'Hypocrisy' of speeding middle-class motorists

[Xt500]

May I suggest you read the thread please?

 

People who speed in their cars cause more deaths than paedophiles do, you may not like this fact because it shows the true impact of the behaviour you defend but it's undeniably true.

 

Your claim about the proportion of accidents in which speed is a factor is lifted from TRL 323.

 

The Slower Speeds Initiative wrote to the Transport Research Laboratory concerning the speedophile's use of the study. The TRL referred us to reports on speed. This is because the TRL study cited by thespeedophiles, TRL Report 323, concerns

 

‘A new system for recording contributory factors in road accidents’.

 

TRL 323 is not a study of crash causation.

 

It is a study of how to collect data.

 

It was not designed to draw statistically reliable conclusions about the causes of road crashes.

 

The accidents included in the three month study were not a statistically representative sample of all accidents. There is no basis for using the study to generalise about the speed-crash relationship.

 

The very low figure quoted by thespeedophiles comes from a table which showed pairings of factors: In 4.04% of crashes recorded in the study, the person filling in the form paired 'excessive speed' (nowhere defined) with 'loss of control of vehicle'.

 

4.04% is only a subset of all speed related crashes recorded in the study.

 

This use of statistics has been described by a professional statistician as ‘extremely naughty’ and by the Department of the Environment, Transport and the Regions as ‘mischievous’.

 

DETR go on to say

‘it is interesting that none of the many other TRL reports on speed and accident risk have been mentioned by those using this report as the basis for their argument.’

 

The TRL 323 methodology for recording contributory factors simply does not ask the questions which would reveal the inherent dangers of speed:

 

Would the factor still have been present if the driver, and/or all the other drivers involved, had been driving more slowly?

 

IF YES, Would the factor still have resulted in a crash?

IF YES, Would the crash still have been so severe?

 

 

Your insistence that children should not be allowed to use the roads is indicative of a bullying, selfish mindset.

 

Children have the right to cross roads, cycle on roads and walk along pavements without selfish, reckless speeding drivers threatening, injuring and killing them. I'm sorry you disagree with this and if you had bothered to read the thread before commenting you would have seen that this is victim-blaming of the worst kind.

 

.

 

Let me tell you something! My kids have never been hit by a vehicle at any SPEED!

That isnt down to obediant car drivers or lack of speeders or any other driver facts,its pure and simple,as a parent it is my responsibility to make sure i take steps to prevent it happening.When i walk with them they are close by and on my left.The only time they would be near a road is with someone with the same mindset,or they are capable of crossing a road safely on their own,for you thicko's that is PREVENTION!

Why is it some of you take no responsibility for your OWN actions and always look for someone else to blame for your failings?

I bet in 80-90% of pedestrian accidents,the pedestrian was at fault,because half the time they cant even be bothered to look,yet people like you would have us believe somehow a vehicles speedo needle being a few millimeters would somehow stop this? Thats rubbish and you know it!

[Mercenary]

Let me tell you something! My kids have never been hit by a vehicle at any SPEED!

That isnt down to obediant car drivers or lack of speeders or any other driver facts,its pure and simple,as a parent it is my responsibility to make sure i take steps to prevent it happening.When i walk with them they are close by and on my left.The only time they would be near a road is with someone with the same mindset,or they are capable of crossing a road safely on their own,for you thicko's that is PREVENTION!

Why is it some of you take no responsibility for your OWN actions and always look for someone else to blame for your failings?

I bet in 80-90% of pedestrian accidents,the pedestrian was at fault,because half the time they cant even be bothered to look,yet people like you would have us believe somehow a vehicles speedo needle being a few millimeters would somehow stop this? Thats rubbish and you know it!

 

That is quite a one sided view. There is no chance that 100% of children will follow what their parents teach them about prevention. It is the responsibilty of both drivers to drive at safe speeds and pedestrians being responsible.

[spindrift]

I bet in 80-90% of pedestrian accidents,the pedestrian was at fault

 

I accept that bet, but before you search for and fail to find the evidence to back up your bet, may I point out you that you are a dangerous, reckless sociopath with a disturbing contempt for people not afforded the luxury of a ton of steel cage.

 

In Britain on average there are 40 pedestrians killed on pavements or verges by motor vehicles every year. Usually, because the driver is speeding, and in most of the other vulnerable road user/vehicle RTA it is the driver of the vehicle who is at fault:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

 

In your fevered, self-righteous imagination it was the pedestrians' fault for daring to walk on the pavement, yes?

 

 

People like you annoy me more than people who urinate in the street or spray graffiti. People like you wreck lives and terrify anyone else sharing the road with you.

 

Have a word mate, you're a danger to yourself, but more importantly, to other people without the protection of a car.

[Cyclone]

A common factor. There's little merit in defending speeding since it is illegal.

