Why speed _limits_ suck

[sobrique]

Well, my previous post about speed cameras has also crossed over to a discussion of speed limits.

So -

Why speed limits suck:

* The motorways in the UK are some of the safest roads in the country, indeed even in Europe. The average speed tends towards 80/90 mph, somewhat above the posted speed limit.

* There is no arbitrary transition between safe as opposed to dangerous. At an absolute level, 5mph is safer than 30. However, when you're on a road where traffic is travelling at 60 miles an hour (regardless of posted limit) then being notably slower is _you_ causing a hazard to other drivers.

* The national speed restrictions in this country were introduced due to fuel consumption. Nothing to do with safety. Vehicle and material technology has improved greatly over the last 50 years, such that a new car at 90 is safer than a 50 year old car at 60.

* Safe driving is awareness of hazards, and objects around you. Velocity of vehicle is a primary causitive factor in 6% of accidents, and a 'secondary' factor in 7.3% (DoT report), information found http://www.speed-trap.co.uk/Facts&Figures/Facts&Figures_Home.htm
The greater ones being failure to judge other person's vector, and carelessness/thoughtlessness/recklessness.
One can argue that exceeding a posted limit counts as recklessness, but I remain unconvinced.

So how about we simply remove the national speed limit, and maybe ditch quite a few of the higher speed dual carriageway restrictions, and apply prosecutions under the basis of 'dangerous/careless driving' instead.

Comments

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

I think there should be a Driving safety certificate. You have to take every so many years.. like pilots have and first aiders..

It should be mandatory for insurance.. an MOT for drivers..


Sorry but after nearly being killed by muppet Dominoe's delivery guy on Dysfunction Junction Sunday I'm kinda on edge about stuff like this.

[elrohana.livejournal.com]

I agree, Crashbarrier. It would remove a hell of a lot of muppets from the roads. Sadly a lot would remain - the ones who are already driving with no licence, MOT or insurance, and their numbers are greater than you might think.

There was a case up here some years ago where an entire taxi firm turned out to be driving on colour photocopies of ONE driving licence.

[sobrique.livejournal.com]

Redoing driving tests on a regular basis is a fairly good idea. It'll never happen in this country though, simply because the majority of drivers aren't convinced they'd pass a second time.

When I'm prime minister, I think I shall change all the driving laws such that everyone's license expires after 6 years, with retests set for every 5. (so you've a year to learn how to drive again if you fail).

And all shall hate me as I laugh maniacally at their feeble protests.

[elrohana.livejournal.com]

I'm not convinced I'd pass again either - standards for the test have changed sooooo much since I took mine - no theory test, hell, I think seatbelts were only just law and I don't think rear seatbelt use was! - but I'd submit to the test if it was necessary, and probably suck up the cost of the lessons to get through it again too. But then, I don't claim to be an above average driver, just a careful and thoughtful one.

[the-wood-gnome.livejournal.com]

It would however mean that everyone would _need_ to be up to date with new driving laws, signs and junctions etc.

[crashbarrier.livejournal.com]

Unfortunately there not much you can do about people driving illegally except punish them to the highest degree when they are caught.

[paulw.livejournal.com]

Thats the thing though isn't it. People are not punished to the highest degree. We should chop off the right foot for those induhviduals who are caught 3 times for driving without license/insurance/tax. For each time after that they loose another limb.

Aren't they doing research on cars which have GPS systems and some sort of receiver/database and this limits the car depending on where it is?