🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <1992Jul16.173708.14300@srg.srg.af.mil> dpipes@spica.srg (Dave Pipes x4552) writes:

[stuff deleted]

   What ever happened to "The faster you go, the harder you hit"?  What about
   the *results* of adding 10 miles per hour to the impact speed of an
   accident?  Why is the result less important than the "probabilities" of
   being hit?

Umm...you're a gamer...I think you can figure this out.  I'll give you
an atomic toothpick that does infinte amount of damage when it hits
someone.  But it hits only once every million times you swing it.  I
take a baseball bat.  I hit you lots more than once every million time
(actually maybe not...I always sucked at baseball ;-)...wanna see who
falls down first?  Granted something of a degenerate scenario but I
think that getting hit less often is much better than getting smacked
more often at 10 mph less closing speed.

   When somebody convinces me that the accident fatality rate will drop if
   we increase speed, I will support such an increase.  Given the record
   of the Autobahn, I sort of doubt that such an argument can be made...

Hmmn...I suspect that the Autobahn has even worse problems with speed
differentials.  I doubt anyone really wants unlimited speed limits on
a day to day basis (I'd like to try it once in Germany ;-) but how
about going the speed roads were designed to go and strictly enforcing
all driving regulations (like yielding, turn signals, tailgating, etc)?

To twist a phrase "drive smarter not slower".  At any rate the
statement above is simply means that you will never support faster
speeds period to which the logical response is don't drive...0 mph
wins hands down safety wise.  What if someone could show that with
technology X you can drive 70 and be at less risk than at 55 before
technology X came along?  In which case 70 mph might "suddenly become
safer".


			   David Pipes
   robear@digex.com

Nigel
--
Nigel Tzeng
.sig under construction