The road toll is our fault

Also to be considered is if / when everything does wrong and you find
yourself swerving, sliding sideways, going off the road, or hitting another
vehicle, are your chances of avoiding, regaining control, rolling, or
surviving adversely affected by an extra 20kph?

20 kph can easily make the difference between survival &
paraplegic/vegetable/dead of you and maybe up to a dozen other involved
people in an impact.

 

The alternative of having different limits for different grade licences is
not really workable, so as in everything in society limits are set for
average drivers not aus.cars grade drivers, because most people here are
motor enthusists, so without ever seeing them in action I would have to
assume would possess skills above the average, motorist, (how they apply
them is a different matter).

Limits are designed for people who believe cars are just a basic tool to get
from A to B and don't know what a bearing even looks like. People in their
50's like my mum & dad, early 20's drivers, soccer mums, fruit truck drivers
etc.

So the limit is set for the majority, if they really wanted it to be safer
they could drop the limit to the bottom 20%'s ability and really piss the
majority off too, but at the moment it is only the top 10% who are unhappy.

Some people could also argue they can drive fine at 3 beers reading .05 so
why isn't the limit raised to .07?

Some P plate motorcyclists could handle a 750cc bike safely, so why is there
a 250cc limit, when some riders can't handle that even?

Some people could be trusted to carry a gun on the street, so why aren't we
all allowed to?

Which are "needs" & which are just "wants"?

 

I agree. You would have to have people displaying "E" plates for expert
or something and cops have a hard enough time as it is without first
having to sort experts from ordinaries before pulling people over.

I still like the German idea of training people properly and then giving
them freer reign. Seems to work for them.

But apparently in NSW there's a six-week delay to book in to sit for
your driving test, and the backlog is increasing, so could the system
cope with more stringent training? Doubtful.

 

Trouble with training is it has to be refreshed, 20years on it will mean
squat, a lot of 19yo may just get overconfident too, free reign is
dangerous, what about tourists, infrequent & elderly drivers, do they still
get free reign?

 

Do they in Germany?

 

Don't know would they here?
If there are no speed limits, what would they assume is the limit?

 

Not for years and only padock use, but I've seen plenty of near misses
involving teleporting ones.

 

I agree, I have no desire or the skills to ride a bike in traffic.

The keeping away from other vehicles theory works even in cars & trucks and
can also be applied by slowing your speed as well as increasing.

But ducking & weaving through traffic at twice the other vehicles speeds,
gives plenty of average drivers good reason to say, "I didn't see you!"
after they lane change into them.

 

Shouldn't really need to say this but it is our fault. Yes, the roads
are mostly shit, and speed limits are not always reasonable. When the
majority of crashes and fatalities are caused by fatigue, DUI, etc.
how can you not say it is the fault of the drivers?

Speed enforcement won't stop crashes, because people will still drive
fatigued and/or drunk, tailgate, not give way when required etc.
Reducing speeds just reduces fatalities, which is all that matters to
the pollies coz it makes them feel good (they think it makes them
_look_ good but we all know better). Speed is almost always listed as
a factor in fatalities because if the offender/s were travelling
slower, it's likely that it wouldn't have been fatal.

If you get fatigued while driving, how is it the fault of anyone else
but you? Get more sleep, or stop more frequently, or drive something
which doesn't put you to sleep.

 

Unless everyone did both they would never be aware and that isn't going to
happen.

Exactly how are they going to notice a bike weaving though 30kph traffic at
60kph

 

And that would be 90% of them which is why you would be better to take it
easy so that you know they've seen you rather than assume they have.




After all a

 

Yep ask some ambo's or hospital emergency staff on how their workload would
be with higher limits.

 

Whilst that is all true it doesn't invalidate the comments about some
people getting drowsier at 100 than at say 120.

It is a factor to take into consideration when determining at what speed
the potential fatality risk factors are at a minmum for the majority of
the population.

That is to say... at what travelling speed are the resultant risks (when
aggregated) at a minimum.

My belief is that 110 on non divided roads and 120/130 on divided roads
is probably closer than the 100 on non divided roads and 110 on divided
roads that we have at the moment.

As for the extra impact caused by higher speed accidents... well we
haven't even mandated twin air bags, let alone side curtain ones, ABS
and traction control in all new cars, let alone introduced plans to more
rapidly phase out cars that are less safe.

That would I expect have more impact in reducing the road toll than any
slight alterations to the speed limits anyway.


G-S

 

Heh heh; they can also tell whether the bike's rider has a multitude of
personality disorders! (i.e. Wannabe American, wanker, wannabe Rossi,
Hell's Accountant etc..)

 

Cops shouldn't need "E" plates. Most experts stand out like the
proverbial with just a minute or two of observation in typical
traffic mix.

There'll be fewer people to test at any time.

That would be the case especially if the professional driving
instructors had to sign their name on a certificate stating that the
candidate was ready to go solo. A candidate wouldn't be able to go
for a "final" test until they had such a certificate.

Driver testing must be more variable to frustrate simply "simply
teaching candidates to pass the test.

If you can't afford to learn to drive, then you can't afford to
drive.

 

I do patterned mirror checks on a regular timed basis (as recommended in
the road safety training manuals), and I have for over 25 years.

Every 15 seconds or so I flick my eyes to the mirrors when driving (yes
all 3).

Most people when asked only use them for diverging or reversing.


G-S

 

That's why I drive cars with good safety impact ratings by preference.

To be honest I'd rather be in a car with good crash performance and
front and side airbags at 120 than an old dunger at 100...

 

I'm not sure it is unworkable in certain ways. One could make the
inside lane on say the multi lane freeways like the hume 'gold licence
only' (to coin a term).

And only allow drivers who had a clean record and who had passed a more
difficult test and who were driving cars with superior crash performance
to use it.

Lowest common denominator licensing. Why not raise the testing standard
and retest people every 10 years and require cars to be off the road by
say 15 years max (unless on classic or club plates).

I would prefer to see the limit at 0.00% for everyone since evidence
points to some degredation in reactions at any alcohol content.

LAMS allows 650cc bikes for learners, Q Ride allows larger bikes for
riders. Q ride requires a clean record, experience and a harder test
(which is the sort of thing I would have designed if I'd been asked
*approving look*).

Provided that reasonable standards are met then we should be. Many
places in fact allow this (not Australia... well not anymore anyway).

Needs are those things basic to life. Wants should be allowed until and
unless the execution of those wants proves that the individual isn't fit
to excercise them.

Of course the nanny state would prefer banning the 'want'


G-S

 

It works well I agree

Increase the cost of the testing and companies will come out of the
woodwork to make $ out of it. The extra $ would be conditional on
significant extra training.

Training should be about as indepth to get a car licence as it is to get
a day time VFR plane licence as a base standard I would expect.

Some people wouldn't pass I can hear you saying? Well sure... but the
average standard of those passing would be much higher in such a
competency based training system.


G-S

 

Of course not!

Tourists have to display a black "T" in a large, red circle with
white background on the roof, front and read of the car, along with
a chartreuse flashing/rotating beacon on the roof. They are also
restricted to 80 km/h maximum speed, banned from the Autobahn and
can only hire cars that are specially restricted.

Pensioners are similarly affected, except that they have an "R" on
the sticker with a magenta beacon and novice drivers have a "?" and
a violet beacon.

All the pretty colours of the Rainbow for the Worrier.