5 ms·

I would have thought dealing with the consequences of speeding in their jobs (notifying families of the death of loved ones, seeing the terrible injuries caused

I would have thought dealing with the consequences of speeding in their jobs (notifying families of the death of loved ones, seeing the terrible injuries caused) would have stopped them. I know a few people who work in that area and that stuff stays with them. For example - they've assured me I should never buy a motor bike.

CamperBob2 14y ago
(Shrug) There aren't any "consequences of speeding." If you hit something or kill somebody, you were doing something wrong besides speeding.
- eru 14y ago
  People are making small mistakes all the time. Lower speed gives you more time to correct your own and other people's mistakes.
  - fnordfnordfnord 14y ago
    Hiring a professional driver would increase safety a bit. Even better, hire a professional driver and pay him/her to drive slowly.
- biot 14y ago
  Yes, you were doing something wrong like not understanding physics involving the coefficient of friction, acceleration formulas, and the inability to see through solid objects to know that a child is about to step out on the road in front of your car at a distance where you could have stopped had you not been speeding.
  - eru 14y ago
    Also, even if the kid (or someone else) is completely at fault, they shouldn't have to die for their mistakes.
  - CamperBob2 14y ago
    So how does a number on a sign at the side of the road have anything to do with any of those things?
    - biot 14y ago
      It's typically an estimation based on 85th percentile speed for a given road derived from engineering considerations like grade, curvature, pedestrian access, presence of divider for opposing traffic, and so on. The limit is generally pegged to specific values and modified for certain scenarios (school, construction, playground, etc.) assuming that roads of most types have similar characteristics. While this can vary from region to region for the same type of road, it generally indicates a reasonable estimate of a safe driving speed for the typical driver and typical vehicle. That's how the number on the sign relates.
  - sergiosgc 14y ago
    The parent comment was aiming at the fact that speed is rarely a cause of an accident, it is often a condition. The difference is small but relevant, as law enforcement focuses on speed as a cause, ignoring the real causes (e.g. Car parked before crosswalk preventing visibility of child that is crossing the road)
    - RobAley 14y ago
      Speed - its not the cause of an accident. It's the cause of death.
      - sergiosgc 14y ago
        That's dumb. As dumb as saying that the cause of death is the dashboard your head bumps onto. Or that the cause of death is being alive. If you can't tell the difference between cause and condition, you may keep silent. No one is forcing you to participate in the discussion.
        RobAley 14y ago
        It wasn't dumb, perhaps I wasn't clear. As a former Police officer I've been to many car crashes and understand the difference between what causes the accident and what kills people. My point was, that in a large proportion of the accidents where people are killed and where drivers are speeding, people state that that it was the drivers inattention that caused the accident, and not the speed they were going. They use this to suggest that we should not prosecute speeding. While this is technically true, (one of) the reason that we impose speed limits is that an accident caused by, e.g., inattention or mistake is turned from a fender-bender into a fatal accident by high speed. Even the best drivers make mistakes from time to time, we have a right not to have that mistake turn into a fatal accident by someone speeding.
        sergiosgc 14y ago
        Point taken, you are right. However, on the other hand, the ease with which speed becomes the culprit often precludes better solutions. Two examples: A particular crosswalk in my city was a dark spot, accident wise. A common accident spot, resulting in deaths. Speed traps were, for years, commonly placed in the street, treating, I assume, the perceived cause of the accidents. Speed bumps followed. Years go by, accident rates don't go down. Then, finally specific street lighting is setup on the crosswalk: problem solved. The cause was not excess speed, but night visibility of the crosswalk. One of the worst mountain roads in Portugal, IP4, was for years considered plagued by speeding. Lots of police cruisers, both marked and stealth, patrolled the road, enforcing limits. Static speed traps the ensued. Accident rates stubbornly wouldn't go down. Then, finally, a brilliant mind decided to place plastic lane barriers preventing overtaking in prohibited zones. Problem solved! Speed was not the cause, dangerous overtake maneuvers were. Speed is an easy target. As such, it's a dangerous default as accident cause.
- msellout 14y ago
  Right, so there aren't any consequences of smoking, but only consequences of inhaling tar?
deleted 14y ago
[deleted]

