Speeding Gets the Boot

[Macktheknife]

Hear yee hear yee.........

Figures released by the Queensland transport for fatalities last year. The figures were just published by the RACQ and are compiled from data collected from police reports and relate to the biggest contributors to road fatalities in Qld.

Now....settle yourselves down and read on..

1. Alcohol and drugs...............36%

2. Disobeyed traffic rules........29%

3. Inattention.........................26%

4. Inexperience......................17%

5. Speed................................16%

Now doesn't it make you feel great that more revenue is gained and more resources and budget spent, on a piddling 16% of the causes of road fatalities......?.......Hmmmm...?

The figures go on....

6. Fatigue..............................13%

7. Other..??...........................11%

8. Age...................................11%

9. Rain/Wet road....................5%

10. Negligence.......................5%

And a couple of others.....

Yes......that's right Claude, by the Police departments own figures............Speeding IS NOT the number one big bad nasty that each state politicians and others would have you believe.

So...dont blame the poor coppers, they can only do what the law and policy makers allow them.

Again...these figures are for Qld but you can bet your sweet bippy that they would be pretty indicative of other states.

So,....Speeding the big bad bogey..??......ITS A LIE..........

LETS KEEP UP THE PRESSURE ON OUR POLLIES AND ELECTED REPS.

We want policing end expenditure on road safety to be reflective of where it's most needed.

Lets go......

[Redhawk]

I'm with ya Mac,

Got Howard's, Lathams's, Brack's. Gallop's, Robert's, and all the other pollies e-mail addresses?

[curious]

Mack, there going to argue that due to the large number of traffic enforcement these figures speak for themselves.

"If there wasnt any cameras or officers checking speed these totals will be higher"

This is not my opinion but will bet my house this what will come of it

[Macktheknife]

  Redhawk said:

Got Howard's, Lathams's, Brack's. Gallop's, Robert's, and all the other pollies e-mail addresses?

They're in here somewhere.

I think Ken (or somebody) posted them a while back when this subject was on the boil.

Maybe someone who knows their way around the site better than me can post them again.........Please......

[plonky]

I agree with Curious.

The whole "policing by statistics" method that I despise will be used to reinforce that thhe focus upon speed has caused a SIGNIFICANT reduction in speed related fatalities.

The various State Govts will take a lot of pleasure and trumpet their achievements by using the statistics to back the whole 'speed kills 'mantra.

I am only interested in 'inappropriate speed for the conditions;. They are the galoots that I target !

[Worpor]

This is a total scam! I would wager that if you compared the number of drivers on the road [which would increase every year] to fatalities. Say at a rate of so many deaths per 1000 drivers you would find that the road toll is actually going down.

You cant say 100 ppl died this year 3 more that last year if the number of ppl driving on the road has increased by 10 000. You can but its not a fair comparisum.

Don’t get me wrong 1 person is too many. But the tactics of telling us that we are becoming bad drivers is just wrong when there is clearly more drivers on the road has to = more accidents

Cheers

Tony

[Macktheknife]

  plonky said:

I agree with Curious.

The whole "policing by statistics" method that I despise will be used to reinforce that thhe focus upon speed has caused a SIGNIFICANT reduction in speed related fatalities.

The various State Govts will take a lot of pleasure and trumpet their achievements by using the statistics to back the whole 'speed kills 'mantra.

I am only interested in 'inappropriate speed for the conditions;. They are the galoots that I target !

Yes, you guys are probably correct.

Notwithstanding all of what has previously been discussed amongst ourselves and many others, my favourite question regarding speeding convictions/revenue.

If the current policies regarding policing of speeding is successful, why does revenue continue to increase...?

One would have thought that if it were largely successful, revenue would decrease....

[Slymeat]

Have a look at the statistics more carefully, Yes speed is not no.1 but these results are over simplified. Speed 16%, Rain wet/road 5%, Other 11%, Alcohol and Drugs 36% - Total 68%. If you look at these results and are mindful of this fact, speed is difficult if not impossible to determine after the act, you can use various formula to calculte the coeficient of drag of the road surface distance and breaking efficiency and come up with a minimum speed a vehicle had been travelling at before impact, but this is not usually used to determine speed as you would require an expert to verify the results. Secondly if the person is over the limit then speed is disregarded as the result of the accident, unless you can prove they are doing more than 45 over. Most alcohol related fatals involve speed or inatention. If the driver at fault is the deceased expert opinions are not called for so no speed calculations are done only checks for alcohol or drugs during the autopsy would be included towards the statistics. Taking all this into account speed is a factor in up to 68% of fatals or more, which would make it no.1.

[ZAP]

I say bring in the 85th % rule. Speed cameras are just Tax cameras, they do nothing to reducing the roadtoll. The most likely cause more accidents as people drive watching the speedo and not the bloody road.

[Slymeat]

Scary if you don't know how well your speedo is calibrated, they don't give much leway.