Thread: Does anyone ever obey the speed limit

Originally Posted by Mick_Marsh

Interestingly, I know a fellow who is involved in a group that advises a state government on roads policy.
He told me their group advises the government advanced driving courses should be made available to reduce the road toll. The government is against the idea as they think it would encourage drivers to take more risks and increase the road toll.

Yes, I've heard that argument before. I think it ignores the reality of human behavior. Driver training should not be designed to create racing drivers, it should be about safe operation of a dangerous machine in a fluid environment. Most people don't set out to kill themselves or others.
We require people to get a medical degree to become doctors, but that doesn't turn them into knife-wielding homicidal maniacs. We require people to do pilot training before they fly airplanes, but how many crash planes into the World Trade Centre?
Better training should produce safer drivers.

Originally Posted by Eevo

hell no.
we could all drive around and 25km/h and there be no accidents.
doesnt mean good driving at all.

good driving should be about achieving your driving goal as quick as possible with safety in mind.

whats your driving goal? for most people its to get from A to B.
doing this quickly mean being efficient on a large scale.
how do you reduce congestion... by reducing traffic
how do you reduce traffic... by getting cars off the road
how do you get cars off the road... by getting them to their destination quickly.

That assumes that everyone is only on the road to get from A to B and assumes no one actually enjoys driving in the first place. I spend a lot of time driving actually enjoying the drive - even at work, so I have no interest in getting there quickly. It took me 6 days to drive to Melrose this year - a trip I can do in a day if I wanted (and have done - but not in a 101... )

Does this make me a bad driver?

Oh, and I seem to remember reading somewhere about a company that put it's drivers through defensive driving courses following a spate of accidents which were not their fault. Problem solved. Makes you wonder doesn't it? After all.There are a lot of safe drivers out there who never have accidents, but my goodness they see a lot.
Cheers, Billy.

Originally Posted by cuppabillytea

Absolutely true. I don't know about the Four Wheel Breaks either but it certainly was the case for Disc Breaks and radial tiers . Another Factor would be the improvement in Vehicle design.
It would be interesting to see what impact the (improvement) in speed policing has had.
Cheers, Billy.

Monash University has used insurance company data to look at accident histories for different model vehicles, and their data shows very little correlation between the safety history of a vehicle and the safety of design. To take an extreme example of this, the record of the Subaru WRX, fitted with just about every safety feature you can think of, has a much worse record than large four wheel drives of all types, which are generally short on safety features and fare badly in rollover accidents. And despite the much better handling and brakes the Subaru has a far higher rate of accidents of all types.

In this case the reason is fairly clear - the Subaru is the joyride and getaway car of choice! I suspect the same pattern applies with less emphasis to all cars - the major accident risk is the driver, and so the accident risk of a particular model is very largely determined by the type of driver that model attracts, regardless of the design.

John

Originally Posted by DiscoMick

..........
Better training should produce safer drivers.

It should - but consider; according to statistics recently published by NSW police, random drug tests of drivers have shown up to 30% are affected, and if you compare the proportion of random breath tests positive (<1%) with the number of those testing positive in post accident tests (>25%), it would seem to me that spending the money on educating drivers not to drink and drive and not to drive while drug affected would seem to be a better use of the money rather than to teach them to drive.

My feeling is that most 'bad' drivers really do know how to drive - they just are not doing so, whether because of attitude, or what they have been drinking, smoking or injecting. I have to be rather doubtful what educating them how to drive will do to improve this.

John

Originally Posted by cuppabillytea

Oh, and I seem to remember reading somewhere about a company that put it's drivers through defensive driving courses following a spate of accidents which were not their fault. Problem solved. Makes you wonder doesn't it? After all.There are a lot of safe drivers out there who never have accidents, but my goodness they see a lot.
Cheers, Billy.

Anecdotally I can confirm that, as it happened at the job I just left. We had 30 plus sales reps on the road in Melbourne, and due to the number of incidents, fines and complaints being made all of us were put through a defensive driving course (I've got a pretty little certificate to add to my collection).

6 months after the course was rolled out, the numbers of all the above issues had dropped significantly.

Could be coincidence, but work were happy with the money spent (coming from a tight arse company) so at least in this small case, it worked.

Originally Posted by bacicat

That assumes that everyone is only on the road to get from A to B and assumes no one actually enjoys driving in the first place. I spend a lot of time driving actually enjoying the drive - even at work, so I have no interest in getting there quickly. It took me 6 days to drive to Melrose this year - a trip I can do in a day if I wanted (and have done - but not in a 101... )

99% of people are going from A to B.
rarely is anyone going from A to A.

Originally Posted by bacicat

Does this make me a bad driver?

no, being a victorian makes you a bad driver...

Originally Posted by Eevo

hell no.
we could all drive around and 25km/h and there be no accidents.

As you well know, South Aussies drive around at 25km/h and manage to have accidents. (Usually involving overtaking on double white lines.)

Originally Posted by Eevo

no, being a victorian makes you a bad driver...

Victorians are not bad drivers, they are angry, aggressive drivers.
Probably caused by being so close to South Australia.