hedgehog

The DfT have spent the last 24 hours pumping out press releases (including one saying that we have the best road works in Europe! Yeah, right tourists will be flocking to see them) and trying to cover up the fact that today they release their stats, for the first time since 1959, showing what actually causes accidents. The stats show that in 2005 (the year they are dealing with) only 4% of vehicles involved in injury crashes were exceeding the speed limit.

When you consider that everyone exceeds the speed limit at some point on most days it may actually be safer to travel in excess of the speed limit.

So, where does this leave the "one third of all accidents caused by exceeding the speed limit" lie which has been used by the administration to justify automatic policing and speed enforcement systems which criminalized 2 million motorists last year?

PeteBrant

It's 15% isn't it?

I have no argument at all with the 30mph limit through built up areas, I don't think you can justify bombing down urban areas at great speed. However, the motor way speed limit is ridiculous. It was bought in to limit petrol use during the Suez crisis and had nothign to do with safety - And even if it did, the vehicle of 40 years ago was very different to today. The braking distance sin the highway code are utter gash. Keep the 30/40/50/60 limits - get rid of the 70.

hedgehog

It is 15% for too fast for conditions and in excess of speed limit combined. The automated policing systems can only address the excess of speed limit problem and that accounts for 4% of injury accidents, as many police forces have said for many years.

So the lie that speeding causes a third of accidents has been thrown into sharp highlight by this and as it was the main factor supporting the large scale deployment of automated policing systems it would seem that there is now no basis for the retention of such systems.

In turn as 96% of accidents occur at less than the posted limit the only way to address these and deal with them is to have properly trained traffic police (and not the current crop who have barely any more training than the average motorist) out on the roads offering advice, subtle training and management of the skills of motorists and setting an example.

Abdabz

Speed limits should not be increased even on motorways IMO.

Apart from all of us on Scoobynet who are excellent and capable drivers at any speed in any condition , the standards of driving seen on todays motorways is appalling... I for one would prefer for the Dave the Rep or Granny Gertrude to drive into me when I am doing 65 rather than 85

Folk cant just relate to their own percived abilities when talking about something this important. Driving standards are generally crap and if you crash at high speed you are more likely to die than at low, so despite of some prpoganda stats and appeals by those unable to drive within the law who have been caught and are now on a crusade, common sense says dont change anything. In fact in Urban areas, continue to roll out more 20zones.

druddle

I am all for urban areas having 20 speed limits and speed cameras outside every school in the country, but am sick of the inconsistencies in the system, lies and fud the govt continue to spread.

Dave

stilover

Speed isn't the cause of accidents. Bad driving is.

Speed is a part of every single crash. cars move at speed whether this is at 5mph or 150mph.

Paul3446

Quote:
The stats show that in 2005 (the year they are dealing with) only 4% of vehicles involved in injury crashes were exceeding the speed limit.


Could you supply a link to this stat please?

Elmer Fudpucker

I like to know what %age of accidents are caused by articulated lorries,a damn sight more than any attributed to excess speed in cars I would imagine?

r32

The case against having to admit guilt was due to come up in the European court of rights yesterday, is there any news?

OllyK

I suspect if you looked at accidents per mile driven, HGV drivers would come out rather better than car drivers.

Norman D. Landing

Tell that to Richard Hammond !

Wonder what the braking distance at 290mph is ?

SJ_Skyline

It has changed, before it was inappropriate speed and has changed to excessive speed. These are completely different things.

hedgehog

That I am aware of the raw stats are not available online, only in the report which I believe costs about £28. Should you have the report then the figures you are looking for are in Table 6 in the final column.

All the DfT material has been very focused on other elements of the report and has caused much confusion by the use of the 15% figure to try and give the impression that this figure relates to accidents caused by those who might be detected by speed cameras. Even the 15% figure is a long way off the "one third" lie that has been used to justify automated policing devices and it is also a long way off the percentage of accidents which occur above the posted limit.

Those who support the widespread use of speed cameras need to take a long hard look at their position. The introduction of these cameras was used as an excuse to cut traffic police in almost every county in the UK leaving the vast majority of actions likely to cause an accident totally unpoliced. The cameras are a distraction both politically and also to the driver and it is their application as a political distraction and money making device which has ensured their position at the side of our roads while the policies they spawn result in the deaths of motorists whose lives would otherwise be saved by a road safety policy based upon the facts and the actual causes of accidents.

B9GLY

I dont think there should be a limit on the motorways, simply because whateva it is most will go 15-20mph faster anyway, its human nature!

Leslie

I agree with the inconsistency of many speed limits and I do think the motorway limit should be raised to 85 mph which is a good average cruising speed for most people.

Some of the 20 mph limits around here are silly and encourage people to break the law. They have been created by PC Plonkers just for the sake of it and who don't understand about sensible driving.

