3 ms·

Those happen in movies, but only very, very rarely in real life. Ambulances have flashing lights, sirens, and trained drivers and they still usually stay below

by acdha 3y ago

Those happen in movies, but only very, very rarely in real life. Ambulances have flashing lights, sirens, and trained drivers and they still usually stay below the speed limit; Joe Soccer Dad is going to get t-boned trying the same thing on the way to the ER. In the vast majority of cases, the delays on those trips are caused by the other vehicles on the road. Driving aggressively will make that worse because it will cause cascades of other people doing unusual moves which increase the unpredictability and danger of the situation.

nobodyandproud 3y ago
> Joe Soccer Dad is going to get t-boned trying the same thing on the way to the ER. Depends on the zone and the speed limit. Going 35 mph in a 20 MPH zone isn’t even noticeable.
- alistairSH 3y ago
  It is if you’re the pedestrian the negligent driver ran over.
  - nobodyandproud 3y ago
    Yes, but the objection is that an average driver cannot go beyond 10 MPH “in practice” without losing control. Which is nonsense. A driver who can control their car in 20 MPH can control it in 35 MPH; it happens all the time. As to your point: I suppose all is well if a pedestrian is hit at 40 mph in a 40 MPH local zone?
    - acdha 3y ago
      The objection isn’t that people can’t drive 35mph but that there are exceedingly few real life situations where people need to go massively over the limit and can do so safely. Those scenarios which most drivers will never be in are being used to justify not having safety precautions which would save thousands of lives annually.
      - nobodyandproud 3y ago
        “Joe Soccer Dad is going to get t-boned trying the same thing on the way to the ER.” That is what I’m responding to. That implies pretty clearly that people can’t handle more than +10 mph, which certainly isn’t true.
        acdha 3y ago
        I know, I wrote that. Getting t-boned does not mean that you can’t handle driving faster but rather that road conditions aren’t safe for it: in most places you aren’t averaging that kind of speed for a non-trivial time without running red lights or being in situations where you really don’t have visibility to do so safely – and you end up getting t-boned by someone who _thought_ they could proceed safely because they weren’t expecting cross traffic going that much faster than normal. The point is simply that it’s extreme rare to be in a situation where going that much over the limit is the right choice.
        nobodyandproud 3y ago
        > Getting t-boned does not mean that you can’t handle driving faster but rather that road conditions aren’t safe for it When you get t-boned—your words and scenario—it’s the other driver that lost control. And I will point out that there’s a large leeway in low speeds; the type of vehicle, weight, and tires all contribute and I stand by my original point. The other point you made is unsafe speeds for the given condition. Conditions—like icy or wet roads—is situational and subject to change. Do you govern for all and introduce a very complex system? Only for ideal conditions? Then there’s the question of changing speed limits (over the years) and the software's ability to keep up: Do you require open source software and hardware? Enforce an end-of-life after 10 years? Studies and data.
      - sokoloff 3y ago
        I have driven 250K accident-free miles. I’d wager that more than half of those were more than 10 mph over the posted limit. Highways in New England are often posted at 55 or 65 and moving at 75-80. Is that “massively over”? No, but a bill to limit to 10 over is kinda impractical.
    - alistairSH 3y ago
      The speed range from 20mph to 35mph (give or take) has been pretty well researched and documented as a range where pedestrian fatalities ramps up dramatically. Additionally, stopping distance (very rough average) will double for most drivers from 20mph to 35mph. So, yeah, for this range of speeds, that 10-15mph difference is absolutely critical to maintain pedestrian safety. Remember, 20mph is slower than the default residential speed of 25mph (in the US). It's almost exclusively used in tight neighborhood streets, where pedestrians (children in particular) should be expected. 70mph vs 80mph, I don't so much care about. In theory, those speeds are only ever seen on a limited-access highway. The California bill is stupid, but probably DOA as well. But, that doesn't mean the problem it's trying to solve doesn't exist.
- acdha 3y ago
  How many situations are there where there’s a life and death situation hinging on you going 35mph in that 20mph zone, but not the 30mph this law would allow? Now, do the reverse: getting hit at 35mph is far more likely to be fatal, and 99.9999% of the time the driver going it has no reason to do so better than “I like vroom vroom”. We have over 40k dead Americans annually and millions with serious injuries, and speeding is a factor in a large percentage of those.
  - nobodyandproud 3y ago
    Where it’s life or death will be an edgecase but it shouldn’t be ignored. There are other consequences like snarled traffic; if everyone goes near the limit, then the way to merge is to slow down. I’d like to see more studies and actual data. Not simply rely on “common sense”.
    - acdha 3y ago
