Re: Victory for green lanes

The message <68voauF2sni70U1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
from Peter Clinch <p.j.clinch@xxxxxxxxxxxx> contains these words:

Ah yes, so a situation where any speed limit would be totally irrelevant
is seen as totally relevant by those who support the ever encroaching
nanny state. Treat drivers as responsible adults and there is a good
chance they will behave like responsible adults at least most of the
time.

As I just pointed out to you, had that been the case there wouldn't have
been multiple fatalities in fog. If you can't trust them to be
responsible where it's patently obvious it's bloody dangerous then
clearly they can't be trusted. Whether a speed limit would have helped
or not (I agree, it doesn't in this case) misses the point that they've
shown that responsible behaviour is well down on the agenda.

Yes but you don't know whether it was the faster end of the spectrum who
caused the accidents or the slower end who wouldn't have driven fast
enough to have been classed as speeders had the national limit been in
force. Given the major involvement of lorry drivers in the carnage my
money would be on the slow drivers.

Exactly how dense do you want traffic to be before the drivers get
habituated to other traffic?

Roger, if you're driving along a rural B road and you see one car every
15 minutes, will your driving be any different than if, on the same
road, there is a constant procession of traffic in both directions? I
know mine does, I am very much forced to adjust my driving to what other
people around me are doing.

Traffic slows me down and the more traffic there is the less overtaking
opportunities there are and the more opportunity there is for other
drivers mistakes to cause me grief. On an empty road (and one car every
15 minutes is effectively an empty road) I only have my own mistakes to
contend with.

It's not just, "wow, what's that self-propeled box with 4 wheels, I've
not seen one of those before!", it's how a higher density in more places
more of the time alters the driving behaviour. In high density traffic
speeds (and other behaviours) tend to converge, taking away the more
extreme max/min differences, reducing the amount of overtaking etc.
That has an effect on the overall safety.

You wish.

You talk as if traffic jams are a recent
occurrence but I am sure I remember news reports of horrendous traffic
jams on the south coast on bank holidays back in the fifties and I know
for a fact that driving up the A1 in summer in the early 60s one was met
with a traffic jam in every town that didn't at that time have a bypass.

jams aren't much of a problem for accidents as nothing's moving. What
you egt now is continual heavy traffic but still moving at a moderate
speed, but leaving drivers little scope for /fully/ independent action.

So you accept that 90 mph is a moderate speed.

No, but how many more school crossing patrols are there now compared to
then? How many more kids are kept in altogether because there's too
much traffic about? Compared to either of our youths, vastly more now.

Funnily enough we had a crossing patrol outside our primary school.

I asked how many more, not were there any at all...

If there wasn't a need there wouldn't have been any.

Transport research has long noted a "safety in numbers" effect. <snip>

It was the only factor you put forward.

But where did I say it was the only factor? I think it's significant,
which is why I put it forward, but I didn't say it was the only one. I
gave you another in my last post, why ignore that now?

The absence of any other was extremely significant. As to your
conflation of drink driving and seat belts. The breathaliser (1967)
didn't come in until after the casualty totals peaked and while fitting
of front seat belts in new cars was required from that year compulsory
wearing of seat belts didn't come in till much later (front 1981, rear
1991) though seat belts had been fitted in some cars from the late
fifties.

You do really go out of your way to misinterpret what I say.

And here's me thinking the same of you... ;-/ I don't think either of
us are going out of our way to do it, but that it does happen.

I said most
and stand by it. The typical long distance journey for most drivers is
largely on motorway or dual carriageway. Roads where bends you have to
slow down for (if sticking to the limits) are very few and far between.

Most of my driving is to outdoor pursuits, mostly in Scotland, a lot of
it outside the central belt. There is no dual carriageway east/west
north of the central belt, the main E/W routes are the A85/82 and A86.
Whether you're driving under the limits or not your chances of
negotiating either without slowing down for quite a few bends are
*remarkably* low! I'll grant you it's different for a lot of places,
but again in the Lakes and the Dales etc. you'll not have a steady 60 on
the speedo, even with a clear road.

