4 ms·

In the U.K. excess speed is the 10th most common cause of accidents, way below “driver didn’t look properly”, which was 9 times as common. As far as deaths go,

by iso947 6y ago

In the U.K. excess speed is the 10th most common cause of accidents, way below “driver didn’t look properly”, which was 9 times as common. As far as deaths go, the most common contributory causes are loss of control and failure to look properly. Exceeding speed limit was a cause in just 16% of deaths. https://www.regtransfers.co.uk/content/common-causes-for-road-accidents-in-britain https://www.regtransfers.co.uk/content/common-causes-for-roa... https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/448037/road-fatalities-2013-data.pdf https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/...

7952 6y ago
I wonder if speeding is correlated with those other causes of accidents. It may not always be the cause of accidents but is evidence of bad judgement and easy to detect. In an ideal world we could also catch people who fail to check their blind spot, or get distracted automatically. Also, it does make the environment less hospitable for pedestrians and cyclists which is a good enough reason alone.
- alvah 6y ago
  "(exceeding the one-size-fits all speed limit) is evidence of bad judgement" This is not as self-evident as you assert. Do you have anything to back up your claim?
  - 7952 6y ago
    Judgement is subjective. I would argue that the safest way to drive is conservatively and with caution. And that your own emotions, time constraints, and judgement about safety are not sufficiently compelling to override that. Of course as a society we are forced to strike a balance between safety and utility. Where you strike that balance is political and not entirely objective.
    - alvah 6y ago
      It is completely possible to drive conservatively and with caution, while exceeding an arbitrary limit. Here's one for you, a 3-lane highway adjacent to a shopping centre and school. The 60km/h speed limit is too high during shopping & school hours, but stupidly low at 3am on a clear night with no traffic around. My opinion of a safe speed is very different for those 2 circumstances - I don't see how that equates to bad judgement.
MaxBarraclough 6y ago
> In the U.K. excess speed is the 10th most common cause of accidents That may be in part due to camera-based enforcement of the speed limits. Also, road accidents kill quite a lot of people. If it's the 10th most common cause, that could still be enough to kill more people than many other things that we regulate.
- growse 6y ago
  > > In the U.K. excess speed is the 10th most common cause of accidents > That may be in part due to camera-based enforcement of the speed limits. I can't lay my hands on it now, but there are studies measuring the effect on road casualties before and after camera installations. A lot of the time there's no difference. Like any punishment/deterrent, people aren't caught often enough for this to work. If you drive around for long enough in the UK, you'll notice that speeding is actually pretty common. However, it's not the case that everyone speeds everywhere, you're far more likely to catch someone speeding on the motorway or an NSL A road in the clear and dry than in a 20 outside a school. This is because most people are competent enough to regulate their speed appropriately for the environment. Sometimes it's riskier to drive at 20mph past a school than it is to do 90 on the motorway. Of course there are people who drive dangerously around vulnerable people and in hazardous situations and these are the people who often end up contributing to the statistics. Those are the people enforcement needs to focus on. > Also, road accidents kill quite a lot of people. If it's the 10th most common cause, that could still be enough to kill more people than many other things that we regulate. The problem with this is that if we were serious about making the roads safer with the limited resources we have, we wouldn't spend it on catching people speeding. We'd spend it on stuff that actually makes a difference.
  - MaxBarraclough 6y ago
    > We'd spend it on stuff that actually makes a difference. What do you have in mind?
- iso947 6y ago
  It could be. I lack the data at the moment but I seem to remember when deaths were higher 20 years ago (3400 a year vs 1700), exceeding the speed limit was higher in the causes. What cameras may have done is change the culture of speeding, making it far more antisocial - like the drunk driving campaigns did. If others don’t speed, then you generally can’t speed, especially in towns where it’s most dangerous. My parents used to speed all over the place in the 90s, my peers don’t today. Perhaps the cameras don’t make any local difference, but are part of a larger cultural shift. More people are killed by car drivers knocking down pedestrians than by car drivers speeding.

by iso947 6y ago

7952 6y ago

I wonder if speeding is correlated with those other causes of accidents. It may not always be the cause of accidents but is evidence of bad judgement and easy to detect. In an ideal world we could also catch people who fail to check their blind spot, or get distracted automatically. Also, it does make the environment less hospitable for pedestrians and cyclists which is a good enough reason alone.

alvah 6y ago
"(exceeding the one-size-fits all speed limit) is evidence of bad judgement" This is not as self-evident as you assert. Do you have anything to back up your claim?
- 7952 6y ago
  Judgement is subjective. I would argue that the safest way to drive is conservatively and with caution. And that your own emotions, time constraints, and judgement about safety are not sufficiently compelling to override that. Of course as a society we are forced to strike a balance between safety and utility. Where you strike that balance is political and not entirely objective.
  - alvah 6y ago
    It is completely possible to drive conservatively and with caution, while exceeding an arbitrary limit. Here's one for you, a 3-lane highway adjacent to a shopping centre and school. The 60km/h speed limit is too high during shopping & school hours, but stupidly low at 3am on a clear night with no traffic around. My opinion of a safe speed is very different for those 2 circumstances - I don't see how that equates to bad judgement.

MaxBarraclough 6y ago

> In the U.K. excess speed is the 10th most common cause of accidents That may be in part due to camera-based enforcement of the speed limits. Also, road accidents kill quite a lot of people. If it's the 10th most common cause, that could still be enough to kill more people than many other things that we regulate.

growse 6y ago
> > In the U.K. excess speed is the 10th most common cause of accidents > That may be in part due to camera-based enforcement of the speed limits. I can't lay my hands on it now, but there are studies measuring the effect on road casualties before and after camera installations. A lot of the time there's no difference. Like any punishment/deterrent, people aren't caught often enough for this to work. If you drive around for long enough in the UK, you'll notice that speeding is actually pretty common. However, it's not the case that everyone speeds everywhere, you're far more likely to catch someone speeding on the motorway or an NSL A road in the clear and dry than in a 20 outside a school. This is because most people are competent enough to regulate their speed appropriately for the environment. Sometimes it's riskier to drive at 20mph past a school than it is to do 90 on the motorway. Of course there are people who drive dangerously around vulnerable people and in hazardous situations and these are the people who often end up contributing to the statistics. Those are the people enforcement needs to focus on. > Also, road accidents kill quite a lot of people. If it's the 10th most common cause, that could still be enough to kill more people than many other things that we regulate. The problem with this is that if we were serious about making the roads safer with the limited resources we have, we wouldn't spend it on catching people speeding. We'd spend it on stuff that actually makes a difference.
- MaxBarraclough 6y ago
  > We'd spend it on stuff that actually makes a difference. What do you have in mind?
iso947 6y ago
It could be. I lack the data at the moment but I seem to remember when deaths were higher 20 years ago (3400 a year vs 1700), exceeding the speed limit was higher in the causes. What cameras may have done is change the culture of speeding, making it far more antisocial - like the drunk driving campaigns did. If others don’t speed, then you generally can’t speed, especially in towns where it’s most dangerous. My parents used to speed all over the place in the 90s, my peers don’t today. Perhaps the cameras don’t make any local difference, but are part of a larger cultural shift. More people are killed by car drivers knocking down pedestrians than by car drivers speeding.