      Yes, I too would like to see some data. For example, we have decades of studies showing that excessive speed is a significant factor to the point where even very pro-driver groups treat it as a given - here’s the first hit I got just now, for example: https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/winter-2022/05 https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/winter-2022/05 On the other hand, we’re being told that measures which will probably save many lives can’t be allowed because of things people saw in a movie? This thread is has people talking like it’s common to have trees falling across roads too quickly to brake or needing to evade pursuit, but it’s really conspicuous how nobody uses first-person language to describe it actually happening to them.
      - nobodyandproud 3y ago
        Nobody is disputing that faster speeds on impact are more deadly. But what thought has been given to automatically restricting the speed of a car? If I cross from a 55 to 25 MPH, is it up to the automaker on whether it gradually slows? Brake checks? Should that mean speed limit zones should also be a gradual change? What happens when the system mistakes a highway for local? Should it be local only? How often is it error prone? Where’s your data for any of that? Poorly thought-out legislation will be worse than what we have now.
chrisco255 3y ago
Sorry it really depends on the situation, road conditions, etc. Ambulances responding to a call is different than transport to a hospital. And many times the paramedics are treating a patient in the back so it doesn't make sense to drive fast if the injuries are treatable or non-life threatening. Firefighters and cops are typically first responders in accidents and incidents and many times they do need to travel faster than speed limit.
- nomel 3y ago
  I think it's silly to assume that emergency vehicles would be included.
  - lamontcg 3y ago
    Literally called out in the article that they'd be exempt.
    - Volundr 3y ago
      To be fair, at least I was paywalled from reading the article, so it's highly likely many are stuck working on the headline alone.
      - lamontcg 3y ago
        https://archive.is/NYi7U https://archive.is/NYi7U https://archive.ph/NYi7U https://archive.ph/NYi7U https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-firefox-clean/-/releases https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-firefox-clea... https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean/-/releases https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean...
- acdha 3y ago
  I doubt this law won’t have an exception for emergency response, but my point was that even people with the legal right to speed, solid need, and safety equipment usually don’t end up going that fast because it’s unsafe or impossible due to traffic. Every so often there’s someone racing down a desert highway but even then they aren't going to want to lose it on a curve.
beanjuiceII 3y ago
do you not drive much? or not have much life experience? i've driven people in emergency situations many times both during day and night. it seems extremely naive to just paper over ALL the situations that happen on roadways with some ivory tower response. dang tree just fell on my car..couldn't accelerate any faster to make it
- acdha 3y ago
  How many times have you seen trees falling on the road at all, much less too close to brake? I don’t know who taught you how to drive but in California in the 90s they tended to emphasize that if you couldn’t stop without hitting something, you were going too fast. I’d give long odds on that being better advice far, far more frequently in scenarios like what you describe.
- alistairSH 3y ago
  If a tree literally fell on your car, there was no way you were going to accelerate out from under it. Humans simply don't have the reaction time to do so. Now, if that tree fell in front of you, the slower you're going, the more likely you are able to stop before running into it. Human reaction time to apply brakes is ~half a second. Stopping distance is roughly linear as speed increases. So, 20mph you start braking in ~15 feet. 40mph, 30 feet. 60mph 45 feet. Etc. That's just to react - you still need the time/space to bring the vehicle to a stop or slow enough to swerve around the tree.
  - beanjuiceII 3y ago
    i guess I'll chalk that up as no to my first two questions
    - alistairSH 3y ago
      I made a conscious decision to reduce my driving from ~15k/year to ~3k/year. I'm 47, so plenty of life experience, though life so far has not included regular emergency trips across the county nor speeding out from under falling trees. :shrug:
sandworm101 3y ago
It happens every day. Happened to me several times yesterday. Often the google maps / internet version of the speed limit is wildly different than the actual speed limits. I drove for an hour on a highway that google thjngs is 40mph but is actually 65. Have fun being that one car whose computer doesnt understand how to read signs. Also, speed variable highways are common in my area.
- kspacewalk2 3y ago
  The "it" that you're talking about is different from the "it" discussed in the parent comment.
beej71 3y ago
I transported my friend to the hospital when they had stroke symptoms. They got checked by a local medic (it was in a small national monument) who told me to drive to the nearest hospital, about 50 miles away, "fast, but not dangerously, unless the symptoms get worse, then drive REALLY fast." We definitely were more than 10 over, relatively safely. Luckily the symptoms did not get worse. But if my speed had been governed, I'd have made it my mission to destroy the careers of the politicians who passed that horseshit. Sometimes the best, safest thing to do is to speed. We need that capability. Normally I drive the speed limit, much to the dismay of those around me.

