3 ms·

The lack of attention to safety in driving drives me nuts every time I drive. Speed limits that have absolutely zero enforcement; so much so, that attempting t

by nunez 2y ago

The lack of attention to safety in driving drives me nuts every time I drive. Speed limits that have absolutely zero enforcement; so much so, that attempting to actually drive at the limit is a road hazard! Road designs that encourage maximum throughput and maximum distraction (forget phones; injury lawyer billboards are distracting by design). I've even seen folks run red lights without impunity here in Houston. Ive seen police here speed WHILE ON THEIR PHONES. Any politician who campaigns on improving driver safety is raked over the coals. Many mayors have gotten roiled over implementing red light or speed cameras or lowering speed limits in cities despite well established evidence that these changes reduce road deaths. Driving is systemically failed, IMO.

cosmotic 2y ago
Any chance you can link to the evidence that the cameras reduce deaths?
- tialaramex 2y ago
  Here's a study performed in the US, specifically Pennsylvania https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/ref/1820 https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/ref/1820
  - cosmotic 2y ago
    The executive summary says it reduced the number of people running through the red light, but it doesn't indicate the impact on accidents or safety.
    - tialaramex 2y ago
      That's correct. The paper assumes that we understand that compliance results in safety. From your response I gather you want to disagree?
      - cosmotic 2y ago
        I think it's probably the most important and powerful statistic they could have published, if it were true. Its ommission implies to me that it does not increase safety.
        tialaramex 2y ago
        The problem is that you'd need a much bigger experiment to get a statistically significant result on the axis you've decided matters instead, and yet you've got no argument for why this much more expensive and longer experiment is needed beyond that you're not convinced.
        cosmotic 2y ago
        Matters instead? I feel like it's the only statistic that matters here. Here's the reason: if it makes a negative impact on safety, the cameras should certainly be removed, and if it makes no impact on safety, the money to install those cameras and monitor them should be spent on something that does have a positive impact on safety. Otherwise, it's just a cash grab and safety theater. The state of Illinois specially requires a statistical analysis to prove they don't make a negative impact on safety. As far as I know, the cities that have the cameras haven't done the required analysis; I've inquired with a few. I'm not sure why you think it would be more expensive to study the safety. I'm sure police have the data. Are accidents just so rare both before and after install that there's no chance of achieving statistical significance? That just seems like reason enough to abandon the project.
        tialaramex 2y ago
        > I'm not sure why you think it would be more expensive to study the safety. Because you'd have to run a much larger experiment. The end point you're measuring (RTAs or possibly deaths depending) is significantly rarer than just running a light. But you're still trying to collect enough data to achieve confidence, so you'll need a larger experiment. My very strong impression is that your priorities are messed up and what you're looking for isn't safety at all, so that no matter what studies are done you'll find another excuse as to why enforcement isn't a good idea, at which point of course any further study is a waste of their time. For example you suggest in this comment that somehow police data would be good enough, and Chicago has police data showing the same thing, but no doubt you'll say you have a different reason why Chicago's police data doesn't satisfy you.
the_snooze 2y ago
>Speed limits that have absolutely zero enforcement; so much so, that attempting to actually drive at the limit is a road hazard! Speed limits really don't do anything other than let local authorities say they're "doing something." People will drive as fast as they feel comfortable to do so, which is primarily a function of road design. No one is going to follow a 25 MPH posted limit on a straight unobstructed 4-lane road.

by nunez 2y ago

cosmotic 2y ago

Any chance you can link to the evidence that the cameras reduce deaths?

tialaramex 2y ago
Here's a study performed in the US, specifically Pennsylvania https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/ref/1820 https://www.iihs.org/topics/bibliography/ref/1820
- cosmotic 2y ago
  The executive summary says it reduced the number of people running through the red light, but it doesn't indicate the impact on accidents or safety.
  - tialaramex 2y ago
    That's correct. The paper assumes that we understand that compliance results in safety. From your response I gather you want to disagree?
    - cosmotic 2y ago
      I think it's probably the most important and powerful statistic they could have published, if it were true. Its ommission implies to me that it does not increase safety.
      - tialaramex 2y ago
        The problem is that you'd need a much bigger experiment to get a statistically significant result on the axis you've decided matters instead, and yet you've got no argument for why this much more expensive and longer experiment is needed beyond that you're not convinced.
        cosmotic 2y ago
        Matters instead? I feel like it's the only statistic that matters here. Here's the reason: if it makes a negative impact on safety, the cameras should certainly be removed, and if it makes no impact on safety, the money to install those cameras and monitor them should be spent on something that does have a positive impact on safety. Otherwise, it's just a cash grab and safety theater. The state of Illinois specially requires a statistical analysis to prove they don't make a negative impact on safety. As far as I know, the cities that have the cameras haven't done the required analysis; I've inquired with a few. I'm not sure why you think it would be more expensive to study the safety. I'm sure police have the data. Are accidents just so rare both before and after install that there's no chance of achieving statistical significance? That just seems like reason enough to abandon the project.
        tialaramex 2y ago
        > I'm not sure why you think it would be more expensive to study the safety. Because you'd have to run a much larger experiment. The end point you're measuring (RTAs or possibly deaths depending) is significantly rarer than just running a light. But you're still trying to collect enough data to achieve confidence, so you'll need a larger experiment. My very strong impression is that your priorities are messed up and what you're looking for isn't safety at all, so that no matter what studies are done you'll find another excuse as to why enforcement isn't a good idea, at which point of course any further study is a waste of their time. For example you suggest in this comment that somehow police data would be good enough, and Chicago has police data showing the same thing, but no doubt you'll say you have a different reason why Chicago's police data doesn't satisfy you.

the_snooze 2y ago

>Speed limits that have absolutely zero enforcement; so much so, that attempting to actually drive at the limit is a road hazard! Speed limits really don't do anything other than let local authorities say they're "doing something." People will drive as fast as they feel comfortable to do so, which is primarily a function of road design. No one is going to follow a 25 MPH posted limit on a straight unobstructed 4-lane road.