What is wrong with people??

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by Simnut

Riiiiiiiight!

Then go ahead and pick what I said apart. Maybe I need to clarify something further for you?

[jlenko]

Originally Posted by Simnut

What is wrong with people??

They're hypocritical... that's what's wrong with people.

[zulutango]

Here is a thought from outside the box...and it deals with those who don't want to pay money when caught speeding. How about a driving prohibition instead of money? Maybe a 30 day prohib for a regular speeding...and a 60 day for excessive...then a due care could be a 6 month prohib. A street racing would be a jail term or a 1 year prohib and whatever other terms RS members could come up with. This would immediately squash those who claim VTs are just for revenue collection and not about about making people comply with traffic laws. What do you think? As a matter of interest, in Nova Scotia back more than 40 years ago, anyone convicted for even a regular speeding ticket got an automatic 2 week prohibition, in addition to the fine.

[Great68]

Drove the 'hat yesterday, they're pretty clever with the speed traps this time around. They're putting a motorcycle cop out with the radar gun a good kilometer or two in front of where they're pulling the cars over. Even if drivers in the opposite direction flash to warn about the pull-over spot, you're already nailed by the motorcycle cop.

My frustration with the malahat are mostly with the drivers who do UNDER 80, and then speed up to 100 when it opens up to 2 lanes in their direction. And I'd say the traffic weavers are a hell of a lot worse than people simply cruising along at 90-100.

[Simnut]

Originally Posted by jlenko

They're hypocritical... that's what's wrong with people.

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiight!

[Simnut]

Originally Posted by Great68

My frustration with the malahat are mostly with the drivers who do UNDER 80, and then speed up to 100 when it opens up to 2 lanes in their direction. And I'd say the traffic weavers are a hell of a lot worse than people simply cruising along at 90-100.

Those are drivers that are not part of the "driving community". We are all on the road together, and we should be paying attention as to what we are doing. It's called driving "WITH due care and attention" as required by law and in respect to others.
Many drivers unintentionally speed up if someone wants to pass......unconsciously they are matching your speed....a result of not paying attention, for instance. It is very easy to get into a "zone of complacency" when doing a lot of driving or driving the same road all the time. All drivers...whether driving a big rig or a little Honda Civic, must pay attention to what is happening around them at ALL times.

[Simnut]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Maybe I need to clarify something further for you?

Clarify something further????? Mmmm....to do something "further", you have to start in the first place.....

[ninjatune]

Something has to be wrong with someone who pays attention to the garbage Simnut and Seberry spout out!

[Simnut]

Originally Posted by ninjatune

Something has to be wrong with someone who pays attention to the garbage Simnut and Seberry spout out!

Not been entertaining for you? :O Oh, and you MUST have been paying attention...or you wouldn't have known it was garbage! Whats wrong with you?

[sebberry]

Hundreds of motorists caught in Malahat clampdown

Hundreds of drivers have been caught speeding and several unsafe commercial vehicles taken off the road two weeks into an aggressive enforcement campaign by traffic police on the Malahat.

Traffic officers, including the Integrated Road Safety Unit, have issued 630 speeding tickets to lead-footed drivers on the high-accident-rate 25-kilometre stretch of the Trans-Canada Highway, from Westshore Parkway in Langford to Frayne Road in Mill Bay.

...

Between 2006 and 2010, there were 288 reported traffic incidents, 193 injuries and seven deaths on the Malahat.

Alright..

• 80% of the drivers pulled for speeding were travelling in excess of 20km/hr over the limit.
• Two week period, 630 speeding tickets.
• 5 year period, 193 injuries.

Simple maths here, rough numbers:

• 630 speeders per fortnight
• stretch that out over a 5 year period that's 80,000+ speeding drivers.

Keep in mind that 80% of the 630 speeding tickets were issued for speeds greater than 20km/hr over the limit. So that's 64,000 drivers exceeding the speed limit by greater than 20km/hr in the 5 year period.

And these are just the numbers during the enforcement times. Many more drivers were speeding without the police there to write tickets.

• 64,000 drivers over this 5 year period where 193 people were injured were speeding in excess of 20km/hr over the limit.
• That's .003% of 20km/hr over drivers getting caught up in injury collisions
• 99.997% of 20km/hr over drivers aren't getting caught up in injury collisions

Did you find my friend's stolen tools yet? Or catch the guy who tried to set my building on fire?

[zulutango]

"Between 2006 and 2010, there were 288 reported traffic incidents, 193 injuries and seven deaths on the Malahat"

Don't know....maybe they were trying to stop this happening instead?

http://www.bclocalnews.com/news/125848403.html

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Hundreds of motorists caught in Malahat clampdown



Alright..

