5 ms·

This is such an insane take. The speed limit is for everywhere for safety. They faster people go the more dangerous it is.

jonathankoren 5y ago
Actually, people tend to drive at the speed that is safe, and traffic engineers set the limit at about the 85th percentile of the observed speed. Maximum limits on safe roads are usually lower than the observed speed, and so serve no purpose from a safety perspective. Traffic calming techniques like narrower lane widths and widths are shown to be more effective than police enforcement. The “downside” of these methods are that they’re actually effective at controlling speed, and thus are a revenue loss.
- xorcist 5y ago
  > Actually, people tend to drive at the speed that is safe, That not remotely true in any part of the world I've visited so far.
- Edman274 5y ago
  Not the person you replied to, but I really feel like enforcement must be a pretty substantial part of what stops people from speeding and driving recklessly, given that traffic enforcement has been de-emphasized since the start of the pandemic and the number of road fatalities has gone up more than 7 percent, even though the actual number of miles driven has gone down. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-show-increased-traffic-fatalities-during-pandemic https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-show... If people drive at whatever speed they think is safe, then why would the aggregate number of people dying on roadways ever go up when miles driven by the same population goes down? Here are the possibilities: 1. Driving has become more risky due to external, uncontrollable factors, like weather or road changes that motorists can't account for or 2. People are modifying their behavior. Why would they modify their behavior? The roads haven't changed. The speed limits haven't changed. What has changed? More people are dead because of extreme speed and reckless driving on roadways, which kind of suggests that traffic enforcement did at least prevent some of those deaths.
  - Zak 5y ago
    I'm not sure there's enough information to draw such a conclusion. For example, due to changes brought on by the pandemic, the makeup of vehicles, drivers, and reasons for driving may have been significantly different. One interesting point from your link was a significant increase in drivers involved in fatal crashes testing positive for drugs including cannabis and alcohol, but especially opioids. It would take real research to quantify the relative effects of each of: 1. Increased speeding due to reduced enforcement 2. Increased DUI due to reduced enforcement 3. Increased DUI due to pandemic-related drug use
    - olyjohn 5y ago
      Also, is there actually any evidence of reduced traffic enforcement? Or are people just assuming this?
  - olyjohn 5y ago
    Except the road conditions totally changed. At the beginning of the pandemic, you had hardly any traffic anywhere. No more were people being slowed down to 25mph on the freeway by a traffic jam. You could easily cruise 60mph into the city for a long time. Suddenly, a morning wreck meant someone crashed at 60 instead of 25.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    You need to stop equating speeding with driving recklessly. Going 70-80 on a limited access highway when conditions permit is not reckless. Weaving through traffic at 20+ the prevailing speed with no margin for error is. A number on a sign does squat to effect either group.
- triceratops 5y ago
  > people tend to drive at the speed that is safe, *at the speed they believe is safe. Most people also highly overestimate their driving skill.
  - throwaway0a5e 5y ago
    When you start saying that everybody else is wrong on issues that are broadly defined by social consensus (e.g. what's a safe speed for this road, what's appropriate attire for the office, etc, etc) you're basically saying everyone is wrong except you but with extra steps.
    - ceejayoz 5y ago
      Social consensus can be and often is wrong. Counterintuitive results like the Birthday Problem are widespread, people are shit at statistics and risk evaluation, etc.
sokoloff 5y ago
The US national speed limit was imposed as a fuel economy measure not a safety measure.
- triceratops 5y ago
  Did states not have their own speed limits prior to that? Do they not set speed limits on state or county roads today?
  - sokoloff 5y ago
    If speed limits are about safety, when the states set theirs and the feds over-rode them, which one was used flawed safety data (or was it “both”)?
Dylan16807 5y ago
> The speed limit is for everywhere for safety. Absolutely not. Speed limits that don't fit the roads they're on are not a safety measure. Outside of really blatant speeders, it's the road design that needs to make things safe or not and do the bulk of the work in guiding people to a reasonable speed. But even separate from that issue, tons of speed limits are set for reasons like "people complained about noise, probably unreasonably" or "we want to make money off tricking drivers".

