steve robinson wrote:
> It doesnt make you a safer driver , i have lost count of the amount of
> drivers who rigidly stick to the speed limit but fail to use
> indicators or mirrors or even bother to look around thier A posts when
> emerging from a junction ,Try and crush me when i am filtering (a legal
> activity) on my motorcycle or just plain dont see me and turn accross
> the front of me .
Yes, it does make you a safer driver, all other things being equal. The
twerp who does the dangerous things you describe at 30mph will cause
fewer crashes and less serious crashes than the twerp who does those
same things at 45mph. Fewer crashes, because they have a much shorter
stopping distance (e.g. twerp A and twerp B both see you, the
motorcyclist, at the last second because they were too busy texting
their girlfriend. The twerp travelling at 30 has a better chance of
stopping in time than the twerp going at 45). And less serious crashes
because if a twerp hits your motorbike at 30 you've a better chance of
surviving than if he hits you at 45.
What's more, I don't think all things are equal. I think the twerp who
blithely breaks the speed limit is more likely to be the one texting his
girlfriend. The ones who stick rigidly to the speed limit are more
likely to be the ones who are aware of and respectful of the rules of
the road. There will be twerps in both categories, granted; twerps who
stick to the limits and twerps who break them. But the people who
routinely break the speed limit are twerps by definition, and criminals
to boot. They won't find any shoulder to cry on here when they get caught.
>
> Most of the roads with a 70 mph limit or national speed limit used to
> have no speed limits at all , duel carriageways were built for speeds
> in eccess of 70 mph
They were also built for vastly lower traffic volumes than they now
receive. That's why the limits were imposed. |