3 ms·

That's just drivers normalising the breaking of the speed limits. If you raise the limits just because drivers are going faster, then the drivers will just incr

That's just drivers normalising the breaking of the speed limits. If you raise the limits just because drivers are going faster, then the drivers will just increase their speeds until again, a majority of drivers are breaking the limit. Speed limits should be defined to reduce the harm from the inevitable crashes e.g. we have a lot of 20mph limits here in the UK in cities such as Bristol which are designed to reduce pedestrian deaths. Personally, I think roads are poorly designed - they often prioritise speed which then encourages drivers to go faster (e.g. long sight lines, sweeping corners etc) and then a speed limit is applied. I think the better alternative s to design roads so that drivers naturally travel slower, or at least the careful ones do.

otteromkram 2y ago
I dislike how you think. When I drive, 99% of the time it's to get someplace, not go for a Sunday cruise. The better alternative is ongoing driver training beyond initial study.
- tfourb 2y ago
  Driving 10 mph above the speed limit on a highway at every opportunity will only lead to a very limited reduction in travel time, because you spend a lot of time breaking (i.e. to avoid crashing into law-abiding drivers, reacting to speed controls, etc.). At the same time it drastically increases both the risk of accidents, as well as the severity of accidents when they happen. You also endanger not only yourself but also everyone else on the road with you. Sensible road design takes this into account and constructs roads in a way that disincentivizes speeding and is safer for everyone. One example would be "lazily" meandering highways instead of perfectly straight ones. The broken sightline is a great incentive to keep your foot off the gas, most people do it instinctively. "Ongoing driver training" on the other hand is burdensome and expensive for the individual drivers and will probably lead to little noticeable effect, as speeding is not related to "not knowing better", but to "feeling entitled to break the rules" (for whatever reason).
  - echelon_musk 2y ago
    > breaking Braking
  - lupusreal 2y ago
    Failure to drive 70 mph on a highway posted at 60 will (very often, road depending) result in far more cars overpassing you. Each instance of passing carries a small but definite amount of risk; it is safer to match the speed of the other cars on the road than to obstinately stick to the limit and get passed hundreds of times in a single trip. (As for ripping up roads and relaying them so drivers intuitively find the safe speed to match the posted speed limit, it would be much cheaper to simply adjust the speed limit than establishing entirely new right of ways through existing neighborhoods, farms and industrial zones. That would be bonkers.)
    - ChoGGi 2y ago
      Everyone doing 60 doesn't see each other because we're all doing the same speed, the ones going faster are the dangerous drivers.
      - ryao 2y ago
        When everyone is driving beyond the speed limit, the ones actually obeying the speed limit are the dangerous drivers. It is unfortunate that speed limits in the US have not corresponded to how people actually drive since 1973.
        tfourb 2y ago
        How does this make sense? If I'm driving the speed limit and someone else is crashing into me from behind while speeding, they are the dangerous driver. No matter how many other people also ignore the speed limit. Also, increasing the speed limit does nothing to make traffic safer. That doesn't make any sense at all, as increased speed is correlated very well with increased accident rates and severity of traffic-related injuries: https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/eu-road-safety-policy/priorities/safe-road-use/safe-speed/archive/speeding/speed-central-issue-road-safety/speed-and-injury-risk-different-speed-levels_en https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/eu-road-safety-po...
- tonyedgecombe 2y ago
  That's the US philosophy and it's why road deaths per mile are so bad there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year#/media/File:1994-_Motor_vehicle_traffic_deaths_in_road_accidents,_by_country.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
  - ryao 2y ago
    That is arguably more aligned with the German philosophy given the no speed limit autobahn and road deaths per mile are not so bad there.
mschuster91 2y ago
> I think the better alternative s to design roads so that drivers naturally travel slower, or at least the careful ones do. We're talking about long distance roads. The purpose of these should be to accommodate travel, not prohibit it. Here in Germany, the Autobahnen do a surprisingly well job, although I agree that a speed limit of around 200 km/h makes sense because those with cars capable of going above that are so much faster than others on the road that even someone with perfect reflexes and racing-grade brake systems will have a hard time avoiding an accident.
lupusreal 2y ago
> If you raise the limits just because drivers are going faster, then the drivers will just increase their speeds until again No. Most people who drive significantly faster than the limit are disregarding the limit and are driving at the speed they feel to be safe. They aren't considering the limit and blindly choosing to drive X over it, such that they'd drive X even faster even if the posted limit were raised by X. If a long flat and straight country road in good condition has a posted limit of 30 and most people instead do 60 (this is common in many parts of the country), they wouldn't start doing 120 if the limit were raised to 60 because "do double the posted limit" was not their objective in the first place. Their objective was "drive at the speed which is safe for this road" and the condition of the road didn't change, so that speed doesn't change. (The reason I know this to be true is because the proportion of drivers who speed on any given road varies wildly with the road. On some roads, 95% do substantially faster than the limit while on other roads that ratio is flipped around the other way. This demonstrates that speeds are being chosen by the condition and nature of the road, not derived in some way from the posted limits.)
- lesuorac 2y ago
  > The reason I know this to be true is because the proportion of drivers who speed on any given road varies wildly with the road. Another way to arrive at this conclusion is that if the speed limit is both 65 for trucks and cars its trivially not the limit of how fast one can safely drive. And as expected, you see trucks going 65 while cars speed around them at 70+. And also the inability for people to use the pedal and the steering wheel at the same time resulting in large 15+ mph speed drops around a highly visible curve.
- mlhpdx 2y ago
  > Their objective was "drive at the speed which is safe for this road" Not really. The problem people are not prioritizing safety, they are rushing in an ego fueled spasm of disobedience and disrespect.