by acdha 3y ago

nobodyandproud 3y ago

> Joe Soccer Dad is going to get t-boned trying the same thing on the way to the ER. Depends on the zone and the speed limit. Going 35 mph in a 20 MPH zone isn’t even noticeable.

alistairSH 3y ago
It is if you’re the pedestrian the negligent driver ran over.
- nobodyandproud 3y ago
  Yes, but the objection is that an average driver cannot go beyond 10 MPH “in practice” without losing control. Which is nonsense. A driver who can control their car in 20 MPH can control it in 35 MPH; it happens all the time. As to your point: I suppose all is well if a pedestrian is hit at 40 mph in a 40 MPH local zone?
  - acdha 3y ago
    The objection isn’t that people can’t drive 35mph but that there are exceedingly few real life situations where people need to go massively over the limit and can do so safely. Those scenarios which most drivers will never be in are being used to justify not having safety precautions which would save thousands of lives annually.
    - nobodyandproud 3y ago
      “Joe Soccer Dad is going to get t-boned trying the same thing on the way to the ER.” That is what I’m responding to. That implies pretty clearly that people can’t handle more than +10 mph, which certainly isn’t true.
      - acdha 3y ago
        I know, I wrote that. Getting t-boned does not mean that you can’t handle driving faster but rather that road conditions aren’t safe for it: in most places you aren’t averaging that kind of speed for a non-trivial time without running red lights or being in situations where you really don’t have visibility to do so safely – and you end up getting t-boned by someone who _thought_ they could proceed safely because they weren’t expecting cross traffic going that much faster than normal. The point is simply that it’s extreme rare to be in a situation where going that much over the limit is the right choice.
        nobodyandproud 3y ago
        > Getting t-boned does not mean that you can’t handle driving faster but rather that road conditions aren’t safe for it When you get t-boned—your words and scenario—it’s the other driver that lost control. And I will point out that there’s a large leeway in low speeds; the type of vehicle, weight, and tires all contribute and I stand by my original point. The other point you made is unsafe speeds for the given condition. Conditions—like icy or wet roads—is situational and subject to change. Do you govern for all and introduce a very complex system? Only for ideal conditions? Then there’s the question of changing speed limits (over the years) and the software's ability to keep up: Do you require open source software and hardware? Enforce an end-of-life after 10 years? Studies and data.
    - sokoloff 3y ago
      I have driven 250K accident-free miles. I’d wager that more than half of those were more than 10 mph over the posted limit. Highways in New England are often posted at 55 or 65 and moving at 75-80. Is that “massively over”? No, but a bill to limit to 10 over is kinda impractical.
  - alistairSH 3y ago
    The speed range from 20mph to 35mph (give or take) has been pretty well researched and documented as a range where pedestrian fatalities ramps up dramatically. Additionally, stopping distance (very rough average) will double for most drivers from 20mph to 35mph. So, yeah, for this range of speeds, that 10-15mph difference is absolutely critical to maintain pedestrian safety. Remember, 20mph is slower than the default residential speed of 25mph (in the US). It's almost exclusively used in tight neighborhood streets, where pedestrians (children in particular) should be expected. 70mph vs 80mph, I don't so much care about. In theory, those speeds are only ever seen on a limited-access highway. The California bill is stupid, but probably DOA as well. But, that doesn't mean the problem it's trying to solve doesn't exist.
acdha 3y ago
How many situations are there where there’s a life and death situation hinging on you going 35mph in that 20mph zone, but not the 30mph this law would allow? Now, do the reverse: getting hit at 35mph is far more likely to be fatal, and 99.9999% of the time the driver going it has no reason to do so better than “I like vroom vroom”. We have over 40k dead Americans annually and millions with serious injuries, and speeding is a factor in a large percentage of those.
- nobodyandproud 3y ago
  Where it’s life or death will be an edgecase but it shouldn’t be ignored. There are other consequences like snarled traffic; if everyone goes near the limit, then the way to merge is to slow down. I’d like to see more studies and actual data. Not simply rely on “common sense”.
  - acdha 3y ago
    Yes, I too would like to see some data. For example, we have decades of studies showing that excessive speed is a significant factor to the point where even very pro-driver groups treat it as a given - here’s the first hit I got just now, for example: https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/winter-2022/05 https://highways.dot.gov/public-roads/winter-2022/05 On the other hand, we’re being told that measures which will probably save many lives can’t be allowed because of things people saw in a movie? This thread is has people talking like it’s common to have trees falling across roads too quickly to brake or needing to evade pursuit, but it’s really conspicuous how nobody uses first-person language to describe it actually happening to them.
    - nobodyandproud 3y ago
      Nobody is disputing that faster speeds on impact are more deadly. But what thought has been given to automatically restricting the speed of a car? If I cross from a 55 to 25 MPH, is it up to the automaker on whether it gradually slows? Brake checks? Should that mean speed limit zones should also be a gradual change? What happens when the system mistakes a highway for local? Should it be local only? How often is it error prone? Where’s your data for any of that? Poorly thought-out legislation will be worse than what we have now.

