The outcome is an increase in more serious injuries.
I don’t have any links to his data, in fact I haven’t seen the figures myself, but I have no reason to question him.
It was of interest to us both as we work (in my case worked) with explosives so have a fair amount of experience in dealing with potentially dangerous circumstances and dealing with the risks involved.
This post is going to be long enough as it is so I will however cut to the chase.
Prevention is better than cure.
By concentrating on mitigating the effects of an outcome, we fail to address and eliminate the root cause of that outcome.
An accident at 40mph is always going to be more favourable than the same accident at 60mph, I’m sure we’re all agreed, but we should be aiming for eliminating the accident entirely, not just mitigating the outcome.
My greatest fear is that we have already gone too far down the road of mitigation (pardon the pun) to be able to address elimination.
The “speed kills” mantra has been so successful in warning people of the dangers of speed that those people now equate driving within the speed limit with safe driving.
I’ve overheard conversations in the pub where someone has been involved in an accident (which was their fault) but they have justified their position by exclaiming that they weren’t speeding, and then gone on to accuse the other party of speeding (well, they must have been to “cause” the accident).
Prevention is always better than cure, and education is the key to prevention.
If someone asks what’s the best way to spend their money to improve their cycling on this forum, the answer won’t be “buy a dropper post” it will be “go and see Jedi”.
There seem to be a lot of people here who are quite vehement about their desire for others to drive more safely, but how many of those have sought additional training once they’ve swapped their pink licence for a green one?
And the floor is yours… 🙂