yet some how the "Speed kills" geniuses at the MoT and ICBC have decided that all the benefits of "going with the flow" suddenly become irrelevant once the speed of traffic has exceeded the posted limit.

If anything, the benefits of going with the flow are more important and space margin maintenance becomes even more critical at higher speeds.

[ilvtofu]

What we need is not heavier punishments but corrective/restorative response, even if you go 40 over and have your car impounded, for many is just an inconvenience and realistically heavier punishments doesn't reduce crime/reoffending.

We need more progressive drivers ed. Even road tests aren't effective enough at reducing douchey drivers on the road, most people can follow the rules for 30 mins or so while under evaluation and as we can see people who have passed those road tests still cause major accidents etc. It's what people drive like when unsupervised that is the problem, which personally I honestly don't have the expertise to come up with a solution to yet.

[jackal]

there is so mush bs being spewed in this thread. the new driving fines and shit are just cash grabs and a cheap alternative to properly traing the driving public.

i would have no issue what so ever to pay 50 bucks every 5 years and have to pass a road test every 5 years. icbc would be rolling in dough and then maybe they'll scrap the bs aircare. the new driving regulations are f-ing stupid. now i just drive along at 4 am after work at 89km/h instead of 90. bad drivers kill people speed doesn't. the capabilities of todays cars is so far ahead of what it was when these speed limits were set it's rediculous the problem is the drivers not understanding what they can and can not do with their vehicles.

[skidmark]

Originally Posted by jackal

the new driving fines and shit are just cash grabs

Actually, I prefer to think of it as a tax on stupidity.

[Rich Sandor]

stupidity is also putting a 80kph limit on a stretch of highway that can safely be driven at 100kph+.

[sebberry]

What measurement system does ICBC have in place to see if the stiff 40+ penalties are having an impact on average travel speeds?

[zulutango]

Originally Posted by Rich Sandor

stupidity is also putting a 80kph limit on a stretch of highway that can safely be driven at 100kph+.

By whom, in what kind of vehicle, at what time of day, in what level of traffic, in what kind of weather/visibility, by what kind of driver ? If you operate in a world composed of variables like those then you have to use the lowest common denominator. What may be "safe" in one vehicle very likely may not be safe in another at the identical speed.

[sebberry]

With that explanation, all vehicles should be driving according to the lowest common denominator. So if there's a tanker truck doing 60 in an 80 zone, everyone should slow down to 60 to accommodate the lowest common denominator.

[Soundy]

This thread is oozing fail.

[zulutango]

Actually the oooze now has begun to fester and it looks terminal Doctor.