otteromkram 2y ago

I dislike how you think. When I drive, 99% of the time it's to get someplace, not go for a Sunday cruise. The better alternative is ongoing driver training beyond initial study.

tfourb 2y ago
Driving 10 mph above the speed limit on a highway at every opportunity will only lead to a very limited reduction in travel time, because you spend a lot of time breaking (i.e. to avoid crashing into law-abiding drivers, reacting to speed controls, etc.). At the same time it drastically increases both the risk of accidents, as well as the severity of accidents when they happen. You also endanger not only yourself but also everyone else on the road with you. Sensible road design takes this into account and constructs roads in a way that disincentivizes speeding and is safer for everyone. One example would be "lazily" meandering highways instead of perfectly straight ones. The broken sightline is a great incentive to keep your foot off the gas, most people do it instinctively. "Ongoing driver training" on the other hand is burdensome and expensive for the individual drivers and will probably lead to little noticeable effect, as speeding is not related to "not knowing better", but to "feeling entitled to break the rules" (for whatever reason).
- echelon_musk 2y ago
  > breaking Braking
- lupusreal 2y ago
  Failure to drive 70 mph on a highway posted at 60 will (very often, road depending) result in far more cars overpassing you. Each instance of passing carries a small but definite amount of risk; it is safer to match the speed of the other cars on the road than to obstinately stick to the limit and get passed hundreds of times in a single trip. (As for ripping up roads and relaying them so drivers intuitively find the safe speed to match the posted speed limit, it would be much cheaper to simply adjust the speed limit than establishing entirely new right of ways through existing neighborhoods, farms and industrial zones. That would be bonkers.)
  - ChoGGi 2y ago
    Everyone doing 60 doesn't see each other because we're all doing the same speed, the ones going faster are the dangerous drivers.
    - ryao 2y ago
      When everyone is driving beyond the speed limit, the ones actually obeying the speed limit are the dangerous drivers. It is unfortunate that speed limits in the US have not corresponded to how people actually drive since 1973.
      - tfourb 2y ago
        How does this make sense? If I'm driving the speed limit and someone else is crashing into me from behind while speeding, they are the dangerous driver. No matter how many other people also ignore the speed limit. Also, increasing the speed limit does nothing to make traffic safer. That doesn't make any sense at all, as increased speed is correlated very well with increased accident rates and severity of traffic-related injuries: https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/eu-road-safety-policy/priorities/safe-road-use/safe-speed/archive/speeding/speed-central-issue-road-safety/speed-and-injury-risk-different-speed-levels_en https://road-safety.transport.ec.europa.eu/eu-road-safety-po...
tonyedgecombe 2y ago
That's the US philosophy and it's why road deaths per mile are so bad there. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in_U.S._by_year#/media/File:1994-_Motor_vehicle_traffic_deaths_in_road_accidents,_by_country.svg https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motor_vehicle_fatality_rate_in...
- ryao 2y ago
  That is arguably more aligned with the German philosophy given the no speed limit autobahn and road deaths per mile are not so bad there.

mschuster91 2y ago

> I think the better alternative s to design roads so that drivers naturally travel slower, or at least the careful ones do. We're talking about long distance roads. The purpose of these should be to accommodate travel, not prohibit it. Here in Germany, the Autobahnen do a surprisingly well job, although I agree that a speed limit of around 200 km/h makes sense because those with cars capable of going above that are so much faster than others on the road that even someone with perfect reflexes and racing-grade brake systems will have a hard time avoiding an accident.

lupusreal 2y ago

> If you raise the limits just because drivers are going faster, then the drivers will just increase their speeds until again No. Most people who drive significantly faster than the limit are disregarding the limit and are driving at the speed they feel to be safe. They aren't considering the limit and blindly choosing to drive X over it, such that they'd drive X even faster even if the posted limit were raised by X. If a long flat and straight country road in good condition has a posted limit of 30 and most people instead do 60 (this is common in many parts of the country), they wouldn't start doing 120 if the limit were raised to 60 because "do double the posted limit" was not their objective in the first place. Their objective was "drive at the speed which is safe for this road" and the condition of the road didn't change, so that speed doesn't change. (The reason I know this to be true is because the proportion of drivers who speed on any given road varies wildly with the road. On some roads, 95% do substantially faster than the limit while on other roads that ratio is flipped around the other way. This demonstrates that speeds are being chosen by the condition and nature of the road, not derived in some way from the posted limits.)

lesuorac 2y ago
> The reason I know this to be true is because the proportion of drivers who speed on any given road varies wildly with the road. Another way to arrive at this conclusion is that if the speed limit is both 65 for trucks and cars its trivially not the limit of how fast one can safely drive. And as expected, you see trucks going 65 while cars speed around them at 70+. And also the inability for people to use the pedal and the steering wheel at the same time resulting in large 15+ mph speed drops around a highly visible curve.
mlhpdx 2y ago
> Their objective was "drive at the speed which is safe for this road" Not really. The problem people are not prioritizing safety, they are rushing in an ego fueled spasm of disobedience and disrespect.