Safe Speed Forums

But you yourself have said the two don't compare. You can't have it both ways weepej!

The fundamental questions that you keep missing:
Clearly motorways are the fastest roads. They're also the safest.
Does this not show that other factors besides 'speed' are at play, and that these other factors are dominant?

Your repeated evasion says it all!


Of course, but your earlier response allowed me to give that conclusion, therefore your response was faulty. Am I asking too much for you understand this simple point?


"But if it saves a life...."
So again returning to my fundamental questions:
Are we better off making roads safer, or slower?


Also, are you going to support the claim you made earlier as I have thrice requested, or evade yet again, again?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Are they making the same mistake that you made over and over again?


So we have:

Weepej, do you remember me asking you this question over and over again: what is safe enough?...

again, and again, and again, and again ....

Do you tire of me showing your attempted repeats of your previously failed arguments?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Quite often the discussion is on roads in general, and you 'urbanise' it as a counter to the motorway argument above. We're all as bad as each other!

Fascinating. What's that got to do with the fact that motorways are faster roads than others. Driving too close and too fast for the conditions are nothing to do with the posted limit or the free travelling speed in good conditions.

Next...

You mean saying that somebody who is tailgating is travelling too fast for the conditions they find themselves in because they are not driving at a speed which means they can stop in the distance they can know to be clear? And what of the person in front that crashes off first causing the tailgater to also fall off the road?

And we all know what 99% of tailgaters are trying to communicate to the person in front; "You're going too slow for my liking, I think you should go faster or at least get out of my way". I.e. it's speed related.



I certainly tire of you putting up some random links and making out that you won the argument each time without context! A very sly tactic.

We weren't talking about the posted limit there, I put the full context of the quote in to ensure it was clear what I was arguing against; Pete317 was asserting that all drivers slow down to a suitable speed when faced with hazards, which is clearly not the case.

...but I thought you said you wanted the motorway speed limit raised to 80?

I think "look we designed this part of the road, many years ago, so that cars of the time should have been able to achieve 50mph in good conditions, but any faster than that and they might have get into trouble because we weren't expecting them to go faster in those days" might be nearer the mark!

Incidentally, what do you think they say when they reduce a speed limit? Would it be:
"look, we cocked-up when we designed this part of the road, so we're lowering the limit, but don't worry, because we know we've got it right this time"!

Thought experiment:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thought_experiment

Which of these are risky:
- A motorway driver doing 80mph and leaving a 3 second gap
- A motorway driver doing 40mph and leaving a 3 second gap
- A motorway driver doing 80mph and leaving a 0.5 second gap
- A motorway driver doing 40mph and leaving a 0.5 second gap

Does the risk follow the speed, or the gap?

Do you still not understand the difference between 'too fast for the conditions' and 'too close for the conditions', or for you is it really all about ‘speed’ and absolutely nothing else?


Again you miss the obvious alternatives, such as 'inappropriate lane use'.


Very funny!
I will let the reader decide what points have been relevant and countered appropriately, and which have been evaded over and over again. The links to previously failed arguments will continue (they form part of a growing list).

Speaking of repeated evasion:
Clearly motorways are the fastest roads. They're also the safest.
Does this not show that other factors besides 'speed' are at play, and that these other factors are dominant?

Are we better off making roads safer, or slower?

Do you understand how I have was not “implicitly asserting … safest because fastest”?

Also, are you going to support the claim you made earlier as I have four times (there is nothing after thrice) requested, or evade yet again, again?

“The faster people go the more risk there is of crashes. People exceeding the speed limit are participating in the increased rate,”
Per unit distance driven, are those who go faster represented more in crashes than those who go slower?

Remember, this was the nub that started off the last half of this thread.

Of course, you could always retort that those were taken "without context" – what a "sly tactic"!
Do you think you have you "consensus" there too?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Which of these is more risky and why?

- A motorway driver doing 80mph and leaving a 0.5 second gap
- A motorway driver doing 40mph and leaving a 0.5 second gap



You mean: "I think you should not be in front of me, get out of my way"?

Now you're twisting people's words! I've read the whole thread and I can see nowhere where Pete317 said that all drivers slow down to a suitable speed. He did say:


For you to say that he is saying "all people/drivers..." is like saying the phrase "people eat cake" means that everyone eats cake.

Next...

So you don't agree with the principle of "keep to the left unless overtaking"?

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed

Ooookay, somebody doesn't follow that rule and sits in L3 at 60mph, does this make it OK to tailgate them to pass on the message that they should get out of your way?

Well done! Now can you address the question that immediately followed?






However you want to spin it is it "speed related"? (excessive speed or inappropriate speed)

How are the cherries you picked?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Looks like both from where I'm standing!

Ah! I know it by another name - "intellectual wa£*ing"! In this case, at least, a truly pointless excercise. Let's have another "thought experiement" shall we? Let's imagine the speed limit on motorways is 1MPH. Even fewer fatalities than at 30MPH? Aye, probaby (unless you count death by old age)!

Now, getting back to reality, as you have said that you want to see the motorway limit raised to 80 (and failed to answer my related questions on that), what's the point in you conducting your "thought experiment" at 30?

How can you possibly say that your didn't show the "A motorway driver doing 80mph and leaving a 3 second gap " as risky?

_________________
Views expressed are personal opinions and are not necessarily shared by the Safe Speed campaign

Which of these is more risky and why?

- A motorway driver doing 80mph and leaving a 0.5 second gap
- A motorway driver doing 40mph and leaving a 0.5 second gap

Don't you love answering questions with questions. Why not answer PeterE's?

I assume I'm right in saying that no one is encouraging tailgating, by the way. But then that's typical weepej to try and make it appear that someone has.