Could the emphasis on not speeding be causing more crashes?

[GTofuS-T]

48 minutes ago, Anfanee said:

80 hours logged driving on the road (with proof of different speed zone driving)

It wouldn't matter what the zone was because they're physically limiting them to 80km/h anyway... which adds another element of danger when you've got these other dickheads not accepting that these L & P platers are limited to 80 and driving like dickheads to get around them..

But I agree, the first time I went on the motorway somehow was during my exam

 

This is now becoming more and more clear as the main cause of incidents

1 hour ago, dyl33 said:

It's not speed, it's people....asshats everywhere.

 

[Anfanee]

Oh sorry yeah didn't mention that, remove the 80km/h speed limit. It is flat out dangerous having cars on a freeway doing 30km/h faster than you are. 

[niZmO_Man]

Scrap the whole testing thing and then copy Germany's system. Of course that won't happen, because it'll mean actual, real work for the RMS :P. I guess it might differ state to state, but it's piss easy to get a license in NSW. Hell I've seen "driving instructors" with bad driving (I waste my time/money with one).

Throw everyone into a VR room and a driving simulator, then take them out onto a skid pan. Teach them about car maintenance and how it affects their safety. Not this "slow down, slam your brakes if you see a cop on the other side of the highway" crap.

[blind_elk]

Anyone ever considered all this "technology" they're putting in cars now. I mean, a car that parks itself!! WTF!! When I got my licence (in the trusty Model T), if you couldn't parallel park, you didn't get a licence. And AEB!! Again, WTF!! Read a report - can't testify to the truthfulness - of a motorist on the freeway; a bird flew in front of the car and the AEB activated! Luckily not being followed by a Kenworth!

My 32 has ABS. I have activated it twice (once on the racetrack, once being a hoon out the back of Werribee). I learned to threshold brake (in a non-ABS car), and I am skilled / observant / aware enough that I don't get into situations where I need to panic stop.

All this technology is dumbing down the populace to a point where drivers now consider themselves invincible, and drivers no longer need to DRIVE - they think the car will do it all for them.

And what about all these "mistook the accelerator for the brake" incidents? How do you make such a simple mistake? And having made the mistake, how can you be so incompetent as to not be able to rectify the mistake? My daily is an auto Pathfinder - never, ever mistake the accelerator for the brake.

We need to be more ruthless in awarding licences.

[Anfanee]

Again ill point out its harder to get a license now than it ever has been. The issue is the people that got their license back in the day.

[Sinista32]

I've said it before and I'll repeat it here. Solution = 12 months on a motorcycle prior to license for driving a car.

• Concentration & anticipation
• Speeds are better understood as your not surrounded by a perceived metal bubble.
• Caution is better practiced due to consequences.
• Immediate consequences and only one casualty (in most cases)
• No distractions (i.e. Texting, mates in the vehicle)
• Drink/Drug riding sorts itself out on the bitumen. (Again generally only a single casualty)

Although dumb arse numpty's are just that be it on a bike or in a car.

But if they die before they drive a car then the rest of the community will be safer and better off  

[Sinista32]

Sorry ^ rant slightly off topic

But yes the emphasis on not speeding in my opinion is causing more crashes.

Our teachings as a nanny and PC correct nation removes responsibility from individuals and they stop thinking. We've designed and continually improved safety features on cars to think for us, reduced speed limits and in the process made the population even dumber.

Reduce the speed so people have more time to loose focus and supposedly reduce deaths. Umm sorry it's not working - fatality's are increasing!

[blind_elk]

I actually just read the article. Might I now present a case that debunks the whole theory.

A few years ago, 2 enforcers of this law were involved in incidents mere weeks apart. One was the then Victorian Police Commissioner Ken Lay, the other the then Victorian Police Minister Bob Cameron. Ken Lay got nabbed for speeding, yet he wasn't involved in a collision. Cameron was involved in a collision, yet wasn't speeding. By his own admission, Cameron crashed because he wasn't paying attention to the task at hand, namely controlling a motor vehicle.

