Forum menu
I'm in agreement with Northernstar; its inappropriate speed that kills, not speed per se. If you're doing 100mph on a motorway and get it wrong, you'll generally bounce along down the road until you either slow down and stop or go off the road and hit something solid. Statistically motorways are the safest roads to drive upon, and they're also the fastest. Based on the propaganda that justifies revenue raising cameras, this seems counterintuitive. This is because speed in this context is not inappropriate, whereas Johnny Boy Racer down the local trading estate/mcdonald's/Kentucky fried chicken on a Sunday night having a drag race with his sad vector buddies is.
All these schemes to put [i]further[/i] legislation in place are pointless when there us nobody out there to enforce them; we already have a ridiculous amount if traffic legislation, we just dont enforce it robustly enough.
bad driving - what's the answer ?
line them up and shoot the lot of them ?
Kev
Not really. I could easily pass a test then go out for a skinful and drive home whilst texting and changing the CD, could I not?
Yes but regular re-testing does help to maintain standards because they just become habit. Drink driving is slowly becoming less and less acceptable - it used to be quite normal largely due to attitudes about drinking, how it wasn't cool to be seen with a Coke or alcohol free beer.
Problem is that the "right" to drive is so entrenched. It's been so good for so long. I remember 20 years ago my Grandparents "going out for a drive" just because they could. But when that perceived right is taken away, all hell breaks loose. We've become so dependant on it, the motoring/oil lobbies are so powerful and it brings in such massive amounts of tax revenue that it's political suicide to try and meddle with it.
Doesn't help that even the courts are part of the problem. Mowed down a bunch of cyclists in Rhyl? "No problem sir, that's £180 for having some bald tyres, off you go now"
Killed a cyclist at a junction? Yes, the A-pillar of my hired Landy didn't allow me to see him but I need the car for my job. OK, 3 points and a fine, be careful now.
I think the major thing that would help is a change in the law to the "presumption of liability" that they have in some American States and various European countries. The fault in any collision lies with the bigger vehicle until proven otherwise. That would make a massive difference.
Oh and pay-per mile roads too. Do away with "Road Tax", cut fuel duty, introduce pay-as-you-drive.
It's bad driving that kills, end of. A bad driver can be unsafe at any speed whether that's 20mph, or 100mph.
Agreed, but if you're a "good driver" doing 100mph and a "bad driver" pulls out on you doing 20mph then you'll be right but just as dead.
No matter what any Clarkson-wannabees say, speed definitely does kill.
Nick, you are wrong I'm afraid. Speeding is a primary contributing factor in only a surprisingly small percentage of accidents. Googling this seems to give results of between 30% and 2% depending on whose statistics you believe. For arguments sake lets just take the middle ground and say 16%.
The danger of focusing so much of our attention on speeding is that it's such a convenient mask for the real problems out there.
The real danger is that drivers are getting more and more brainwashed into driving by their speedometers and not by assessing the road conditions, hazard perception etc. People are starting to think - well so long as I don't speed then I must be a safe driver. This is clearly absolute rubbish.
To prove a point, a work colleague was injured a while back in an accident (not seriously though thank goodness). A van came round a sharp bend at 50mph (60mph limit road) and ploughed right into the back of her stationary car stuck in traffic. Conditions at the time were wet, greasy and slightly misty.
Do you know what the first thing he said to the Police when they arrived? I was only doing 50 sir - I wasn't speeding!
Technically no he wasn't speeding. Yet he was driving at 50mph in conditions where the safe speed would have been somewhere around 30mph. But in his eyes, the fact that he wasn't speeding made everything okay?
Crazy.
Speeding is a primary contributing factor in only a surprisingly small percentage of accidents.
Ahem:
At least one [contributing factor] of "exceeding the speed limit" and "travelling too fast for the conditions" was reported in 13 per cent of all accidents and [b]these accidents accounted for 27 per cent of all fatalities[/b].-- [url= http://www.dft.gov.uk/pgr/statistics/datatablespublications/accidents/casualtiesgbar/rrcgb2009 ]Reported Road Casualties Great Britain 2009: Annual Report (ONS/DfT)[/url]
If 27% of fatal accidents involve someone going to fast then I think it is fair to say that speed kills.
Part of the answer certainly and should be brought in immediately for the over 65's, who should have to prove their fitness (eyesight in particular) to drive every 5 years after that.The answer - tougher enforcement and mandatory retesting periodically
I would also like to see a retest within the first year of passing the basic test as a 'double check', as it is obvious that some new drivers are totally incompetent but somehow managed to scrape through. How many 'friends' have sat tests on others behalf, I wonder?
My particular hates at the moment is the drivers who maintain a steady 45mph regardless of the road conditions/speed limit and others who apparently [b]never[/b] check their mirrors. I counted 6 drivers in 4 miles yesterday, who pulled out to overtake the cars which had moved over to the left to let me pass as I was on 'blues and twos'. Evidently the new sequence is manoeuvre-signal-mirror followed sharply by the panicked jerk left on the steering wheel and washing of underwear (hopefully).
