🚀 go-pugleaf

E. Faubion wrote:

>grimrod@mindless.com (Brandon Sommerville) wrote:
>
>>If the old wife was a mathematician named Julie Anna Cirillo, then
>>you're absolutely right.
>
>Then this superb mathematician should be able to provide a computer
>program that supports the faster-is-safer theory.   Where is it?

a) what does being a mathematician have to do with programming, and b)
the data supports the theory that those moving 10 to 15 mph faster
than the average speed of traffic are involved in the fewest
accidents.

>>Since very few people know about the study, that logic doesn't stand.
>
>It salves the conscience of those who like to drive fast and that's
>all it does.   Try using it in a court of law to support your driving
>37 mph in a 25 mph zone after you've run over a child a see how far it
>goes.  

If you can show me an interstate signed at 25 mph we'll have a case
for it.  In 25 mph zones with kids playing and parked cars limiting
visibility I rarely move at 25 mph, often I'm at 20.

>For that matter, show me a single case where it's been used
>successfully as a defense for speeding anywhere in this country.

Defending a speeding ticket isn't about proving you were safe, it's
about proving you didn't break the law or that the law was misapplied,
big difference.  And speed limits are going up, so the courts are
acknowledging that higher speeds are not the risk that some people
(not mentioning any names to protect your innocence) claim.

>>The study best holds true (like any similar study) when people are
>>unaware of it or do not modify their driving styles to compensate for
>>it.  For those of us who habitually travel 10 to 15 mph faster than
>>the average, it is just a pleasant confirmation of something that
>>we've suspected for years.
>
>We can always implement this theory by starting an experiment on the
>street where Brandon lives.  For the sake of argument let's assume
>Brandon has children who like to play on his front lawn.  Assuming the
>current speed limit is 25 mph and the average speeds equal the limit
>then we'd all have to drive 37 mph to be 'safe'.  But now the average
>speed goes up so we've got to drive faster and faster.... oh, never
>mind.  It's only Brandon's kiddies at risk so that doesn't matter does
>it?
>
>One has to be truly blind and gullible to believe this nonsense.   I'm
>truly surprised even you would bite on it.

Why is it when we talk about interstate speeds you always bring up
children playing?

>>You never did explain to me why it is ok
>>for the NHTSA to include "speed too slow for conditions" in their
>>speed related numbers to demonstrate the dangers of exceeding speed
>>limits, care to take a stab at it now? (wait, I know, snip snip snip!)
>
>Why don't you ask the good folks at NHTSA?  I have no idea.

I've tried, but there was no response.  I figured since you knew that
speed was so dangerous and since you support the NHTSA's position, you
could defend it.  Silly me.

>In the meantime I'll restate a challenge I made a long time ago and
>that no one could take up.  Find a single bona fide accident
>investigator anywhere who believes driving faster is safer or that
>speed doesn't kill.  Until you can do that *and* provide the name of
>this person(s) your arguments are just so much hot air.  Go for it.

An accident investigator really couldn't tell me what I need to know.
All he can tell me is that higher speeds mean more damage in an
accident, which is something I've never denied.  He can't prove to me
that exceeding the speed limit by a reasonable amount means I'm more
likely to be involved in that accident because it simply isn't true.

Perhaps you could find a traffic engineer who recommends setting speed
limits below the 85th percentile for safety reasons?

You are in the unfortunate position of dealing with those who have
crashed and you don't see the people going by at high rates of speed
in safety.
-- 
Brandon

"Spooooooooooonnnnn!"