Pretty good message in this video from Aunty
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/uk-42406692/why-is-speeding-not-a-taboo
CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Resources
Why is speeding not a taboo?
(56 posts)-
Posted 6 years ago #
-
"You lose concept of reality"
Posted 6 years ago # -
They answered their question in the first sentence: "It may look good on TV..."
The whole segment is like something from a Ballard novel. Especially the woman talking about her crash injuries, then admitting she speeds for "the buzz" as it makes her "feel alive". Like drug addicts talk about their habit...
Posted 6 years ago # -
I thought the video was flawed in a number of ways. First of all, much of the footage of 'speeding' is of cars driving fast on tracks. Which isn't speeding. It's just driving. It's incorrect to conflate speeding and driving fast. You can be speeding at 21 mph.
I have to say that I didn't recognise any of the reasons for speeding from that video.
'you lose concept of reality' - the problem here is not speeding, it's that this person is not treating driving as a serious endeavour.
'30 mph feels slow on a clear road' - because it is. The problem with speed limits is that sometimes the limit will be faster than is appropriate, and sometimes it will be slower than is appropriate. But, there is not really any excuse for breaking a 30mph limit in my opinion.
'I speed because i'm under pressure' - poor planning, leave earlier.
There is no differentiation in that video between 70 mph in a 30mph zone (unacceptable) and speeding on a motorway (often no problem). If I am going to break the speed limit, I do so in a conscious way, and I also won't do it in any limit below 50 mph. I'm happy to drive faster than the speed limit on motorways especially, and especially when traffic is light. I don't have any issues with this, I don't think it's immoral, etc. etc. Of course, If were caught, I'd take the consequences; I accept I'm breaking the law when doing this.
The is a simple reason that speeding is not a taboo: done responsibly, it's absolutely fine. The same reason that for many people taking illegal drugs are not a taboo. The law doesn't match up perfectly with morality and ethics.
Driving whilst being inattentive is, I would argue, a much bigger problem than speeding. This should be the taboo. It's a much bigger risk factor than speed alone (i acknowledge it will often lead to people speeding). It's just not easily measurable.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Crowriver Especially the woman talking about her crash injuries, then admitting she speeds for "the buzz" as it makes her "feel alive".
Yes, and the fact that other people may get to feel dead because of her just doesn't enter in to it.
Posted 6 years ago # -
The is a simple reason that speeding is not a taboo: done responsibly, it's absolutely fine.
Do you think that drinking & driving done responsibly is absolutely fine? What if you have 3 drinks and then drive very slowly, knowing your reactions are slightly impaired? Is that fine?
Posted 6 years ago # -
@glasgow megasnake
you are justifying speeding in the same way that others do - by personal standards. What if you lose control of your vehicle at high speed on the motorway? Even if no other vehicles are involved the potential pain/grief for those close to you is very significant.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Before we all pile into Glasgow Megasnake, (s)he does say "I also won't [speed] in any limit below 50 mph".
I also speed. Where? In the outside lane of a motorway. I reckon that doing less than 70 there is probably more dangerous than making sure I'm over 70, because the other OLAMs* won't be expecting someone to be going that "slowly" there. Yes, I'm condoning/encouraging/going along with other people's law breaking.
*Otherwise Law Abiding Motorist
Posted 6 years ago # -
@glasgow megasnake, I think you have hit the nail on the head.
People speed because they think their personal moral standards trump the law of the land. It may well be "safe" to drive over the limit on an empty motorway but that normalises breaking the speed limit which in turn means more people will speed on a congested motorway. That further normalises choosing which parts of the law to obey and makes people comfortable breaking the speed limit in built up areas, etc.
Speeding on the motorway will also increase noise pollution for anyone unlucky enough to live within a mile of the road. So even if you don't physically harm anyone it isn't a victimless crime.
I don't expect anyone would be happy with a thief justifying their activities based on their own personal morals rather than the law and I don't see why drivers consider it any different.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Drinking (anything, IMO) before driving is irresponsible. That's clear. you are impairing your ability to drive.
If you are on a clear road, and you can see that you will be able to stop, even from higher than the speed limit, then there is no additional risk to going, say, 80 mph instead of 70mph, is there? Drink driving is not comparable to breaking the speed limit.