We are in a small minority in travelling to outlandish places.

I can't recall much about the A86 but the A84/A85 didn't have much in
the way of serious bends way back when unlike the A82 on Lomondside back
in the early 60s.

But your idea is that they're responsible enough to look after
themselves and set their own limits... which is just what they're doing.

Not so. My argument is that to get responsible drivers you have to let
them exercise responsibility.

Exactly! These are people who have the say in whether they stay on the
road or retire. They have the say, so they have the responsibility.
You then point out that they are staying on the road in an irresponsible
manner, so they've been given the responsibility and they have *not*
acted on it. I really don't see how your argument sits with that behaviour.

Its more than 40 years since drivers had the chance to be really
responsible. Exceed speed limits and by definition you are
irresponsible. Those that don't exceed the higher limits get told time
and time again that they are the safe drivers. little wonder that
drivers who are sufficiently decrepit not to exceed even the 30 limit on
a regular basis (as 99% of the rest do) think they can soldier on by
going slower and slower.

Half blind old fogies with reaction times measured in seconds will be
driving slowly, some of them very slowly. A television program some time
ago featured a man would had driven the same car (an A35 IIRC but it
could have been an A30) for most if not all of his motoring life. He was
filmed travelling in the region of 20 mph and even at that speed was
unable to keep his car in lane. Do you really think that such people
should be allowed to continue driving?

No. But though he has the responsibility of declaring himself unfitr,
rather than the nanny state, he isn't taking it.

Having been treated as an irresponsible child for over 40 years he is
waiting to be told to stop by nanny.

You were there when I learnt to drive?

No, I've just seen the traffic density rise enormously in the 20 years
I've been here, and in the years before that. Compared to when I was a
child, traffic densities in Edinburgh are what I'd have only associated
with London when I was child, which is about as heavy as it gets.

I thought Edinburgh was little more than a village. The whole of
Scotland has a population less than that of Greater London.

I certainly think that young male drivers thinking speed limits aren't
for them are the primary victims, but that's not quite the same thing.

You sure about that? Bikers seem to be far more at risk and have a
culture that lends itself to such gestures.

fair point, "young male drivers and riders".

At it again Pete? "Drivers need to drive at a speed that engages their
full attention" doesn't imply driving too fast, just fast enough not to
be distracted by nagging wife, beautiful scenery, or whatever.

It's simply risk homeostasis behaviour.

That relies on peoples perception of risk which might well have little
bearing on reality.

Living is a risky business but not concentrating on the job in hand when
driving is an unnecessary risk.

Implying it's impossible to concentrate on driving at lower speeds, but
that isn't so.

It is human nature for the mind to wander if it is not sufficiently
engaged with the job in hand.

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Victory for green lanes
    ... a RTA even when they are not to blame but arguing that car drivers are ... world you have invented where cars are so rare that even experienced ... exercise responsibility is not the way to minimise the numbers. ... driver is more concerned with preventing anyone overtaking than they are ...
    (uk.rec.walking)
  • Re: North wales deaths
    ... you think that drivers have no responsibility ... > After the car went straight on at the bend, hit the verge, belted the dry ... who drives frustratingly slowly in front of you, ... >> you get behind the wheel you accept responsibility. ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: Hit and run in Yorkshire
    ... Scandinavia, Holland and Germany, drivers who collide with cyclists or ... You and every member of the Association of British Drivers, ... calls for "everyone" to take responsibility to drive safely. ... I drive an estate car personally, ...
    (uk.rec.cycling)
  • Re: Victory for green lanes
    ... speeds tend to converge, ... but leaving drivers little scope for /fully/ independent action. ... so they have the responsibility. ... I've just seen the traffic density rise enormously in the 20 years ...
    (uk.rec.walking)
  • Re: Interesting crash videos
    ... Good parenting alone cannot overcome raging hormones, ... experience, and immaturity. ... drivers are not screwing around and taking unnecessary risks when they ... to maximize throughtput and violate speed limits as a safety technique ...
    (rec.autos.driving)