• 80% of the drivers pulled for speeding were travelling in excess of 20km/hr over the limit.
• Two week period, 630 speeding tickets.
• 5 year period, 193 injuries.

Simple maths here, rough numbers:

• 630 speeders per fortnight
• stretch that out over a 5 year period that's 80,000+ speeding drivers.

Keep in mind that 80% of the 630 speeding tickets were issued for speeds greater than 20km/hr over the limit. So that's 64,000 drivers exceeding the speed limit by greater than 20km/hr in the 5 year period.

And these are just the numbers during the enforcement times. Many more drivers were speeding without the police there to write tickets.

• 64,000 drivers over this 5 year period where 193 people were injured were speeding in excess of 20km/hr over the limit.
• That's .003% of 20km/hr over drivers getting caught up in injury collisions
• 99.997% of 20km/hr over drivers aren't getting caught up in injury collisions

Did you find my friend's stolen tools yet? Or catch the guy who tried to set my building on fire?

The math and conclusions here are so bizarrely flawed, I'm not even going to bother going beyond pointing out how stupid it is.

[Spidey]

I can't beleive there is even a debate on this.. Why people justify speeding by saying stupid shit like "the limit should be raised", "i have total control". How hard is it to follow the speed limit? Maybe you should look at the cause of you being "late" and needing to be somewhere in half the time it should take you, rather than blaming the speed limit. If you speed, you get a ticket, deal with it, you broke the law. It isn't like you are being tricked to speed.

[Soundy]

Originally Posted by BlueG2

I can't belive there is even a debate on this.. Why people justify speeding by saying stupid shit like "the limit should be raised", "i have total contro". How hard is it to follow the speed limit? Maybe you should look at the cause of you being "late" and needing to be somewhere and are going to be late, rather than blaming the speed limit. If you speed, you get a ticket, deal with it, you broke the law. It isn't like you are being tricked to speed.

Funny thing... I was in Edmonton all last week, and was amazed how many people stuck to the speed limits. Granted, a lot of them seemed more reasonable - most of the two-lane back highways are 100km/h - but even when it dipped to 70 or 50 going into the towns, everyone slowed down... the construction zones (and there were many), everyone was doing 50 (compare this to Hwy. 1 out here, where the construction zone limit is 80 and regular flow of traffic is still a steady 110 through the day).

Even on the open freeways (#2 heading south of town), where the limit was 110, almost everyone was doing 110 or a hair over... very very rarely did I see anyone go blazing past at 130 or more. And these are long, flat, straight, two-and-three-lane stretches where, if the Malahat should be "safe" at 120, these roads should reasonably allow 160 maximums.

Oddly, it seems few Albertans find these limits "too low" or has a problem following them.

[Spidey]

Originally Posted by Soundy

Funny thing... I was in Edmonton all last week, and was amazed how many people stuck to the speed limits. Granted, a lot of them seemed more reasonable - most of the two-lane back highways are 100km/h - but even when it dipped to 70 or 50 going into the towns, everyone slowed down... the construction zones (and there were many), everyone was doing 50 (compare this to Hwy. 1 out here, where the construction zone limit is 80 and regular flow of traffic is still a steady 110 through the day).

Even on the open freeways (#2 heading south of town), where the limit was 110, almost everyone was doing 110 or a hair over... very very rarely did I see anyone go blazing past at 130 or more. And these are long, flat, straight, two-and-three-lane stretches where, if the Malahat should be "safe" at 120, these roads should reasonably allow 160 maximums.

Oddly, it seems few Albertans find these limits "too low" or has a problem following them.

It may be true that if speed limits were higher, people would obey them... But at the same time, if someone were to go 130 in a 100 zone, and the speed limit was raised to 130, that person wouldn't be considered "speeding" anymore... You shouldn't accomodate a law like that just because "everyone does it". The speed limit hasn't changed in Vancouver for years, people should be used to it/plan their commute accordingly. There still isn't any excuse. The only people who may have a valid reason for speeding are those who are out of town and are not used to the lower speed limit, but even with that, they should adapt.

I haven't been to Edm, but if it is anything like calgary where most of their main roads are basically highways, then you could imagine the minor congestion they get during rush hour? Correct me if I am wrong, but when I was in Calgary last year, it seemed like they wouldn't experience the kind of traffic we do, so people wouldn't always be in a rush like they are in Vancouver.