@morepathspie. I guess, if I crash and die/am injured there will be consequences. Same as if I fall off my bike, get run over, am in a plane crash, etc. etc. Everything has a risk and when crystallised the risks have consequences.
But the whole point is that when driving you are constantly making judgements about what the appropriate speed is for the conditions. It's these judgements that stop you from crashing, not sticking to an arbitrary number. Often, the appropriate speed is much less than the speed limit. There is nothing necessarily 'safe' about sticking to the speed limit, just as there is nothing necessarily dangerous about breaking it.
I'm sure we've all been passed on bicycles perfectly safely and well by somebody who is speeding, and also in extremely unpleasant/dangerous ways by people who are not speeding. It's too simplistic to boil driving down to >X mph = BAD, <X mph = good.
In a previous life I frequently drove at >200 kph on public roads legally. The only reason that's not appropriate in the UK is because of the speed limit and driver training. It's not because you instantly turn into a fireball once above an arbitrary number.
Posted 6 years ago # -
@fimm, I assume you are talking about a three or more lane motorway. If the traffic is moving slowly enough that you could use the outside lane at less than 70 then I don't think any competent driver would be surprised to find someone doing less than 70 there. They might be frustrated by it but that is their choice.
Posted 6 years ago # -
btw, I am not trying to defend speeding, I can see many of the arguments against it and think that they are good ones.
But I wanted to think a bit more in depth about the question posed by the video which was "why isn't speeding a taboo?'. I think 'because I get a buzz' and 'because I didn't notice' and 'because I'm late for work' are reasons why people speed, but don't address the question of why it's not a taboo. I think it's an interesting question...
Posted 6 years ago # -
The only reason that's not appropriate in the UK is because of the speed limit and driver training.
And infrastructure. The Armco will have a set impact rating which may well be lower in the UK due to design constraints than say Germany where the maximum likely impact could be expected to be higher.
But largley I agree.
Posted 6 years ago # -
https://www.theguardian.com/money/2017/dec/16/motoring-myths-black-boxes-telematics-insurance
"Speed is the root of all motoring evil. “If there’s one thing young drivers need to do, it’s to slow down. Speed is the single biggest contributor to risk. About one-third of drivers drive too fast for the conditions on the road,” says Vaughan. Her data shows that drivers who speed 20% of the time increase their risk of having an accident by 87%.
I don't speed, although probably did on the past on motorways. Much of it comes from the realisation that I'm almost certainly overestimating my own driving skills. .
Posted 6 years ago # -
About one-third of drivers drive too fast for the conditions on the road,”
But as I'm sure "we're" all aware too fast for the conditions isn't necessarily exceeding the speed limit. 60 on a narrow b road is legal but perhaps not driving to the conditions.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Drinking (anything, IMO) before driving is irresponsible. That's clear. you are impairing your ability to drive.
Speeding (anything over any limit, IMO) while driving is irresponsible. That's clear. you are reducing the time to react to problems, impairing your ability to safely drive, as well as increasing the kinetic energy should any collision happen.
there is no additional risk to going, say, 80 mph instead of 70mph, is there?
What if your front tyre has been slowly deflating unknown to you and then blows out. Do you prefer to be upside-down on the motorway at 80mph or 70mph? What about the people on the other side of the carriageway you may cross into? Maybe the crash barrier cannot hold back an 80mph car, but at 70 would be OK....???
Posted 6 years ago # -
"...what the appropriate speed is for the conditions..."
One of the 'conditions' of any bit of road is the speed limit assigned to it.
A former colleague with several crashes under their belt always honked about 'driving to the conditions', including when describing their own behaviour prior to a traffic collision, neglecting to register that one of the conditions had been the proximity of their car to the car in front, resulting in not being able to stop/avoid it when its condition became swervey and deceleratory.
I have heard several different people refer to a stretch of the A1 somewhere in East Lothian where there are no cameras, no turnings, no corners etc., on which they declared themselves happy to significantly exceed the legal speed limit, not considering that although they may have been doing this when the road ahead/behind was clear that they were markedly increasing the risk of there being an unexpected crashed vehicle that the next person passing that bit of road might have to avoid.
Posted 6 years ago # -
A car travelling at 30mph has twice the kinetic energy of a car at 20mph and ROSPA estimates the fatality risk increases from 1.5% to 8%. There are lots of benefits in reducing speed limits from 30mph to 20mph, the resistance to the introduction of these zones is a good measure of the inability of people to understand (and exercise) good judgement in relation to speed.