People are starting to think - well so long as I don't speed then I must be a safe driver. This is clearly absolute rubbish.
This bit I agree with though.
I think that as demonstrated on here most people know that you can be not speeding but driving badly.
The 'I was only doing 50' thing is a defensive reaction. It's not that they genuinely believe that it's ok do whatever the speed limit is - it's that people know they've done wrong they get on the defensive and try and focus on anything that might have a positive attribute, no matter how ridiculous.
Agreed, but if you're a "good driver" doing 100mph and a "bad driver" pulls out on you doing 20mph then you'll be right but just as dead.
To be honest GrahamS, a good driver should not put him or herself into a position where 'unexpected things happen'. Good driving is about forward perception of the actions of others, assessing the road ahead and behind for hazards and driving at a speed appropriate for the conditions.
I'm not saying that random things never happen, that would be silly, but the vast majority of accidents on UK roads would be avoided by drivers just 'thinking ahead' and planning accordingly.
100mph should be perfectly safe on a quiet motorway in dry conditions. Similarly 25mph down a busy high street may be far to fast when there's likely to be children around. Safe driving is more about driving to suit the conditions rather that whether you're breaking the speed limit or not.
There is no answer if it involves money and somebody having to do something
To be honest GrahamS, a good driver should not put him or herself into a position where 'unexpected things happen'.
That's not entirely possible all the time as you accept, so it's a bit of an empty comment.
Safe driving is more about driving to suit the conditions rather that whether you're breaking the speed limit or not
Yes of course but many people do not have the required level of judgement. And speed is one of the only things we can measure and legislate easily on. Hence speed limits.
GrahamS, I'm not saying that there are no accidents where speed is a contributary factor. All I am saying is that the current focus of SPEED KILL is masking the real issues regarding SAFE DRIVING.
If the media and pressure groups was as keen to focus on say 'tailgating' or 'middle lane hogging' or 'drug driving' or 'texting whilst driving' then that would make me a lot happier. It's far too easy for them just to rely on the shock tactics of the SPEED KILLS thing without them having to get off their a*ses and address the real issues behind bad driving.
I completely agree with you NorthernStar - I only disagree on the point that speeding isn't a problem.
Yes, speeding on a dry quiet motorway is obviously a less risky than speeding on lesser roads in worse conditions.
Unfortunately I'd say the vast majority of drivers I see on my daily commute are speeding on NSL, dual, 50's and even 30's. If you try to drive at or below the limit you'll quickly get someone tailgating and flashing their lights.
So their "need to speed" is actually causing more bad driving
There was a big campaign about mobile driving, wasn't there?
And in any case, it is true that if everyone kept on doing the exact same bad driving as they do now, but slowed down a bit, there'd be fewer fatalities.
Whatever accident you have, caused by whatever act, the consequences will be less severe if lower speeds are involved.
Yes of course but many people do not have the required level of judgement. And speed is one of the only things we can measure and legislate easily on. Hence speed limits.
Yes and should those without the 'required level of judgement' really still be on the roads?
This is where a compulsorary retest every ten years would help keep people's skills current. Much the same as an airline pilot spends hours every year re-training and in simulators.
Whatever accident you have, caused by whatever act, the consequences will be less severe if lower speeds are involved.
What's the solution then, limit all cars to 20mph?
stick everyone on a 50cc scooter for a year before they can go for a car licence
if you accrue points
back to the scooter you go ....
Umm.. not that draconian. How about.. 30mph in towns, 60mph on the open road and 70mph on motorways? Of course that doesn't reflect the exact driving conditions, but it's the only legislative option we have at the moment.
Yes and should those without the 'required level of judgement' really still be on the roads?
No, definitely not. But how do we weed them out?
stick everyone on a 50cc scooter for a year before they can go for a car licence
I like this 🙂 Improves awareness of bikes and other road users and gives a suitably low speed intro to the roads.
The only problem is you end up with novice drivers in the most vulnerable vehicles and people learning to drive a car then spending a year on a scooter and forgetting it all. Apart from that it's a great idea 🙂
20 mph urban limits with the "empty roads" unsigned / unmarked roads of the Netherlands would go a long way
the "empty roads" unsigned / unmarked roads of the Netherlands
Can you rephrase that please? 🙂
Regular retests.
Just wondering do HGV, bus and coach drivers need to retest? What about other potentially dangerous machinery operators? Forklifts, crane, etc.Much the same as an airline pilot spends hours every year re-training and in simulators.
More traffic police would be nice, better prosecution and punishment of bad drivers. Some woeful failings from the courts in the last few years.
Speed causes crashes and is a determining factor in the damage caused by a crash so I'm happy with an emphasis on keeping speed in check. Only an idiot thinks they can drive however they like as long as they are under the limit.