50 years ago being gay was illegal, clearly being illegal does not make something not worth defending.

However as the OP indicates pretty much all motorists are hypocritical on the subject - me included. Like most folk I make a judgement but that isn't a defence.

I don't agree with this, unless you condemn people in circumstances where you yourself would speed then there is no hypocrisy.

 

 

 

As a related aside, while on the pushbike a car passing 12" from my elbow at 30mph is plenty uncomfortable for me as a rufty tufty biker who's not scared by traffic. At 40mph it's double trouble. But, at 20mph it's just a bit annoying.

Ermm, yes. I'm not sure of your point though. The speed you pass a bike is about the appropriate speed, not about the speed limit. Does it make a difference if it's 40 mph in a 40 zone, does that somehow make you safer because they aren't braking the law?

 

That pretty much sums up spindrifts' point (I think ). Yea he's a bit militant in how he makes it but his point is very valid. Appropriate speed is the road safety issue but it's clear to me that 50% of drivers are not capable of making that decision and the other 50% can not be trusted to make that decision. You and I are in the remaining 10% of superb drivers but luckily there isn't a remaining 10%.

 

I honestly can't see any validation for a motorist driving around town faster than 30mph at any time of day

Likewise.

, night or condition and I'd happily see a general 25mph urban limit that reduces further to 20mph in residential estate areas. As the sensible folk we know that it would result in no discernible additional journey time. But the 100% mentioned earlier would have none of it since they all have digital wrist watches with 1/100th second split timing and a Victoria sponge burning in the oven.

 

On the other hand I'd happily make the outside lane of the motorways a 70mph - 120mph zone usable only by cars and drivers certified to enter it. Me and mine would be fine.

Also agreed. I'd also make it permanently variable ala the M25, with the limit varying depending on traffic and weather.

[Cyclone]

Maybe because you're doing the 'affecting'?

 

No, more likely because you any driver will be affected by poor lane discipline, inappropriate braking gap, lack of attention, failure to give way, etc... In a negative way than they will be affected by someone driving too fast.

 

You can probably count the times on one hand when someone elses speed has actually caused you a problem somehow. You probably need an abacus to count the number of times someone cut you up, failed to stop, stopped for no reason, didn't see you, pulled out on you or changed lane when you were already using that space, though.

[Cyclone]

There are lots of causes of accidents. Improvements in driver behaviour are necessary. When we achieve zero accidents, then it will not matter what speed people travel at. But until we do, then speed does matter as it affects the severity of any accident. You either cannot understand that, or you choose not to.

 

 

So we should all travel at walking speed with a man with a red flag in front of the car?

[Bulgarian]

50 years ago being gay was illegal, clearly being illegal does not make something not worth defending.

 

Being gay doesn't put peoples lives at risk though does it, I think that might be the difference.

[Cyclone]

I accept that bet, but before you search for and fail to find the evidence to back up your bet, may I point out you that you are a dangerous, reckless sociopath with a disturbing contempt for people not afforded the luxury of a ton of steel cage.

 

In Britain on average there are 40 pedestrians killed on pavements or verges by motor vehicles every year. Usually, because the driver is speeding, and in most of the other vulnerable road user/vehicle RTA it is the driver of the vehicle who is at fault:

 

http://www.guardian.co.uk/lifeandstyle/2009/dec/15/cycling-bike-accidents-study

 

In your fevered, self-righteous imagination it was the pedestrians' fault for daring to walk on the pavement, yes?

 

 

People like you annoy me more than people who urinate in the street or spray graffiti. People like you wreck lives and terrify anyone else sharing the road with you.

 

Have a word mate, you're a danger to yourself, but more importantly, to other people without the protection of a car.

 

Yep, it's actually 60% isn't it. We did this before.

Still I bet you weren't going to volunteer the fact that more pedestrians deaths are the pedestrians fault than the drivers were you.

[Tony]

Instead of quoting nonsence meaningless per cent crap why dont you give us the situations speed was responsible.

You seem to have a bit of a problem with understanding cause and effect.

 

I fear that if I smashed your head in with a hammer you would blame Spear and Jackson.

 

 

 

If speed is killing kids then would it not be wiser to look at keeping kids OFF the roads then speed wouldnt be a factor at all would it.

Ah, now it's clear. The penny has dropped.

 

They are your roads.

[SnailyBoy]

No, more likely because you any driver will be affected by poor lane discipline, inappropriate braking gap, lack of attention, failure to give way, etc... In a negative way than they will be affected by someone driving too fast.

 

You can probably count the times on one hand when someone elses speed has actually caused you a problem somehow. You probably need an abacus to count the number of times someone cut you up, failed to stop, stopped for no reason, didn't see you, pulled out on you or changed lane when you were already using that space, though.

 

Strange, you didn't add tailgating.