Thread: Road Safety or Revenue?

Originally Posted by Tombie

The causes have changed. Luckily vehicles tend to keep morons alive more often now.

The last 3 fatals around here were all distraction via mobile.

Accidents never have a single "cause". They are always the result of multiple factors as I pointed out above. In the cases mentioned phone use may have been a factor, but even in these cases, it is certain not to be the only factor.

Inattention is certainly a significant factor in many accidents, but even where a phone is being used, the issue is not the phone, but the inattention, and if a phone is not being used the same drivers are probably likely to feature in the statistics due to inattention anyway, whether it is fiddling with another gadget, yelling at the kids, or discussing the neighbor's crops with a passenger.

As Tote says, if they are such a major factor, why did the statistics keep dropping as phones went from rare to in every pocket? And fail to drop any faster when they were made illegal to use?

The police in Queensland used (may still) to have a tick list for they reason for the accident. No doubt to allow statics to be produced.

Some of these boxes were prefilled with the minimum percentage to be allocated to the cause. This would no doubt ensure these reasons kept a place in the table and would influence how the person filling in the form viewed their importance

Originally Posted by ramblingboy42

wanna get into a blue?

tell an aussie guy he's a lousy driver.

get's the hackles up real quick , doesn't it?

Barry Sheene ex 2 times motor bike champion once said "You can accuse Australians of most things, but being able to drive isn't one of them". Love it and oh so true.
AlanH.

Originally Posted by ATH

Barry Sheene ex 2 times motor bike champion once said "You can accuse Australians of most things, but being able to drive isn't one of them". Love it and oh so true.
AlanH.

After driving tour buses for many years I had so many Germans and Europeans asking me. Isn't the overtaking lane the right lane? I would reply yes, why you're correct. They would ask "why is this person in this lane when they aren't overtaking anyone?"
I'd usually reply with something like "they probably have to turn right 15k down the road" and that's usually the reason if you're not on a motorway
I actually rate Australians as completely amongst the absolute best and worst of the world in driving 😂

Speed cameras on highways are revenue raising coffers for the government if they were serious about road safety they would take them of the highways and put them where they could do some good like school zones. I am of the opinion that our speed limit should be 110km and the police should concentrate more on dangerous driving then the person a couple of ks over some speed limit as the speed limit changes many times as you drive around town my commute to work of a morning the speed limit changes 8 times in 6 ks.

Originally Posted by laney

Speed cameras on highways are revenue raising coffers for the government if they were serious about road safety they would take them of the highways and put them where they could do some good like school zones. I am of the opinion that our speed limit should be 110km and the police should concentrate more on dangerous driving then the person a couple of ks over some speed limit as the speed limit changes many times as you drive around town my commute to work of a morning the speed limit changes 8 times in 6 ks.

While concentrating on dangerous driving rather than speed, is certainly the way to go in theory, proving dangerous driving is much more difficult and open to dispute than a simple measurement of speed. This is why the emphasis on speed or, for that matter, phone use. It is a lot easier to prove. Same for alcohol - a much greater factor in road deaths than is either speed or phone use.

But it is difficult to see what either speed cameras or mobile phone cameras will do to reduce the most common cause of road deaths in NSW (and, I suspect, other states), which is a single vehicle leaving a two lane country road and hitting a tree in the early hours of Friday or Saturday morning, usually with a blood alcohol reading well above the legal limit. More spectacular ones such as the recent incidents when a (drunk, drugged or both) driver hits pedestrians or a truck runs into stationary traffic are the ones that make the news, but these are relatively rare. And neither of these would be impacted by speed or phone cameras either.

Interesting that, in Qld for 2021 so far, out of 32 deaths, 6 are pedestrians. This equates to nearly 20% of road deaths. No camera is going to stop that! (Not even a selfie!)

Also, to back up JD's comment about rural prangs, most deaths in Qld are in the Central and Northern regions, going by government stats.

Most death in WA seem to be single vehicle country accidents but the emphasis is mainly to be on speed in the metro or close to metro areas. Always the same old rant after yet another death.... "Speed was a factor". Of course it was unless the vehicle was parked, but what speed?
Was it some warp speed well above the limit or a small amount for a short duration during overtaking? A heinous crime here in WA although perfectly acceptable and quite safe when done correctly. Or was it the booze or distraction as others have suggested?
We'll never know I suspect as it's easy to just blame the one thing.
AlanH.