chrisco255 3y ago

Sorry it really depends on the situation, road conditions, etc. Ambulances responding to a call is different than transport to a hospital. And many times the paramedics are treating a patient in the back so it doesn't make sense to drive fast if the injuries are treatable or non-life threatening. Firefighters and cops are typically first responders in accidents and incidents and many times they do need to travel faster than speed limit.

nomel 3y ago
I think it's silly to assume that emergency vehicles would be included.
- lamontcg 3y ago
  Literally called out in the article that they'd be exempt.
  - Volundr 3y ago
    To be fair, at least I was paywalled from reading the article, so it's highly likely many are stuck working on the headline alone.
    - lamontcg 3y ago
      https://archive.is/NYi7U https://archive.is/NYi7U https://archive.ph/NYi7U https://archive.ph/NYi7U https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-firefox-clean/-/releases https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-firefox-clea... https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean/-/releases https://gitlab.com/magnolia1234/bypass-paywalls-chrome-clean...
acdha 3y ago
I doubt this law won’t have an exception for emergency response, but my point was that even people with the legal right to speed, solid need, and safety equipment usually don’t end up going that fast because it’s unsafe or impossible due to traffic. Every so often there’s someone racing down a desert highway but even then they aren't going to want to lose it on a curve.

beanjuiceII 3y ago

do you not drive much? or not have much life experience? i've driven people in emergency situations many times both during day and night. it seems extremely naive to just paper over ALL the situations that happen on roadways with some ivory tower response. dang tree just fell on my car..couldn't accelerate any faster to make it

acdha 3y ago
How many times have you seen trees falling on the road at all, much less too close to brake? I don’t know who taught you how to drive but in California in the 90s they tended to emphasize that if you couldn’t stop without hitting something, you were going too fast. I’d give long odds on that being better advice far, far more frequently in scenarios like what you describe.
alistairSH 3y ago
If a tree literally fell on your car, there was no way you were going to accelerate out from under it. Humans simply don't have the reaction time to do so. Now, if that tree fell in front of you, the slower you're going, the more likely you are able to stop before running into it. Human reaction time to apply brakes is ~half a second. Stopping distance is roughly linear as speed increases. So, 20mph you start braking in ~15 feet. 40mph, 30 feet. 60mph 45 feet. Etc. That's just to react - you still need the time/space to bring the vehicle to a stop or slow enough to swerve around the tree.
- beanjuiceII 3y ago
  i guess I'll chalk that up as no to my first two questions
  - alistairSH 3y ago
    I made a conscious decision to reduce my driving from ~15k/year to ~3k/year. I'm 47, so plenty of life experience, though life so far has not included regular emergency trips across the county nor speeding out from under falling trees. :shrug:

sandworm101 3y ago

It happens every day. Happened to me several times yesterday. Often the google maps / internet version of the speed limit is wildly different than the actual speed limits. I drove for an hour on a highway that google thjngs is 40mph but is actually 65. Have fun being that one car whose computer doesnt understand how to read signs. Also, speed variable highways are common in my area.

kspacewalk2 3y ago
The "it" that you're talking about is different from the "it" discussed in the parent comment.

beej71 3y ago

I transported my friend to the hospital when they had stroke symptoms. They got checked by a local medic (it was in a small national monument) who told me to drive to the nearest hospital, about 50 miles away, "fast, but not dangerously, unless the symptoms get worse, then drive REALLY fast." We definitely were more than 10 over, relatively safely. Luckily the symptoms did not get worse. But if my speed had been governed, I'd have made it my mission to destroy the careers of the politicians who passed that horseshit. Sometimes the best, safest thing to do is to speed. We need that capability. Normally I drive the speed limit, much to the dismay of those around me.