Mark Scaife calls for 140km/h limit on VIC freeways
in [Aussie Drivers]
|
Prev: I aint old by choice
Next: Skaife makes a valid point applicable to all of Oz ( now tell mewhy the govco wont block it)
From: the fonz on 18 Jun 2010 21:43 On Jun 15, 10:15 pm, st3ph3nm <s...(a)hotmail.com> wrote: > > > australia is pretty much on the OECD average at 0.7 deaths per hundred > > million vehicle kilometres. again, when skaife talked about how "it's > > not working" i'm unsure what he meant. you can also see from that > > report that Vic, with the most strict enforcement regime, has a lower > > fatality rate than other states. > > >http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/2009/pdf/r... > > You're looking at National figures, where improvements in safety are > arguably accounted for by improvements in safety engineering in more > modern vehicles. If we're only average by OECD standards, the > draconian speed enforcement tactics are clearly not working. In > Victoria for example, (which Skaife is talking about) in 2001 - 2002 > the road toll increased by 10%, whilst speeding apparently was reduced > (according to the Vic Police at the time) by 25%. Which sadly was > hailed by authorities as a success! actually australia's figures are very good. our road environment is far more challenging than most OECD countries. a large proportion of australian fatalities are on rural roads with very poor safety (i.e. broken shoulders and trees in close proximity). australia also has an older vehicle fleet than OECD countries - so our success is not explained by more modern vehicles. the fact we are on a par with the OECD average is remarkable and really only explained by enforced driver behaviour. if you compare our figures (0.7 deaths per hundred million vehicle kilometres) with NZ (1.1) this becomes clearer. NZ's road conditions are more similar to ours than most other OECD nations (i.e. more challenging), they also have an older vehicle fleet and they have lax enforcement. the result is disastrous. the arguments put forward by people like Skaife are uninformed and based on 'seat of the pants' opinions driven by ulterior motives (i.e. enjoyment of driving fast). the link in my previous post went haywire: http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roads/safety/publications/2009/pdf/rsr_05.pdf
From: D Walford on 19 Jun 2010 03:04 On 19/06/2010 11:43 AM, the fonz wrote: > the arguments put forward by people like Skaife are uninformed and > based on 'seat of the pants' opinions driven by ulterior motives (i.e. > enjoyment of driving fast). Have a read of his comments in Fridays Cars Guide found in many newspapers like the Herald Sun. Most of what he said was about improving driver training and attitude, increasing speed limits on the 3 roads in Vic he mentioned was a minor side issue but of course the media Police and Govt predictably jumped at it and ignored the rest. Whether or not the big increase in road fatalities in Vic is a statistical anomaly or not doesn't change the fact that there has been a big increase (3 more on Friday) so its clear that more needs to be done other than just increasing already draconian speed enforcement. It is plainly obvious that more of the same is simply not working. Daryl
From: the fonz on 19 Jun 2010 04:40 On Jun 19, 5:04 pm, D Walford <dwalf...(a)internode.on.net> wrote: > Whether or not the big increase in road fatalities in Vic is a > statistical anomaly or not doesn't change the fact that there has been a > big increase (3 more on Friday) so its clear that more needs to be done > other than just increasing already draconian speed enforcement. > It is plainly obvious that more of the same is simply not working. i just watched on the news the aftermath of one crash in which two people died in a turbo rx-7 that lost control and hit a pole. you don't need to think to hard to guess what the driver was up to. this sort of accident occurs time and time again - we've all seen them on the news. you can't say all accidents are the same, but generally speaking, it's not your mum on the way to the shops in her 4 cyl. Camry who's dying, it's her son in his fully done turbo 200SX. changing behaviour is known to be a mix of education and enforcement. i agree we need more driver education, but it's clear that a lot of the drivers who are dying have hardened attitudes towards driving, that mere education won't fix. drive along Sydney Road in Coburg on a friday night and they are out in force. that's why they target speed and if that's what it takes to get these idiots off the road, i'm fine with it.
From: D Walford on 19 Jun 2010 05:30 On 19/06/2010 6:40 PM, the fonz wrote: > changing behaviour is known to be a mix of education and enforcement. > i agree we need more driver education, but it's clear that a lot of > the drivers who are dying have hardened attitudes towards driving, > that mere education won't fix. drive along Sydney Road in Coburg on a > friday night and they are out in force. that's why they target speed > and if that's what it takes to get these idiots off the road, i'm fine > with it. The problem with that is speed is only one factor in the cause of crashes, you can exceed the speed limit safely by a big margin in some circumstances but driving at the speed limit can be dangerous in others. I don't know if there are any published figures but I'd be amazed if a lot of fatalities aren't occurring at or below the speed limit. High speed crashes which result in fatalities make the TV news but they aren't the whole problem, if we somehow eliminated that type of crash involving young drivers, powerful cars and excessive speed we would still have many fatalities. The heavy enforcement seems to be failing because the numbers of those types of crashes is increasing, if targeted enforcement was working then they would be reducing. I don't think its possible to completely eliminate the idiot factor but education would at least show these people what the likely result of their idiocy might be so they might be less inclined to behave like idiots. Daryl
From: st3ph3nm on 19 Jun 2010 19:12
On Jun 19, 6:40 pm, the fonz <arthur.fonzzare...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jun 19, 5:04 pm, D Walford <dwalf...(a)internode.on.net> wrote: > > > Whether or not the big increase in road fatalities in Vic is a > > statistical anomaly or not doesn't change the fact that there has been a > > big increase (3 more on Friday) so its clear that more needs to be done > > other than just increasing already draconian speed enforcement. > > It is plainly obvious that more of the same is simply not working. > > i just watched on the news the aftermath of one crash in which two > people died in a turbo rx-7 that lost control and hit a pole. you > don't need to think to hard to guess what the driver was up to. this > sort of accident occurs time and time again - we've all seen them on > the news. Yes, the news. The news is always going to sensationalise these big accidents. Sad as they are, they're relatively uncommon compared to, say, collisions on country roads caused by fatigue (either head ons or single vehicles leaving the road). > > you can't say all accidents are the same, but generally speaking, it's > not your mum on the way to the shops in her 4 cyl. Camry who's dying, > it's her son in his fully done turbo 200SX. So why are we getting so hung up on 5kph infringements that specifically target the mum in her camry, rather than stupid behaviour aimed at the son? Oh yeah, that'd be because it's more profitable to put a camera beside the road to the shops, than put more cops on the road. And it's politically dangerous to make driver training, licencing and testing more stringent. > Cheers, Steve |