interesting point about speeding (nbr)

[theemptythrone]

http://jalopnik.com/this-is-the-best-ta ... 1302382244

though more relevant to Canada i feel like there are some strong points here

[TVB]

This video doesn't prove what the article on the web site seems to think it does. All things being equal, going faster means greater risk. The physics of momentum, the neurology of reaction times, the engineering of human tissues, and common sense all tell you that.

What it presents is evidence that speed limits that are posted lower than they need to be, with the result that traffic travels at different speeds (some obeying the limit, others not), creates more risk.

In Michigan the law says that posted speed limits are supposed to be based on the actual speeds of most drivers on a given road. So if x% of people naturally drive around Y mph on it, that should be the limit (up to a max of 55 or 70, depending on the type of road). Unfortunately, that rule gets ignored a lot, and you have places like the suburb near my house which doesn't own a speed limit sign that reads other than "25".

[werro_123]

you have places like the suburb near my house which doesn't own a speed limit sign that reads other than "25".

Exactly the kind of place I live in. The big street in Cincinnati, is Vine and for most of it, the speed limit is 35, which is reasonable for it. As soon as you come into St.Bernard, which is where I live, it drops to 25 and there are tons of people speeding.

[michelle_7728]

Very good video. Lot's of good research seemed to have gone into it, and it made a lot of sense. I also agree with what TVB said though.

Thank you for posting that link.

[Quo Vadimus]

In Michigan the law says that posted speed limits are supposed to be based on the actual speeds of most drivers on a given road. So if x% of people naturally drive around 45mph on it, that should be the limit (up to a max of 55 or 70, depending on the type of road). Unfortunately, that rule gets ignored a lot, and you have places like the suburb near my house which doesn't own a speed limit sign that reads other than "25".

Ever since I found this out I've been bothered by it. Such a method sacrifices the safety of 'alternative' users like us, cyclists, pedestrians - all the users that are better for the environment, for congestion, for general good vibes, and adjusts speeds continuously upwards based on a) the lowest common denominator of driver, b) underfunded enforcement agencies' inability to maintain a presence, and c) cars and roads that are designed to encourage faster driving (see 99% invisible: the modern moloch).

What would the roads look like if other laws were determined based on what a lot of drivers do? Well, we wouldn't have to pay for turn signals in our cars anymore. Texting while driving would be required. Seat belts would never have become standard. Etc. Etc. I just don't get leaving safety up to the masses. The masses, as a whole, generally show themselves not to consider the consequences of their actions in terms of others, especially if they're running late (due of course to no fault of their own).

I dream of getting a group of drivers together who find out where they're doing speed surveys, and go out and drive up and down those roads at 10mph all day.

/rant

[wheelbender6]

I had to do a book report on Quo Vadis in high school.