If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
> Vincent Wilcox wrote:
>> I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our >> esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included as >> closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is basically a >> question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is needed to drop >> speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation and a repost to >> the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views. You don't state your opinion very well, your post is very disorganized and incoherent. I'm guessing that you want lower speed limits and want to find statistics that say that lower speed limits save lives. That is demonstrably not the case, in terms of fatality *RATE*. >> Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year >> the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the later >> part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the restrictions >> removed? >> >> Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period >> 1996/97[1]? It was a blip. They immediately went back down the next year. See: http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates >> The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world? No. They are not even representative of the US. Note that the fatality rate is different for MT than the majority of the US (see my reference.) Since about 2000 they have had a 75mph limit, with very poor compliance (I've driven there, and it's more like 85mph, as is Arizona, where the fatality rate is in line with the US average.) Please read in the report you posted: the rural (non-interstate) roads have a very high fatality count and rate. Speeds on interstates haven't affected the rate, and in fact it is now lower than in the period before '97, in line with the rest of the US. Speed limit compliance (especially on interstates - motorways for you UK guys) in the US is not very good. The WA DOT publishes data showing that: http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates Also, please note the section in the report you mention that talks about *HOW* speed limits should be set (on page 5: FHWA). There is no way to align your opinion with demonstrated facts from scientific studies that support these guidelines. Floyd |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Common Cause - Just zis Website
Alistair J Murray wrote:
> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: > >>On Thu, 26 May 2005 16:53:40 +0100, Alistair J Murray > wrote: > > > [...safe unlimited roads...] > > >>>Which is tragic, considering the Montana experience. >> >>So you say. Sounds like question-begging to me... > > > Perhaps, but Montana provides the only hard data we have. > > I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views. Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the restrictions removed? Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period 1996/97[1]? Montana opposed the original 55mph speed limit imposed as a result of the fuel crisis. They were forced to accept it due to federal government guidelines. These same government guidelines saw a reduction across the board of fatalities in states that actively enforced the limit. A bit of googling uncovers anecdotal evidence that these laws were not overly enforced in Montana. During the period before the abolition of the speed limit Montana imposed a stiff $5 fine on speeders. Which became known as the fuel tax, no points or record was kept of those found speeding. Were speed limits routinely ignored in Montana? When speed limits were re-introduced in the main the automobile associations cried foul and pointed without fail to the figure -11% of 95/96 which up to that point was already in decline. Presumably then the +31% of 96/97 was an outlier? Since then the situation has got worse. Is it the case that unless the limits are enforced there is no point posting them? In which case the UK is for once a leader, speed three or four times and you are out. Since then Montana has had an increase and a number of rather interesting public policies regarding speeding, including accusations of get out of jail free cards etc. The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world? France, Portugal, flagrant disregard of speed limits. High fatalities. Nordic countries, obeyance of limits, low fatalities. [1]http://leg.state.mt.us/content/audit/download/98l-11.pdf&e=9707 |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Vincent Wilcox wrote:
> Alistair J Murray wrote: > >> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 26 May 2005 16:53:40 +0100, Alistair J Murray >>> > wrote: >> >> >> >> [...safe unlimited roads...] >> >> >>>> Which is tragic, considering the Montana experience. >>> >>> >>> So you say. Sounds like question-begging to me... >> >> >> >> Perhaps, but Montana provides the only hard data we have. >> >> > > I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our > esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included > as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is > basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is > needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation > and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views. > > > Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year > the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the > later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the > restrictions removed? > > Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period > 1996/97[1]? > > Montana opposed the original 55mph speed limit imposed as a result of > the fuel crisis. They were forced to accept it due to federal government > guidelines. These same government guidelines saw a reduction across the > board of fatalities in states that actively enforced the limit. > > A bit of googling uncovers anecdotal evidence that these laws were not > overly enforced in Montana. During the period before the abolition of > the speed limit Montana imposed a stiff $5 fine on speeders. Which > became known as the fuel tax, no points or record was kept of those > found speeding. > > Were speed limits routinely ignored in Montana? > > When speed limits were re-introduced in the main the automobile > associations cried foul and pointed without fail to the figure -11% of > 95/96 which up to that point was already in decline. Presumably then the > +31% of 96/97 was an outlier? Since then the situation has got worse. Is > it the case that unless the limits are enforced there is no point > posting them? In which case the UK is for once a leader, speed three or > four times and you are out. > > Since then Montana has had an increase and a number of rather > interesting public policies regarding speeding, including accusations of > get out of jail free cards etc. > > The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world? > > France, Portugal, flagrant disregard of speed limits. High fatalities. > > Nordic countries, obeyance of limits, low fatalities. > > > [1]http://leg.state.mt.us/content/audit/download/98l-11.pdf&e=9707 Apologies for the above link. This should be correct at least it works for me. http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=U&sta...-11.pdf&e=9707 |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Vincent Wilcox wrote:
> Alistair J Murray wrote: > >> Just zis Guy, you know? wrote: >> >>> On Thu, 26 May 2005 16:53:40 +0100, Alistair J Murray >>> > wrote: >> >> >> >> [...safe unlimited roads...] >> >> >>>> Which is tragic, considering the Montana experience. >>> >>> >>> So you say. Sounds like question-begging to me... >> >> >> >> Perhaps, but Montana provides the only hard data we have. >> >> > > I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our > esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included > as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is > basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is > needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation > and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views. > > > Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year > the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the > later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the > restrictions removed? > > Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period > 1996/97[1]? > > Montana opposed the original 55mph speed limit imposed as a result of > the fuel crisis. They were forced to accept it due to federal government > guidelines. These same government guidelines saw a reduction across the > board of fatalities in states that actively enforced the limit. > > A bit of googling uncovers anecdotal evidence that these laws were not > overly enforced in Montana. During the period before the abolition of > the speed limit Montana imposed a stiff $5 fine on speeders. Which > became known as the fuel tax, no points or record was kept of those > found speeding. > > Were speed limits routinely ignored in Montana? > > When speed limits were re-introduced in the main the automobile > associations cried foul and pointed without fail to the figure -11% of > 95/96 which up to that point was already in decline. Presumably then the > +31% of 96/97 was an outlier? Since then the situation has got worse. Is > it the case that unless the limits are enforced there is no point > posting them? In which case the UK is for once a leader, speed three or > four times and you are out. > > Since then Montana has had an increase and a number of rather > interesting public policies regarding speeding, including accusations of > get out of jail free cards etc. > > The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world? > > France, Portugal, flagrant disregard of speed limits. High fatalities. > > Nordic countries, obeyance of limits, low fatalities. > > > [1]http://leg.state.mt.us/content/audit/download/98l-11.pdf&e=9707 Apologies if the above link doesnt work, this was the one I was using. http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=U&sta...-11.pdf&e=9707 |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
"Vincent Wilcox" > wrote
> fbloogyudsr wrote: >> Speed limit compliance (especially on interstates - motorways for >> you UK guys) in the US is not very good. The WA DOT publishes data >> showing that: > > Ok. Whoops. Wrong link. http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/mapsdata/tdo...d%20Report.pdf Floyd |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
"Vincent Wilcox" > wrote
> Fine, but which states employ the most effective/draconian (depending > upon perspective) enforcement? How has that affected things? I'm not sure how "compliance" would be easily measured. Certainly the WA DOT data don't show good compliance; perhaps the fars site has that info buried somehow. Here's my anecdotal take on it. OR(egon) probably has the best compliance - and lowest interstate limit - on the west coast. You have the WA data; CA is probably not as compliant: speeds on the (70mph limit) freeways there are probably 5-10mph higher than in WA, especially as you go south of San Francisco. Enforcement in OR is quite a bit more overt than in WA and CA. However, the "rule" appears to be 10mph over in the 55 limit sections, and 5mph over in the 65 sections. MT has low enforcement (except for out-of-staters). ID(aho) seems pretty lax in enforcement. So, overall I would say that compliance has no effect - even in some cases negative effect - on fatality rates. Note the CA/WA/OR rates: OR, with highest compliance, has a higher fatality rate than WA/CA. Floyd |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
fbloogyudsr wrote:
>> Vincent Wilcox wrote: >> >>> I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of >>> our esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course >>> included as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It >>> is basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that >>> is needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the >>> situation and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look >>> forward to views. > > > You don't state your opinion very well, your post is very disorganized > and incoherent. I'm guessing that you want lower speed limits and > want to find statistics that say that lower speed limits save lives. That > is demonstrably not the case, in terms of fatality *RATE*. > Its true, long night, sorry. No I am looking/thinking more about compliance. Countries where the majority comply seem to do better than countries where compliance is lower. I'd love to see the figures for Mogadishu. Think Greece versus Sweden for example, population of Greece 11M Sweden 9M but which country do you suppose is better at obeying simple things like limits? http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=U&sta...003.pdf&e=9707 >>> Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the >>> year the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in >>> the later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the >>> restrictions removed? >>> >>> Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period >>> 