jonathankoren 5y ago

Actually, people tend to drive at the speed that is safe, and traffic engineers set the limit at about the 85th percentile of the observed speed. Maximum limits on safe roads are usually lower than the observed speed, and so serve no purpose from a safety perspective. Traffic calming techniques like narrower lane widths and widths are shown to be more effective than police enforcement. The “downside” of these methods are that they’re actually effective at controlling speed, and thus are a revenue loss.

xorcist 5y ago
> Actually, people tend to drive at the speed that is safe, That not remotely true in any part of the world I've visited so far.
Edman274 5y ago
Not the person you replied to, but I really feel like enforcement must be a pretty substantial part of what stops people from speeding and driving recklessly, given that traffic enforcement has been de-emphasized since the start of the pandemic and the number of road fatalities has gone up more than 7 percent, even though the actual number of miles driven has gone down. https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-show-increased-traffic-fatalities-during-pandemic https://www.nhtsa.gov/press-releases/2020-fatality-data-show... If people drive at whatever speed they think is safe, then why would the aggregate number of people dying on roadways ever go up when miles driven by the same population goes down? Here are the possibilities: 1. Driving has become more risky due to external, uncontrollable factors, like weather or road changes that motorists can't account for or 2. People are modifying their behavior. Why would they modify their behavior? The roads haven't changed. The speed limits haven't changed. What has changed? More people are dead because of extreme speed and reckless driving on roadways, which kind of suggests that traffic enforcement did at least prevent some of those deaths.
- Zak 5y ago
  I'm not sure there's enough information to draw such a conclusion. For example, due to changes brought on by the pandemic, the makeup of vehicles, drivers, and reasons for driving may have been significantly different. One interesting point from your link was a significant increase in drivers involved in fatal crashes testing positive for drugs including cannabis and alcohol, but especially opioids. It would take real research to quantify the relative effects of each of: 1. Increased speeding due to reduced enforcement 2. Increased DUI due to reduced enforcement 3. Increased DUI due to pandemic-related drug use
  - olyjohn 5y ago
    Also, is there actually any evidence of reduced traffic enforcement? Or are people just assuming this?
- olyjohn 5y ago
  Except the road conditions totally changed. At the beginning of the pandemic, you had hardly any traffic anywhere. No more were people being slowed down to 25mph on the freeway by a traffic jam. You could easily cruise 60mph into the city for a long time. Suddenly, a morning wreck meant someone crashed at 60 instead of 25.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  You need to stop equating speeding with driving recklessly. Going 70-80 on a limited access highway when conditions permit is not reckless. Weaving through traffic at 20+ the prevailing speed with no margin for error is. A number on a sign does squat to effect either group.
triceratops 5y ago
> people tend to drive at the speed that is safe, *at the speed they believe is safe. Most people also highly overestimate their driving skill.
- throwaway0a5e 5y ago
  When you start saying that everybody else is wrong on issues that are broadly defined by social consensus (e.g. what's a safe speed for this road, what's appropriate attire for the office, etc, etc) you're basically saying everyone is wrong except you but with extra steps.
  - ceejayoz 5y ago
    Social consensus can be and often is wrong. Counterintuitive results like the Birthday Problem are widespread, people are shit at statistics and risk evaluation, etc.

sokoloff 5y ago

The US national speed limit was imposed as a fuel economy measure not a safety measure.

triceratops 5y ago
Did states not have their own speed limits prior to that? Do they not set speed limits on state or county roads today?
- sokoloff 5y ago
  If speed limits are about safety, when the states set theirs and the feds over-rode them, which one was used flawed safety data (or was it “both”)?

Dylan16807 5y ago

> The speed limit is for everywhere for safety. Absolutely not. Speed limits that don't fit the roads they're on are not a safety measure. Outside of really blatant speeders, it's the road design that needs to make things safe or not and do the bulk of the work in guiding people to a reasonable speed. But even separate from that issue, tons of speed limits are set for reasons like "people complained about noise, probably unreasonably" or "we want to make money off tricking drivers".