CamperBob2 14y ago

(Shrug) There aren't any "consequences of speeding." If you hit something or kill somebody, you were doing something wrong besides speeding.

eru 14y ago
People are making small mistakes all the time. Lower speed gives you more time to correct your own and other people's mistakes.
- fnordfnordfnord 14y ago
  Hiring a professional driver would increase safety a bit. Even better, hire a professional driver and pay him/her to drive slowly.
biot 14y ago
Yes, you were doing something wrong like not understanding physics involving the coefficient of friction, acceleration formulas, and the inability to see through solid objects to know that a child is about to step out on the road in front of your car at a distance where you could have stopped had you not been speeding.
- eru 14y ago
  Also, even if the kid (or someone else) is completely at fault, they shouldn't have to die for their mistakes.
- CamperBob2 14y ago
  So how does a number on a sign at the side of the road have anything to do with any of those things?
  - biot 14y ago
    It's typically an estimation based on 85th percentile speed for a given road derived from engineering considerations like grade, curvature, pedestrian access, presence of divider for opposing traffic, and so on. The limit is generally pegged to specific values and modified for certain scenarios (school, construction, playground, etc.) assuming that roads of most types have similar characteristics. While this can vary from region to region for the same type of road, it generally indicates a reasonable estimate of a safe driving speed for the typical driver and typical vehicle. That's how the number on the sign relates.
- sergiosgc 14y ago
  The parent comment was aiming at the fact that speed is rarely a cause of an accident, it is often a condition. The difference is small but relevant, as law enforcement focuses on speed as a cause, ignoring the real causes (e.g. Car parked before crosswalk preventing visibility of child that is crossing the road)
  - RobAley 14y ago
    Speed - its not the cause of an accident. It's the cause of death.
    - sergiosgc 14y ago
      That's dumb. As dumb as saying that the cause of death is the dashboard your head bumps onto. Or that the cause of death is being alive. If you can't tell the difference between cause and condition, you may keep silent. No one is forcing you to participate in the discussion.
      - RobAley 14y ago
        It wasn't dumb, perhaps I wasn't clear. As a former Police officer I've been to many car crashes and understand the difference between what causes the accident and what kills people. My point was, that in a large proportion of the accidents where people are killed and where drivers are speeding, people state that that it was the drivers inattention that caused the accident, and not the speed they were going. They use this to suggest that we should not prosecute speeding. While this is technically true, (one of) the reason that we impose speed limits is that an accident caused by, e.g., inattention or mistake is turned from a fender-bender into a fatal accident by high speed. Even the best drivers make mistakes from time to time, we have a right not to have that mistake turn into a fatal accident by someone speeding.
        sergiosgc 14y ago
        Point taken, you are right. However, on the other hand, the ease with which speed becomes the culprit often precludes better solutions. Two examples: A particular crosswalk in my city was a dark spot, accident wise. A common accident spot, resulting in deaths. Speed traps were, for years, commonly placed in the street, treating, I assume, the perceived cause of the accidents. Speed bumps followed. Years go by, accident rates don't go down. Then, finally specific street lighting is setup on the crosswalk: problem solved. The cause was not excess speed, but night visibility of the crosswalk. One of the worst mountain roads in Portugal, IP4, was for years considered plagued by speeding. Lots of police cruisers, both marked and stealth, patrolled the road, enforcing limits. Static speed traps the ensued. Accident rates stubbornly wouldn't go down. Then, finally, a brilliant mind decided to place plastic lane barriers preventing overtaking in prohibited zones. Problem solved! Speed was not the cause, dangerous overtake maneuvers were. Speed is an easy target. As such, it's a dangerous default as accident cause.
msellout 14y ago
Right, so there aren't any consequences of smoking, but only consequences of inhaling tar?

deleted 14y ago

[deleted]