[Simnut]

Originally Posted by sebberry

Hundreds of motorists caught in Malahat clampdown

• 64,000 drivers over this 5 year period where 193 people were injured were speeding in excess of 20km/hr over the limit.
• That's .003% of 20km/hr over drivers getting caught up in injury collisions
• 99.997% of 20km/hr over drivers aren't getting caught up in injury collisions

You forgot some important numbers.....the ones that count.

193 people injured...that's 193 too many.
7 deaths.......that's 7 too many.

You look at this as to how many people "get away with it"....most concerned people look at the results of those that DON'T "get away with it" and cause or get injured or killed.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by zulutango

"Between 2006 and 2010, there were 288 reported traffic incidents, 193 injuries and seven deaths on the Malahat"

Don't know....maybe they were trying to stop this happening instead?

BCLocalNews.com - Eyewitness testifies accused stopped, screamed and ran

He was on the run in a stolen car.

Hardly on the same planet as a most of the "speeders" on the Malahat.

[sebberry]

Originally Posted by Simnut

You forgot some important numbers.....the ones that count.

193 people injured...that's 193 too many.
7 deaths.......that's 7 too many.

You look at this as to how many people "get away with it"....most concerned people look at the results of those that DON'T "get away with it" and cause or get injured or killed.

The key here is that the vast majority of speeders aren't crashing their cars on the Malahat.

[gars]

Originally Posted by sebberry

The key here is that the vast majority of speeders aren't crashing their cars on the Malahat.

IF the vast majority of speeders end up crashing their cars - we'd have a very, VERY serious problem. Just like how the vast majority of drunk drivers don't crash their cars either.

That said, your math/logic is definitely flawed.

[Spidey]

So because not all drunk drivers crash their cars, we should up the blood alcohol limit right? FFS people

[rriggi]

http://blog.leatherup.com/wp-content...-Autobahn5.jpg

Just cover speed limit signs with these

[Riddle]

Actually this is quite an interesting stretch of road because most of the reasons for the accidents have been due to the inattentiveness of the driver. Majority of the accidents and fatality have been head on collisions and going off-road. And this is mostly during daytime too...
They have increased the amount of concrete median barriers to avoid head-on-collisions but still haven't been able to solve the problem completely.
Speed surveys have been done pretty much every summer at this location and I believe the average speed is 100 km/hr (20 above the maximum). Also, wild animals also seem to be the cause of accidents yet there is only one sign throughout the 21 km.

Here's an old study: Malahat Corridor Study Final Report

[Simnut]

Originally Posted by sebberry

The key here is that the vast majority of speeders aren't crashing their cars on the Malahat.

No, but the second leading causes of the accidents on the Malahat are caused by speeders! Kind of negates what you just said doesn't it?

Here's a link you should read:
http://www.google.ca/url?sa=t&source...THBNCA&cad=rja

Here's another link:
What Causes Car Accidents?

Pay careful attention to the example:
"Consider this example: a pedestrian walks out in front of a car. If the car is traveling at just 30 mph, and the driver brakes when the pedestrian is 45 feet away, there will be enough space in which to stop without hitting the pedestrian. Increase the vehicle speed by just 5 mph and the situation changes dramatically. At 35 mph, with the pedestrian 45 feet away and the driver braking at the same point, the car will be traveling at 18 mph when it hits the pedestrian. An impact at 18 mph can seriously injure or even kill the pedestrian."

That is why speed limits are what they are............

[jlenko]

Originally Posted by Simnut

a pedestrian walks out in front of a car. If the car is traveling at just 30 mph, and the driver brakes when the pedestrian is 45 feet away, there will be enough space in which to stop without hitting the pedestrian. Increase the vehicle speed by just 5 mph and the situation changes dramatically. At 35 mph, with the pedestrian 45 feet away and the driver braking at the same point, the car will be traveling at 18 mph when it hits the pedestrian. An impact at 18 mph can seriously injure or even kill the pedestrian.

Nothing stops the darwin award candidate pedestrian from jumping out in front of the car with only 20 feet... doesn't matter if you're doing 30 mph or 100 mph at that point... they're done.

You can't protect stupid people from themselves with laws.

[Simnut]

Originally Posted by jlenko

Nothing stops the darwin award candidate pedestrian from jumping out in front of the car with only 20 feet... doesn't matter if you're doing 30 mph or 100 mph at that point... they're done.

You can't protect stupid people from themselves with laws.

Forget the fact that the Darwinian Pedestrian stepped in front of the car. That is not the point of the "story". The "moral" of the story is adding speed adds stopping distance....exponentially. So, perhaps slowing down may save lives???? Again...you missed it by "thaaaaat" much!