I will admit to a number of incidents where I exceeded the posted speed limit. Not in any one of those instances was I involved in a collision, not even close.

When the Victorian government and TAC started promulgating this "speed kills" theory, there were a number of television ads. One showed a woman travelling in slowish traffic on the Tulla freeway. She pulls into the emergency lane and accelerates to 110, only to find some sucker changing a flat tyre. Speed had nothing to do with the fact that she killed that sucker, it was pure impatience (she would have killed him at 60, or even less). Another ad showed a youngish girl lamenting that she has killed her best friend. Sure, she was exceeding the speed limit a bit, but she was also attempting the change a cassette tape in the car. Speed had little to do with the death, more it was pure inattention.

However, as much as I resent the attention paid to this subject, I feel that the "eyes glued to the speedo" argument is a bit of a furphy. You only need to glance every now and then, as you glance at lots of other things while driving in order to assess what is happening and what dangers may be about to present themselves. The eyes should be continually scanning the environment, not simply glued to the road ahead, or the speedo, or the hot chick walking on the footpath. If the eyes are always moving focus, you can gauge your speed in relation to the surroundings, with only the occasional glance back to the speedo to confirm. All part of being a competent driver.

[Dobz]

Agree with the above apart for an aspect of the last paragraph.

While people certainly don't need to glue their eyes to the speedo it happens so much because of the authorities demonising speed and implementing costly penalties. I can bet you the most dangerous place to be caught on the road would be right where a know speed camera is. As long as the authorities keep pushing their speed agenda people will keep on looking at the speedo more than they need to. 

Good would be the day the TAC changes it's tune to "inattention kills".

 

[Gymkhana]

In my opinion, all we need is a better testing/learning system when first going for your licence. As someone else said, we're taught how to pass a test, not drive a car. I was actually surprised at how little I had to do on my learners test, I wasn't even required to do any form of parking. It's that simple.. better testing. Speed cameras and more fines/penalties are not the answer.

Slightly off-topic, but the P plate laws are ridiculous in Victoria. P platers should have a log book and have a certain amount of hours required rather than the 4 year restriction currently in place. A P plater driving 1000KM a week is going to be a much better driver than a P plater driving their car maybe once a week and getting their full license at the same time. 

Australias entire system is flawed but it'll never change, the revenue the government raises is far too valuable for them.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Gymkhana

[blind_elk]

On 02/12/2016 at 10:43 AM, PranK said:

This is another good quote;

The never-repeated 20-year-old study assessed 148 crashes in suburban Adelaide in 1996 and concluded that: “In a 60km/h speed limit area, the risk of involvement in a casualty crash doubles with each 5km/h increase in free travelling speed above 60km/h”.

Its not the risk of being involved in a casualty crash that doubles, it is IF you are involved in a crash then the risk that there will be a casualty doubles. First you have to have the crash, then consideration can be given as to whether or not  there might be a casualty.

My experience - I have NEVER been involved in a crash where excessive speed was ever a causative factor; every crash I have ever been in occurred at below the prevailing speed limit.

[GTR-N1]

Has Speeding Been Responsible For More Road Deaths in NSW in 2016?

I know that this is a different  (albeit related) question: but I'm approaching this thread from a different perspective.

I'm asserting that if there's a criterion behind speed, it's alcohol, illicit drugs and inattention  (due to texting/talking on phones).

Why?

Because in 2016, boat related deaths are up by 24%. So I'm joining some dots from another angle.

[Steve85]

Here in Melbourne the focus has been on three things for a number of years; dont speed, dont drink and dont be on your phone. Unfortunately this combination has led people to believe that they are fantastic drivers as long as they arent doing any of the above.
What it has led to, is an entire state driving around with their attention anywhere but the road.
You see it everywhere, cars judt wandering all over the road, no f**ks given about other road users and tailgating like they believe if they get close enough their car will pass right through yours.
I'd love to see the stats on low speed, no injury crashes. I guarantee these will have increased disproportionally to number of drivers on the road.