Did you recently take on (or consider) a loan of 84 months or longer on a car purchase?
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
A reporter would like to speak with you about your experience; please reach out to PR@Edmunds.com by 7/25 for details.
Options
Comments
It has been demonstrated long ago that exceeding speed limits has never been the cause of accidents. Going at an excessive speed *in a given situation* is the cause, when it's not plain inattention. The only institution which doesn't seem to understand that is the government. That's particularly true in France. Italy has got a clue, at least, since the speed limit is now 95mph (instead of 80) on 3-lane highways. And since then the accident rates haven't increased or decreased.
To the credit of Italian drivers anyway, they may drive like crazy but they drive well. They ALWAYS pay attention. Having driven in Naples, where traffic lights are merely seen as decorations, I can witness that. They're probably the best drivers in Europe after the ultradisciplined Germans.
Example:
I head out of town Thanksgiving day, following the same route I take to work, at about 9am. Traffic is extremely light. Yet I see 6 squad cars in that 20 mile stretch. Why? Safety?
Couldn't be safety - traffic is light. They are out there because they know people are travelling for the holidays, and it is the perfect opportunity to make some money.
If they were truly concerned about safety, they would be in the exact same spot any weekday during rush hour, when there are indeed safety issues.
Of course, that would necessitate hiring more police officers.
The easy way, recoup the investment... I think you see what I mean...
The hard way, think long-term and save the money wasted in accidents, by actually placing them where it is needed...
Unfortunately, the easy way seems to be systematically preferred. That has been the case in France for countless years.
But I figure others read these threads, and maybe a few will have open minds and think about what is said. Like many others I came here several years ago with traffic safety in mind (it even influenced my original handle.) I had the mindset "how can you possibly defend speeding, with >40,ooo deaths on the highway each year.
Over time it dawned on me that the two facts (mass speeding and traffic fatalities) aren't necessarily directly connected... at least not as linearly as we are told. I have read, and listened and done my research, and now I think I am getting a better picture than those who support lockstep obedience.
"If 40,000 people say a stupid thing, it's still a stupid thing." (Confuscious)
The pure fact of the matter is that fully 80% of all traffic fatalities occur under the "speed" of 45 mph !!!! So much for "safe" arbitrary speeds.
Do you also remember when the national speed limit was 55 mph?
When there was a proposal to put that up to 65,70 75MPH the feds predicted unparrallel CARNAGE!
Not only did the cumulative death fatalities not go up, but in fact it stayed the same and started to go down. Also the per capita miles driven way way up. MEANING? It was actually SAFER per mile driven !!
Now keep in mind that higher speed limits categorically DO NOT preclude ANYONE from going 45,50,60 mph if one feels that is safer!! The law does say however :keep right except to pass. Or slower traffic keep right.
I remember when I visited Taiwan several years ago. Who needs roller coasters when you have Asian taxi drivers for all your thrills and heart-stopping moments?
Taxi Driver(while facing the passengers seated behind him, one hand on wheel, moving at around 45 mph through intersection filled with cars pointed every which way, bicycles, scooters, pedestrians, more gimpy, 3-legged dogs than I have ever seen in my life; while smiling and calmly facing us (ie facing backwards)): "We have the BEST drivers in the world!!"
I swear I wouldn't last 10 minutes driving in any major Asian city. Oddly enough, through all the chaos and insanity, I saw very few accidents (just a lot of aforementioned gimpy strays wandering about). If everyone drives like a maniac, then it all just sort of reaches a fragile equilibrium.
I certainly would NOT say that U.S. has the best drivers by a long shot. However, I will say that traffic rules (with the exception of speed limits) are obeyed much more consistently here. People stop at lights. People will more-or-less wait their turn at 4-way stop signs. People actually PULL OVER for ambulances and other emergency vehicles.
My understanding is that the relationship between higher speed limits and accident rates is still unknown. Studies/results from monitoring are vastly inconsistent and inconclusive. In many states, raising the limit increased accident rates. In other states, raising the limit had no effect or even LOWERED the accident rate.
Sorry, can't remember the source.
I used to have the link for the NTS National Traffic Safety Board (a gov agency) that documents what I have said. Also the insurance industry has one that documents among many things the actual accidents and fatalities etc. The good news and the bad news is that they kept the real statistics even though it did not match their dire warnings.