More ad campaigns other than speed/phones/drink, not sure I've ever seen a "middle lane hogging" ad or a "watch out for cyclists" (motorcyclists yes)
Re-education of drivers is important and somehow getting rid of the cyclist hate plenty of drivers seem to have, no idea how you do that tho.
forklifts every 4or 5 years innit - although mines an american ticket ... digger tickets expire also
"people learning to drive a car then spending a year on a scooter and forgetting it all."
ifyou had the threat of ending up back at scooterville im sure youd soon remember how to drive sensibly;)
overtaking also causes alot of incidents
when i drive in i use the stonehaven netherley road which is a B road - its also a National cycle network road.
yet we have artic lorrys driving it at rushhour doing 20mph up the hills because they cant go any faster- you then get johnny late for work in his powerful audi overtaking on a corner/blindhill - ive come round corners and had to emergency stop due to stupid overtaking (and i wasnt speeding i was driving a 1980 landy ... i challenge anyone to speed in it)
similar on the a9 on sunday - chap overtaking and ended up with a car coming towards an no room to move in - forced him self inbetween 2 cars that were not a car apart !
Scooters of course being a great place for young people to learn responsible road craft, as anyone who's been to say Paris or Rome will testify 🙂
weeds out the stupid by way of natural selection .....
no protective box. drive safe or die - i could be in parliment with a catch phrase like that 😉
A turbo charged hot hatches with no seatbelts and rubbish brakes for all drivers under 30, the natural selection works.
No seatbelts or airbags. Big spike in the centre of the steering wheel.
Car drivers feel too safe in modern cars. Make 'em feel vulnerable
Somebody up there mentioned the perceived "right to drive", and I think this contributes.
My dad always taught me that driving is a privilege, not a right, and I hold that dear, to this day.
Addressing this concept, and having people appreciate that they're in charge of a potentially lethal weapon when driving, is the key for me. It's not about specifics like speed, phones etc, its all of those things together with the fact that if you get it wrong, you might kill someone...
Move to Murcia, no-one gives a shit how badly you drive and the world is peachy.
Right from the very beginning of learning to drive, get across that the roads are a system for cooperation, not competition.
It is not about your personal "right" to do as you please (speeding included) - it is your responsibility as a road user to do everything you can to make the whole road system flow - Not just you.
In particular, any blatant act which defies the natural flow of the road should be heavily punished. Overtaking by hopping a line of cars (where exactly are you going?), driving closer than two seconds from the car in front (three or four seconds gap is much more comfortable - just get used to it), etc.
similar on the a9 on sunday - chap overtaking and ended up with a car coming towards an no room to move in - forced him self inbetween 2 cars that were not a car apart
How do you know the gap was less than a car length?
More blah blah blah
Overtaking by hopping a line of cars
And if it's done safely, i.e. with good visibility, no oncoming traffic or hazards like side turnings?
Don't see what's wrong with overtaking if it's done properly. Sometimes you have to overtake a train of more than one vehicle these days. You often get a whole train of driving 'zombies' following a lorry moving at low speed - none of who will overtake despite the road ahead being clear.
I got aggresively flashed once for overtaking an old chap who was doing 45mph on a clear straight 60 limit road. What was the reason for that?
While I have no problem with those from the shallow end of the gene pool killing themselves in the name of speed I do hate the fact that quite often they take several other car drivers/passengers, cyclists, pedestrians and various other casualties along with them.A turbo charged hot hatches with no seatbelts and rubbish brakes for all drivers under 30, the natural selection works.
Erm why are they "zombies"?
Northern Star - not what I'm talking about - I mean when you can't see the slow moving front of the line. Just making your way without even knowing where you're going to get back in - feeding on the good drivers who have left a sensible gap - that gap is not for dickheads to muscle in to!
Obviously overtaking is sometimes safe and appropriate - just doesn't happen very often.
How do you know the gap was less than a car length?
the hard braking and caravan wobble that occured from that vehicle just to let the overtaking vehicle narrowly avoid smashing into the oncomming vehicle (which was visible and obviously going to hit before the vehicle had made the overtake it was going for from my POV -
Erm why are they "zombies"?
I don't know? How else would you describe these sort of drivers, lack of confidence perhaps? Daydreamers maybe? loosing the will to live perhaps?
It's the CAPITALISATION for EMPHASIS that's killing me. It's not an ad agency FFS.
Relaxed?How else would you describe these sort of drivers
I got aggresively flashed once for overtaking an old chap who was doing 45mph on a clear straight 60 limit road. What was the reason for that?
Maybe he was congratulating you on a splendid overtaking manoeuvre? 🙂
Or warning you of speed cameras ahead?
Or most likely just being a daft old duffer who thinks the NSL is 40.
I don't know? How else would you describe these sort of drivers, lack of confidence perhaps? Daydreamers maybe? loosing the will to live perhaps?
Or not in a hurry? Allowed enough time for their journey?