Why is speeding socially acceptable?

EssexExile

If we are going to let motorists decide how fast is appropriate then the driving test is going to have to be a lot harder.

Nobbie1967

charlotte1994 wrote: »

I think the only time it is ok to speed is when there is an absolute emergency, the person in your car is dying and you're on the way to the hospital, it's quicker than waiting for an ambulance.

This is actually the most dangerous time to speed as your judgement will be impaired by you determination to get to the hospital fast and you'll distracted by the dying person. Better to call 999 and let a paramedic attend and start treatment who can probably get to you before you could get to the hospital.

jimbo6977

Because arbitrary limits are not subject to a reasonableness test.

NBLondon

I'm in the camp that says it's not speed per se but inappropriate speed that can cause accidents or make the impact much higher. And that inappropriately low limits can cause frustration and as a knock-on effect make some drivers assume that all limits are lower than they need to be.

But pragmatically - no matter how many of us here make the argument that we might break the limit only in good conditions with minimal increased risk; there are plenty who work on the principle of "what can I get away with" so the rules are set at the lowest common denominator - and that's pretty low in most cases.

MEM62

The problem, in my opinion, stems from the fact that the focus in respect of road safety is wrong. This, along with poorly thought out policies in respect of road safety encourage the public to be both blas! and cynical on the topic. After all, if the Government is not taking it seriously, why would anyone else?

To make the statement that speed causes accidents is fundamentally wrong. It is bad driving that causes accidents. Agreed inappropriate speed for the road and conditions falls under the umbrella of bad driving but only in a very few cases would speed alone be the cause of an accident. Therefore, the focus should be on poor or bad driving - which covers a much wider array of potential causes of accidents and which would be much more effective in reducing road KSI figures.

Of course, the problem with enforcing better driving standards is that is requires roads policing units out there doing the job and these resources have been reduced to the point where they are struggling to do the job effectively. Speeding however, can be policed with cameras and therefore is a much easier target. This, along with the fact that there is also a tendency in some cases to use cameras a revenue-generating devices rather than a road safety tool encourages a cynical response from the public.

Sadly, much of this is about money. If our Government were truly serious about improving road safety the would make the necessary investments that this requires. More traffic officers would help but this is not the only area where money needs to be spent. Investment in infrastructure is also needed. The quality of our roads is shocking and the problems range from poorly designed junctions that need updating to cope with modern traffic levels to the state of the road surface itself. Any of us that ride a motorcycle can tell you just how hazardous the lack of maintenance to the road surface can be. Lethal!

Better thought out policies and a focus on bad driving rather than a blinkered focus on speeding would do much more to improve safety on our roads.

Retrogamer

It always amazes me how many drivers will complain about cyclists going through red lights with quotes like "cyclists should obey the law" whilst simultaneously complaining about speed cameras and ignoring the fact that most motorists break the speed limit.

EssexExile

MEM62 wrote: »

Better thought out policies and a focus on bad driving rather than a blinkered focus on speeding would do much more to improve safety on our roads.

It's easier, and probably more effective, to put up a big red circle with a number in it than sign telling drivers to drive better.

agrinnall

John_G_Jones wrote: »

It is not obvious at all, but I suppose if you want to debate on facts you just made up then there’s little point continuing.

There are so many other factors involved that making a blanket assertion like yours is just pointless. I am safer doing 198mph (my car’s listed top speed) on that section of M11 that I mentioned above, on that hypothetical clear, bright summer evening than I would be doing 40mph on the way out of my street on a recent icy morning.

But that isn't the point that was being made in the post that you quoted, you are confusing two different things. Yes, you may be safer in the former situation than in the latter, but if you do crash in both scenarios then the outcome will be exponentially worse at 198mph than at 40mph, a simple calculation of kinetic energy tells you that.

motorguy

Aylesbury_Duck wrote: »

Flipping the question on its head, why is it that sticking to the stated limit is so obviously unacceptable to many drivers? Drive at bang on 30mph (satnav speed) on a road with that limit and more often than not I end up with an obviously impatient driver weaving about behind and looking to overtake. There's a temporary 30mph stretch for a mile along an otherwise 50mph road near me whilst they repair some serious junction damage. I'm regularly overtaken through there, almost daily, because I drive at 30mph as the signs dictate.

And most often by people who dont consider themselves "speeders"

motorguy

John_G_Jones wrote: »

There is nothing inherently wrong about high speed if the conditions allow it. Doing 150mph on an empty, straight piece of motorway on a clear, well lit summer evening in a well maintained modern car is no more dangerous than doing the same on a stretch of derestricted autobahn where it would rightly be viewed as appropriate.

Inappropriate speed is a different issue, and the two should not be conflated. 60 in dense fog is too fast on pretty much any road, as is the same speed in very heavy rain.

I wanted to see if the limiter on my last car was as lax as rumour suggested so ran it up and down to it over about a mile on a stretch of the M11a couple of years back. No danger to anyone as I could see that there wa no-one else for over a mile ahead when I did it.

When I was younger and commuted upmand down that road on a fast motorbike I’d do similar if it was properly empty. Illegal, yes, but neither dangerous nor stupid.

Exactly. Speed isnt the issue - inappropriate speed is.