There is a thread call I don't like SUV's why do you? I am sure a perusal of the 28,000 plus or so postings will yield some and more of the links I have given reference.
Just as long as there aren't three "law abiding" drivers, side by side in the right, center and left lanes, there really isn't a risk.
It is a good thing that the fed agencys can do VOODOO experimental design, and explain that it was some gremlin that skewed the results.Remember they hypothesize carnage, ie MORE fatalities!!!! You might might want to review "null hypothesis" to see how it is EXACTLY the opposite direction of the empirical hypothesis !!
Another kicker was during this time there was a surge in buying SUVs and we all know how much "more dangerous" that is!!???
So during this time frame we had: 1 more people buying "more dangerous SUV's" ie predicting more carnage 2.The speed limit going from 55 mph to 60,65,70,75 mph 3. More cars driving more miles (per capita. So in that sense of 3 variables MORE "CARNAGE" should have easily won!! As you have even said not CLEARLY the case at all.
Which brings me to the question are they just waiting to gather only the data that supports the GREATER CARNAGE VIEW? Plainly, that would be called cooking the data!! I think they are probably content to leave the new speed limit and go after new goblins to try to scare us with.
A long line of vehicles cannot travel at the same speed for long.
Harry
Of course it upsets everyone else. But not nearly as much as the family of the deceased.
TB
A former OIC, Signal Corps
Try searching on Google for "geopolitical message boards"
PF Flyer
Host
Pickups & News & Views Message Boards
People - use your signal and actually turn your heads to LOOK.
IMO, failure to signal and look when changing lanes should be an automatic failure for obtaining a license.
So what is wrong with Capuccino?
I am always looking for them.
Brian: Defensive driving is JOB ONE
I think people in SUV's in general don't tend to understand these things. They're mostly in the vehicle that they're in because they don't like Minivans or station wagons. This is where you get you high speed blowouts and rollovers. This is what happens when someone figured if they could drive their last vehicle fast around corners and for sustained periods at over 80 mph and safely change lanes with just a quick glance at a mirror, they should be able to do so in an SUV.
As far as other motorists just changing lanes without looking, it sounds like typical Boston traffic.
Better there than here, that is for sure!! You first place winners are entitled to take a bow! Kudo's! Now stay in your state!!
The sign says "Yield" not "4 way stop". If I come to the circle and there's no one to hit, then I enter the circle....then I have the right-of-way...no stopping required. All those peckerheads who have stopped to wait their turn scowl like I have broken into line.
The other drivers think I'm inconsiderate. All I can do is smile, and howl with laughter once I'm through the intersection. For I know that I am right and they are wrong. A Yield Right of Way sign is a triangle....Stop signs are not triangles. (Even people from Alabama know this.) The Georgians just amaze you with their courteous and naive driving habits. Aahahaha.
In traffic circles it's every man for himself. First come, first served. That's what yield means....right Gentlemen.?!
There is a traffic circle right on the MD -DC boarder called Chevy Chase Circle. There is a fountain there that is flowing during the warmer months. Many, many years ago, a nasty high school student dumped a big box of detergent in the fountain. There were so many soap bubbles that traffic had to go real slow because they couldn't see through them. Ahahaha
It was for me about 30 some yrs ago! I had to wait 6 wks to retake the test (CA)
The cops don't ticket for it anyway!
IMO not using them is lazy, selfish, inconsiderate and dangerous....not necessarily in that order
Also, youth soccer and hockey are huge in this state. This translates to way too many dangerous soccer moms on the roads.
As far as whole States worth of bad drivers, I think Virginia has to have MN beat. All the Interstates in VA have signs on them that say "Wrong Way" Since they are both 1 syllable words, almost 47% of Virginians can read the sign.
I would hazard a guess that those places are not made easier to drive with Minnesotians (sic?) taking the top fatality spot (per capita, fatalities per million miles etc, or how ever it is quoted to measure). I would also surmise that being mad or not paying attention matters little in terms of fatalities! They key is what needs to be done attitudinally or reverse the tide??? I mean really it was already hard enough to come to the surprising conclusion that MN is the fatality leader!!!
It does mean however in both cases that in ANY of those "traffic" hells or supposedly "safe" MN is as it appears!!
Just like intuitively,one would point to an "LA traffic area" as MOST likely to have fatalities, but as it turns out, the most fatalities occur on less used bucolic rural highways and roads!!!
</snip>
Don't you mean "One way"?
I saw those signs in VA on a trip we took over the holidays, and for the life of me I couldn't figure out why in the world they would have them there. The only place a driver would see them head on is if they were to stop at the end of an on-ramp, turn perpendicular to the freeway and sit there deciding whether to turn left or right. If VA has a big enough problem with this that they install those signs at every on ramp ... <shudder> ...
-Jason
MN
Cars on Road = 100,000
Traffic Fatalities = 100
Traffic Fatalities caused by failure to yield = 16
State X
Cars on Road = 100,000
Traffic Fatalities = 1,000
Traffic Fatalities caused by failure to yield = 80
In MN, 16% of fatalities are caused by failure to yield whereas in State X only 8% are. However, if you live in State X you're actually 5 times more likely to die due to someone failing to yield right of way.
I did a quick search on the NHTSA website and got the following stats on fatalities per 100,000 miles driven:
USA: 1.51
MN: 1.06
MA: 0.90
From this MN is actually better than the national average. However, I have a mistrust even in this because MA came out at 0.90, THE BEST IN THE COUNTRY!!! Living in Boston I wonder how that can be. Maybe we just get in a lot of fender benders but because it's city driving the speeds aren't great enough to cause death.
Here's the website in case you're interested:
http://www-nrd.nhtsa.dot.gov/pdf/nrd-30/NCSA/TSF2001/2001statedat- a.pdf
We had a rollover last week on a city street (SL=35mph) in which the driver of the rolled vehicle was cited for following too closely. The moron rolled his Jeep GC after hitting the other car from behind! Not sure just how he managed that, but both drivers had minor injuries.
theorem : things greater than the same thing, are greater than each other.
I suspect we may be mixing statistics per vehicle, vs per vehicle mile, vs per 100,000 miles driven, vs per capita.....
An extreme example: MN could have just one fatality, but it was caused by failure to yield. This would lead to 100% of fatalities being caused by failure to yield. "Worst" in nation but only when taken completely out of context.
It turned out that the law was broken about 70% of the time at that particular intersection. There were some special exceptions at that intersection and I felt some signs and routing (because it was a "Y" type intersection) needed to be changed.
Went to City Engineer and presented the results of my study... He knew of the changes of traffic pattern there and somewhat agreed the intersection had a slight problem.
Bottom line, he looked on his office Map and could find no red push pins(fatalities) in the maze of yellow push pins residing at that particular intersection. He told me that he could not reroute or reengineer the intersection because there was no "fatality" justifications.
When I went before the traffic Judge about my ticket, the policeman told him I did a "rolling stop". Then it was my turn to talk. I first said that I still stopped...just my wheels didn't completely stop rotating. I looked in all traffic directions (except for the cop hidden behind some bushes).
Then I laid it on the Judge about my little survey and it's results. Reported to Judge what City Engineer said!
Judge Mecklin let me off that day. And that "Y" intersection was transformed to a "T" intersection within 4 months and the signs were changed to what I had recommended. This little study paid dividends to many.
Whew, sorry for long story.
I yield to next poster.
(In addition , you the GREEN light crosser may be held WHOLLY to partly responsible if there is an accident or fatality!!{the law states that for the green light crosser it is against the law to enter the intersection unless it is CLEAR} )
I was astounded to read in the local rag's "traffic" column, edited and answered by a local motorcycle policeman (I would assume with the auspices of the police chief and city council) That if a yellow and /or red light runner hits or is hit by a green light crosser in a guided intersection that the green light crosser can actually be held wholly to partially responsible for damages!
Do you ever wonder if the scofflaws know something the law abiding citizens do not?? Be careful out there! If you think you are protected by the law , it may not necessarily be the one you think!!?
Turned out that he was guilty of what they called "pushing the green". Meaning that as soon as the light turned green he punched it, and got into a collision with a red light runner. Now I don't know who actually hit whom, and he did still get some money, but now he's in his 50's and still living with his mother, and spends most of his days trying to figure out ways to go cheatin the system like a true modern day Robin Hood. yee-haw.