Speed triggers polemic views that often carry a high emotional charge. On the one hand speed is seen as a demonic cause of death and mayhem, and something to be cut wherever possible especially on roads. On the other, and especially for trains, high speed is seen as the key to transport efficiency.
But the often neglected fact about links between speed and casualties is that speed is not the most common causal factor of serious injury or death, especially on UK roads where most occur in Britain.
Correspondingly, policy responses to speed invokes controversy. The use of ‘safety cameras’ that are more widely known as ‘speed cameras’ as an automated and profitable way to enforce speed limits is a particular focus for heated debate in the UK. The UK government view of this bone of contention can be found here, and challenges are voiced by such organisations as Safe Speed, and the ABD .
labels and tags
October 19th, 2008 at 1:37 pm
It’s sad that the speed debate is still crawling along with the limit limpets on one side and the speed libertarians on the other. This polarisation misses several important issues.
Speed limits are now being used for something they were never intended – to reduce vehicle speeds. Although this sounds perverse, limits were originally intended to ensure that most people, driving reasonably, were doing so within the law.
A local authority measured the speed of traffic on a road, assumed that the top 15% of vehicles were going too fast and so set the speed at the 85th percentile. That meant speed limits felt “right” to most drivers. Now, limits are set using political, rather than rational, criteria. The result? Limits that change too frequently, are unnaturally low for the road conditions and frequently ignored. This has brought limits into dangerous disrepute.
These ultra-low limits require a great deal more concentration for compliance – concentration that is better spent on observation, hazard management and car control. Add in the threat of prosecution from cameras and drivers’ attention is being dangerously diverted from observation of potential hazards to their speedometers. Limit compliance has become a dangerous proxy for safe behaviour.
Rather like painting by numbers, this “driving by numbers” gives a poor and parodied representation of the original. The safe speed for the road varies constantly and can never be reduced to a simple round number.
We need to move to restore balance to the 3 Es of road safety – Engineering, Education and Enforcement, rather than simply focusing all three on speed limit compliance.
How important are speed limits in safe driving? Perhaps I can answer with a question for the limit limpets. If your speedometer broke, would you still be able to drive safely?