1996/97[1]? > > > It was a blip. They immediately went back down the next year. See: > http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates > Whats the margin here? It looks like Montana has barely changed over the entire period. > >>> The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the >>> world? > > > No. They are not even representative of the US. Note that the fatality > rate is different for MT than the majority of the US (see my reference.) > Since about 2000 they have had a 75mph limit, with very poor compliance > (I've driven there, and it's more like 85mph, as is Arizona, where the > fatality rate is in line with the US average.) Poor compliance. Greece versus Sweden? > > Please read in the report you posted: the rural (non-interstate) > roads have a very high fatality count and rate. Speeds on interstates > haven't affected the rate, and in fact it is now lower than in the period > before '97, in line with the rest of the US. But not lower than earlier figures. A plateau? Why? > > Speed limit compliance (especially on interstates - motorways for > you UK guys) in the US is not very good. The WA DOT publishes data > showing that: Ok. > http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates > > > Also, please note the section in the report you mention that talks > about *HOW* speed limits should be set (on page 5: FHWA). There > is no way to align your opinion with demonstrated facts from scientific > studies that support these guidelines. > > Floyd Fine, but which states employ the most effective/draconian (depending upon perspective) enforcement? How has that affected things? |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
fbloogyudsr wrote:
> "Vincent Wilcox" > wrote > >> Fine, but which states employ the most effective/draconian (depending >> upon perspective) enforcement? How has that affected things? > > > I'm not sure how "compliance" would be easily measured. Certainly > the WA DOT data don't show good compliance; perhaps the fars > site has that info buried somehow. Here's my anecdotal take on it. > > OR(egon) probably has the best compliance - and lowest interstate > limit - on the west coast. You have the WA data; CA is probably > not as compliant: speeds on the (70mph limit) freeways there are > probably 5-10mph higher than in WA, especially as you go south > of San Francisco. > Britain has on the whole pretty good compliance, hence the figures.Portugal is **** poor as is Spain and France. The French are rather embarassed about it and they've had around a ~20% drop but they've really been clamping down, hard. I live in France work but work in the Britain. I am unsure how the German figures changed after re-unification. > Enforcement in OR is quite a bit more overt than in WA and CA. > However, the "rule" appears to be 10mph over in the 55 limit sections, > and 5mph over in the 65 sections. MT has low enforcement (except > for out-of-staters). ID(aho) seems pretty lax in enforcement. > Err, sorry I've got OR being Oregon (correct?) but I have to look up my WA and CA definitions.WA is Washington and CA California? Verbosity here would help. I still don't understand what you mean though. Is this fact? > So, overall I would say that compliance has no effect - even > in some cases negative effect - on fatality rates. Note the > CA/WA/OR rates: OR, with highest compliance, has a higher > fatality rate than WA/CA. > > Floyd Thats not what we see here. The French have increased the number of cameras, cue. Someone saying but not since ... or whatever, but in the interim there were a mass of warnings before they were introduced. A lorry/truck driver friend was on the ball about this years before they were introduced, although as he said at the time. I didnt have to worry because I had a British number plate. Not so now. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
I really don't think the UK has good compliance. The posted limit is
70 mph on motorways, but it's common to see drivers hitting 90 to 95 on the M4 towards London. Also, Germany's fatality rate is now lower than that of the United States. I got it straight from FHWA... scroll down to the second chart. http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohim/hs02/in6.htm It shows Germany at 1.3 deaths per 100 million freeway kilometres. The United States is showing 1.6. Even France with its blatant disregard for the 130 km/h limits has lower fatalities than the United States. Having been all over Europe, I can say that the motorways in the UK are more comfortable and safer than that of Europe (i.e., shoulders, signage clarity, etc.). Furthermore, in 1995, the top 1 percentile would be about 200 km/h (125 mph). I recently went to Germany a few months ago and had an Audi A8 TDI V-8. I think the regular petrol models have a speed governor at 250 or 255, but the TDI apparently did not have any because the governor stopped the car at 280 km/h. That's 175 mph. There were just four cars going from Berlin to Madgeburg on a very smooth nearly-straight three-lane autobahn A2 that was almost new. Seeing that the S600 topped at 255 km/h, it could not catch up with us travelling over 275 km/h, so there were just the three of us at 6 in the morning on a Sunday when there's nobody out there. Bliss! Lorries are still limited at 90 km/h or 100 km/h, and that's with cars screaming nearby in excess of 260 km/h. Far safer than lorries doing 90 km/h and cars going 200 km/h? Well, the numbers show a substantial decrease in fatalities. Look at this one: http://www.driveandstayalive.com/inf..._1988-2001.htm This one is not per kilometre mile driven, but I can assure you more people are driving cars in Germany compared to 1988 (especially with the fall of the Berlin wall). Still, from 1988 to 2001, there was a huge decrease of 36% in overall deaths. During the same timeframe, the U.S. only dropped 4 percent - the worst of all the 30 countries on the list. |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Wiggums wrote:
> I really don't think the UK has good compliance. The posted limit is > 70 mph on motorways, but it's common to see drivers hitting 90 to 95 > on > the M4 towards London. I'm sorry that's not true. It's common to see cars travelling at that speed all over the country. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
New car website | Terry Mitchell | General | 1 | December 12th 04 07:19 AM |
Please visit my brand new Xenon HID Showcase Website today... | WENW | Honda | 0 | October 11th 04 02:54 AM |
Fix strategy for (common?) broken hood on '71? | pgtr | Corvette | 22 | October 9th 04 05:56 AM |