One thing I will say however is that there is no place for three figure speeds on public roads. They are too crowded by far and whatever you say about speed not killing, you cannot deny that very high speeds reduce safety margins significantly and should a problem arise, you are less likely to be able to save the situation. That is grossly unfair on the other road users who may be involved in your accident.

Les

DCI Gene Hunt

Motorway 100
Everywhere else 75
Villages 35
Estates 20
Chav estates 50

And ban all old ***** on Sundays as they drive too feckin slow ........

SJ_Skyline

OllyK

There are times when you can do 3 figure speeds safely. I'd like to the effort that's going in to ISA and trying to slow the world down, go in to intelligent siging that takes account of the weather and traffic conditions and posts a more realistic speed limit accordingly. Dry night on an empty motorway - unlimited, wet day at 3.30 outside a school 15mph, otherwise 20 and then 30-40 if dry and outside school hours. However, if you trained people properly in the first place then people would be adjusting their speed naturally in this manner anyway.

hedgehog

The case was heard yesterday but it could be months before we have a result. Idris said that his case was well presented and appeared much more solid than the government case but the government are now behaving as if they are confident of a win. I suppose what that says is that it is impossible to guess what the outcome might be.

I did post on the subject a few days back along with some background from the Observer if you want to hunt it down.

Leslie

Trouble is Olly, just like posted limits on those motorway signs. no one wold take any notice. We need a proper force of traffic police, real ones I mean who would control the behaviour of motorists in a sensible manner-no jobsworths, and who would be able to weed out the dangerous unlicensed and uninsured or non MOT drivers.

I hope they succeed in the case in the Eu court especially since I believe that speed cameras are not reliable enough to convict a motorist fairly.

Les

OllyK

I agree in part, but at the moment we have fixed limits being re-set at even lower levels and that's why they get ignored. If they were changing to suit the conditions people would learn to use them as an effective aid and would be more likely to stick to them.

Think about the motorways now, the sign pops up saying "Slow, Accident ahead". People slow down for a mile or so, however after 5 miles of the signs flashing and no sign of an accident, people speed up again, probably straight in to the accident. Prior warning is good, but if it comes too early or doesn't give enough information it gets ignored.

I don't disagree with this, I just think it's a part of the solution not the whole solution.

Tidgy

not quite true, the first motorway was imposed whena AC cobra was reported doing 180mph on the m1 by a journalist.

or at least thats what the news said tother week when they did a whole bunch of progs on the m1 lol

GC8

There are endless 'reasons' and myths about how the temporary restriction came about... In reality Jaguar used the M1 as a proving track which didnt go down well. O top of that there were a number of high-profile high speed runs which made the limit easier to bring into being. One of these involved Innes Ireland driving at GT40 at nearly three times the current limit (in a car which my father nearly bought, think what a genuine Gulf GT40 would be worth now ffs!).

Simon

Leslie

Olly.

I do agree with the problem with the motorway signs warning of an accident etc. only to find it has all been cleared away. It is no wonder that people ignore them nost of the time. That is down to the authorities needing to be a good deal sharper at cancelling them when the danger has disappeared.

I also agree with the stupidity being shown with present changing of speed limits and restricting the traffic unnecessarily. It does encourage people to break the law as well.

Well the traffic police would go a long way to improving matters I think, an awful lot is down to drivers acting in a responsible way as well. It is well beyond time that a decent road system was built in this country, God knows we have paid well over the odds for road fund tax, petrol duty, insurance duty etc for long enough. Get rid of the green pc plonkers who cannot see that we desperately need that and also it would go a long way to reduce pollution on the roads.

Les

hedgehog

I think this is the key to the whole road safety thing Les, at the minute people devolve responsibility to little signs with numbers on them whereas there should be effective policing aimed not at getting as many people into court as possible but aimed at making people aware of their errors and making them take full responsibility for their actions on the roads.

The only catch is that police driver training is a mere shadow of its former self with even the "best" police drivers having little more instruction and possibly a lot less experience than many "normal" drivers. The old 12 week course with 95% fail rate needs to come back to Hendon for police drivers and it needs to be impressed upon them that they should be proud of their skills and should pass them on to other motorists when the opportunity presents itself. Where motorist make genuine mistakes then police drivers should be encouraged to educate them rather than to book the driver for something he may not even have realized was wrong, such action breeds resentment rather than respect. However, where the motorist clearly acted in full knowledge of the risks of what he was doing wrong then the officer can resort to the law. As a motorist I am sure that during your daily driving you spot incidents that fall into both groups and so understand what I am saying.

Once we have effective policing then we can also have respect for the law and respect for our own driving skills and the lives and skills of others and that will result in significant improvements in road safety. There are few motorists who have any respect for the roadside cameras or for the speed limits and policing tactics they represent and this can only make our roads a more dangerous place.

mart360

want to bet teflon trades some veto or longstanding right we had to "cough" see justice upheld

Mart

Leslie

Thats the way the world goes round these days! We used to have a democratic country too.

Les