@wingpig I think that might be the stretch of dual carriage-way between Tranent and Longniddry. I have heard that it is used by drivers and motorcyclists to test their flat-out speed. A motorcyclist died there earlier this year.
Posted 6 years ago # -
thought experiment please:
Take a stretch of motorway. For argument's sake, let's just say a straight bit, three lanes wide, good sight lines (because it's straight), etc.
Put it in the UK - what's the safe speed?
Put it in Germany - what's the safe speed?
Is it the same, or different?
Posted 6 years ago # -
The logic behind some posts on this imply that by increasing the speed limit you would make driving safer.
Posted 6 years ago # -
@glasgow megasnake I don't know. And that's why I would drive at or below the advisory speed limit also taking the weather conditions intyo account.
Posted 6 years ago # -
That manufacturers design and market cars to be capable of travelling 'safely' and, perhaps more problematically, comfortably at significantly higher speeds than local limits allow springs to mind as being a crucial issue, as if a challenge is being made to drivers to meet expectations.
Posted 6 years ago # -
Are the widths of the lanes the same? Will the other drivers on it be those from country A or country B? Is the length of the stretch the same between countries? Does the straightness/width/sightline quality vary significantly on stretches before or after? Does the driver experience/training/habit vary between sites? Has driver training/driving rules/country-wide driving experience been considered when determining the posted speed limit which would be applied at each site?
Posted 6 years ago # -
Put it in the UK - what's the safe speed?
That depends on a number of factors which are outside the control of the question. The legal limit will be 70mph or less though.Put it in Germany - what's the safe speed?
That depends on a number of factors which are outside the control of the question. Regardless of what the safe speed is there may be no legal limit.One thing we can be certain of regardless of the definition of "safe" is that the faster the vehicle is travelling the higher the level of pollution (including noise) that it is emitting.
Posted 6 years ago # -
“One thing we can be certain of regardless of the definition of "safe" is that the faster the vehicle is travelling the higher the level of pollution (including noise) that it is emitting. “
Even that is not certain if you ride down a hill on a bike without applying the brake you waste less energy (non travel energy) than when the brake is applied, the same may apply in a car in many instances a car may require the brake or engine brake to travel slower on the down side of a hill. This wastes more energy.Posted 6 years ago # -
Drivers don't usually have in mind the experience of things going terribly awry (they either forget or don't survive). Modern vehicles are very insulating as well. So perception of risk may be some distance from actual risk.
Related is the lack of awareness of how much space a car needs to brake (all in the HW code) - reaction time plus physical processes. The faster you go the longer it takes.
Then as cyclingmollie says faster cars cause more damage when they hit things.
Finally faster cars produce more CO. I'd argue that we should lower speed limits on motorways on that basis alone.
I am a car driver. I used to enjoy driving fast - it's fun. But that's not a reason for allowing it. If you want proper freedom and speed - get on a bike or somat.
Posted 6 years ago # -
@cyclingmollie the resistance to the introduction of these zones is a good measure of the inability of people to understand (and exercise) good judgement in relation to speed
Amen. People are very poor judges of risk - that's why we don't leave it up to "common sense".
Posted 6 years ago # -
In built up areas I think most people agree (but may not stay within) that lower speed limits are better.
Lots of people argue Motorway speeds should be higher, and in fact the UK has one the lowest motorway speed limits in Europe. It would be interesting to look at relative casualty statistics, which from memory the UK does better than most.
Perhaps it is actually our lower speed limits which make the difference...
Posted 6 years ago # -
"Perhaps it is actually our lower speed limits which make the difference... "
Could be the high levels of traffic - it's harder to have a serious crash if you in a slow moving queue."Lots of people argue Motorway speeds should be higher, and in fact the UK has one the lowest motorway speed limits in Europe."
Given the very real situation we are in with regard to climate change and pollution, shouldn't we lower speed limits in order to reduce this both directly and indirectly by encouraging people on to faster modes of transport like rail?Posted 6 years ago # -
As mentioned in a previous thread - try driving round Edinburgh with the speed limiter set @ 20mph - amazing the amount of abuse and overtakes.
Posted 6 years ago #
Reply »
You must log in to post.
posts
