[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: Speed Kills
-
Subject: Re: Speed Kills
-
From: kevinatk@home.com (Kevin Atkinson)
-
Date: 1 Nov 1995 22:53:16 -0500
-
Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
-
Organization: Clark Internet Services, Inc., Ellicott City, MD USA
-
References: <4764qh$avv@osh2.datasync.com> <477ql8$s9o@Asylum.CC.MsState.Edu> <4786eo$bsb@NNTP.MsState.Edu> <4789lj$foe@filet.nrlssc.navy.mil>
In article <4789lj$foe@filet.nrlssc.navy.mil>,
Todd Mullins <todd@nutria.nrlssc.navy.mil> wrote:
>Bennet George (georgeb@ur.msstate.edu) wrote:
>
>: I'm a little grumpy this morning from missing breakfast to go tend to the
>: wounds of the occupants of two cars involved in a wreck. I'm a volunteer
>: firefighter and EMR. [ ... ]
>
>[ detailed stories excised ]
>
>: My proposal is to let neither the lawyers nor the engineers set the speed
>: limits. Let's let the firefighters and EMTs do it. And the family members
>: of fatal wreck victims.
>
>: Please, friends, slow down and buckle up. I don't want my face to be the
>: last one you see.
>
>Point taken.
>
>But, and naturally I have no scientific data to back this, I submit that
>speed limits have nothing to do with accident rates. A tire will blow
>out whether the little sign says 55 or 70. A sleepy driver is a hazard
>both above and below the speed limit.
I have some. A well known fact, most accidents accure at LESS THAN 40
mph and and mostly at intersections. Not sure if that directly backs you
point up but it indirectly does.
>Accidents are caused by something or somebody operating beyond capacity,
>whether it's the capacity of the tire to adhere to the road, or the
>capacity of the inebriated (or fatigued) brain to relay instructions to
>the hands and feet, or the capacity of the vehicle's safety engineering
>to protect its occupants from serious harm. There are lots of factors
>involved, including the speed of the vehicle, and the interplay of the
>factors is different for each particular vehicle/driver combination.
>These, coupled with the driver's familiarity with hir own capacities as
>well as hir vehicle's, are what gives you grumpy mornings.
>
>Not speed limits.
True, speed diffrence is the MAIN killer. If you have't already take a
look at the study "EFFECTS OF RAISING AND LOWERING SPEED LIMITS" at
html://www.clark.net/pub/kevina/sl/sl-irrel.html or
ftp://ftp.clark.net/pub/kevina/sl/sl-irrel.txt, a study that showes first
hand that speed limits set at the 85th percentile speed cause the least
accidents.
>Drivers must learn to operate their vehicles at safe speeds. This
>probably means no more than 50mph for the nearsighted lady in the
>Chevette, or it may mean 95mph for the physicist in the Benz. Abnormally
The nearsited lady in my oppion should have a licence. Or al least
shouldn't be allowed on anything greather than city streets.
>low speed limits have conditioned most American drivers, much like
>children at a slumber party, to see what they can get away with. That's
>idiocy. I am not completely opposed to the idea of abolishing all speed
>limits and letting St. Darwin intervene.
Low speeds limits cause drivers to do stupid things and the idea of curtesy
that use to exist in the 60s totaly disapeared after the 55 mandate.
--
* Kevin Atkinson, Clarknet I'net Serv., Maintainer of the Usenet Info Center *
* Finger usenet-i@clark.net for more info on Usenet Info Center. *
* Or send mail to usenet-i@clark.net with a subject line of HELP. *
* This is in its beginning stages and I could use any help I could get! *
Follow-Ups:
References: