“If I may be at liberty to play devil's advocate...you could have speed limits with a reward system instead of a punitive system or you could have speed limits as guides in a non-punitive system.”

Mjpb, if we had a reward system for driving safely and no punishment for driving recklessly, there would be a whole lot of drivers who would drive recklessly. There are an awful lot of abject hoons for whom the thrill of the moment is far more important than safety issues. There are also many non-hoons who would be willing to drive faster than the recommended speed. There would also be many people who would prefer to drive within that speed level, but who would realise that with a lot of much faster vehicles about, it would be safer to drive a fair bit faster and roll with the flow. Indeed, the small minority that stayed at or below that speed would become a hazard!

But I agree, there should be a reward system for good driving: a carrot and stick approach.

A few years ago I was busted for doing 92kmh in an 80k zone, having just missed the 80kmh sign when coming out of a 100k zone, and thinking that I was well within the limit. I wrote to the police, expressing my record of about 22 years without the loss of a demerit point, despite being a prolific driver. Of course it counted for nothing.

I remain utterly disgusted that a good driving record doesn’t mean a bloody thing to the cops. And I doubt that it would have carried any weight if I’d taken the matter to court.

“…you can also have a punitive system with no speed limits and policing of fools who push the envelope.”

Possibly. But the ‘envelope’ would be very ill-defined. So what one person…or one police officer…might think was acceptable, another wouldn’t.

I detest uneven policing. We need to strive to make the policing regime and hence the law and clear as possible for everyone. And this means having speed limits that everyone must abide by.

Hey eyeball, welcome to OLO.

“All we hear from the powers that be, is SPEED & DRINK.”

Yep. Isn’t it pathetic. There is so much more to road safety……that could so easily be dealt with if the will was there.

And even speed and drink are so really damnly poorly dealt with.

I’d be interested in your comments on my ten points of action as listed above.

You might also be interested in my passionate expression of road safety concerns (141 posts on the same thread!) on this subject, starting at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?article=2877#20951

"Mjpb, if we had a reward system for driving safely and no punishment for driving recklessly, there would be a whole lot of drivers who would drive recklessly...But I agree, there should be a reward system for good driving: a carrot and stick approach."

Well some drivers anyway. I agree with the carrot and stick approach not a carrot only. I was just playing devil's advocate on the possibilities.

"...And I doubt that it would have carried any weight if I’d taken the matter to court."

The court is only empowered to consider whether or not you did it if police proceed so yes.

"Possibly. But the ‘envelope’ would be very ill-defined. So what one person…or one police officer…might think was acceptable, another wouldn’t."

I suspect most people would have a fair idea. It would be up to courts and precedents that they set or any legislative definition at the end of the day.

"I detest uneven policing."

You have made that abundantly clear over the years. I don't think you miss any related threads.

"There are also many non-hoons who would be willing to drive faster than the recommended speed. There would also be many people who would prefer to drive within that speed level, but who would realise that with a lot of much faster vehicles about, it would be safer to drive a fair bit faster and roll with the flow. Indeed, the small minority that stayed at or below that speed would become a hazard!"

You seem to have some concept of the physics of moving objects. So have you heard about the 85th percentile and would you support raising speed limits accordingly so that less people exceed the limit and it makes sense to enforce them more rigidly?

http://web.archive.org/web/20011220132706/http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/fossc/trafficoperations/rules.htm

Regarding "speed".

One very important thing to be aware of is that "speed", as defined by authorities and responsible drivers (and anyone who has even a modicum of safety awareness), does NOT mean the same thing as "going fast".

A driver is "speeding" if going at 70kph in a 40kph school zone in Alice Springs. A driver is not speeding if going at 130kph in the designated 130kph areas on the Stuart Highway.

It's a fact of life, "speeding" is BAD driving, and it's only right that great emphasis be placed on eradicating it. "Speeding" kills and injures people.

"Speeding" also has a direct relationship with "prevailing conditions". For example, in good weather conditions going at 130kph in a 130kph zone is not speeding, however, going at 100kph in the same zone in atrocious weather conditions can easily be "speeding".

“So have you heard about the 85th percentile…”

Yes mj. But I wonder just how applicable it is in Australia? Who actually sets speed limits? And on what basis? I’m sure there are very few situations where the actual 85th percentile speed is calculated directly from the traffic flow! Speed limits are set by people who may not even give this a thought, but who just make judgements based entirely upon eyeballing the setting.

“…would you support raising speed limits accordingly so that less people exceed the limit and it makes sense to enforce them more rigidly?”

Yes! As I stated above on this thread (on 21 July, under point 1), I think that a reasonable trade-off would be to allow all speed limit signs to actually indicate speed zones where the limit is 10kmh higher than what is stated on the signs, as a concession to drivers in exchange for community acceptance of much more rigorous policing and zero tolerance of those who exceed the new higher limits.

Much more rigorous policing would be multifaceted, with many more police on the roads, stationary speed detector devices and cameras all over the place and the boxes that these sit in just absolutely everywhere!...and the community encouraged to do their bit by way of the facilitation of complaints.

Ludwig,

"Yes mj. But I wonder just how applicable it is in Australia? Who actually sets speed limits? And on what basis? I’m sure there are very few situations where the actual 85th percentile speed is calculated directly from the traffic flow! Speed limits are set ..."

I agree with what you say and I'd add that sometimes people living in an area just ask their local politician to set a speed limit at a certain level and it happens. So much for scientifically matching the speed limits with the road! I used to have a link which gave an example but it would take me many hours to hunt it down. Still I believe it is applicable in one sense. It is desirable. Roads are roads. Drivers are drivers. Safety is safety. When speed limits are set too far from the 85th percentile you get more crashes.

“… I think that a reasonable trade-off would be to allow all speed limit signs to actually indicate speed zones where the limit is 10kmh higher than what is stated on the signs, as a concession to drivers in exchange for community acceptance of much more rigorous policing and zero tolerance of those who exceed the new higher limits."

That reminds me of an American example where speed limits were being raised to the 85th percentile and some grumpy police officer who wasn't aware of the research hadn't approved and had been all set to rigidly enforce and book everyone (expecting them to go above the new limits too). He was delightfully suprised by the compliance. I can probably locate that article if you are interested.

"Much more rigorous policing would be multifaceted, with many more police on the roads, stationary speed detector devices and cameras all over the place ..."

If the speed limits were set so as to maximise safety and compliance the existing resources would go much further because the baddies would be the only ones breaking the law but I'm open to more cameras in that situation.