A Cycling & bikes forum. CycleBanter.com

Go Back   Home » CycleBanter.com forum » rec.bicycles » General
Site Map Home Register Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Common Cause - Just zis Website



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old May 27th 05, 04:17 AM
fbloogyudsr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vincent Wilcox wrote:
I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our
esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included as
closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is basically a
question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is needed to drop
speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation and a repost to
the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views.


You don't state your opinion very well, your post is very disorganized
and incoherent. I'm guessing that you want lower speed limits and
want to find statistics that say that lower speed limits save lives. That
is demonstrably not the case, in terms of fatality *RATE*.

Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year
the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the later
part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the restrictions
removed?

Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period
1996/97[1]?


It was a blip. They immediately went back down the next year. See:
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates

The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world?


No. They are not even representative of the US. Note that the fatality
rate is different for MT than the majority of the US (see my reference.)
Since about 2000 they have had a 75mph limit, with very poor compliance
(I've driven there, and it's more like 85mph, as is Arizona, where the
fatality rate is in line with the US average.)

Please read in the report you posted: the rural (non-interstate)
roads have a very high fatality count and rate. Speeds on interstates
haven't affected the rate, and in fact it is now lower than in the period
before '97, in line with the rest of the US.

Speed limit compliance (especially on interstates - motorways for
you UK guys) in the US is not very good. The WA DOT publishes data
showing that:
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates

Also, please note the section in the report you mention that talks
about *HOW* speed limits should be set (on page 5: FHWA). There
is no way to align your opinion with demonstrated facts from scientific
studies that support these guidelines.

Floyd

Ads
  #2  
Old May 27th 05, 04:33 AM
Vincent Wilcox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default Common Cause - Just zis Website

Alistair J Murray wrote:
Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Thu, 26 May 2005 16:53:40 +0100, Alistair J Murray
wrote:



[...safe unlimited roads...]


Which is tragic, considering the Montana experience.


So you say. Sounds like question-begging to me...



Perhaps, but Montana provides the only hard data we have.



I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our
esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included
as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is
basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is
needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation
and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views.


Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year
the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the
later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the
restrictions removed?

Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period 1996/97[1]?

Montana opposed the original 55mph speed limit imposed as a result of
the fuel crisis. They were forced to accept it due to federal government
guidelines. These same government guidelines saw a reduction across the
board of fatalities in states that actively enforced the limit.

A bit of googling uncovers anecdotal evidence that these laws were not
overly enforced in Montana. During the period before the abolition of
the speed limit Montana imposed a stiff $5 fine on speeders. Which
became known as the fuel tax, no points or record was kept of those
found speeding.

Were speed limits routinely ignored in Montana?

When speed limits were re-introduced in the main the automobile
associations cried foul and pointed without fail to the figure -11% of
95/96 which up to that point was already in decline. Presumably then the
+31% of 96/97 was an outlier? Since then the situation has got worse. Is
it the case that unless the limits are enforced there is no point
posting them? In which case the UK is for once a leader, speed three or
four times and you are out.

Since then Montana has had an increase and a number of rather
interesting public policies regarding speeding, including accusations of
get out of jail free cards etc.

The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world?

France, Portugal, flagrant disregard of speed limits. High fatalities.

Nordic countries, obeyance of limits, low fatalities.


[1]http://leg.state.mt.us/content/audit/download/98l-11.pdf&e=9707
  #3  
Old May 27th 05, 04:38 AM
Vincent Wilcox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vincent Wilcox wrote:
Alistair J Murray wrote:

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Thu, 26 May 2005 16:53:40 +0100, Alistair J Murray
wrote:




[...safe unlimited roads...]


Which is tragic, considering the Montana experience.


So you say. Sounds like question-begging to me...




Perhaps, but Montana provides the only hard data we have.



I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our
esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included
as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is
basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is
needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation
and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views.


Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year
the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the
later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the
restrictions removed?

Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period
1996/97[1]?

Montana opposed the original 55mph speed limit imposed as a result of
the fuel crisis. They were forced to accept it due to federal government
guidelines. These same government guidelines saw a reduction across the
board of fatalities in states that actively enforced the limit.

A bit of googling uncovers anecdotal evidence that these laws were not
overly enforced in Montana. During the period before the abolition of
the speed limit Montana imposed a stiff $5 fine on speeders. Which
became known as the fuel tax, no points or record was kept of those
found speeding.

Were speed limits routinely ignored in Montana?

When speed limits were re-introduced in the main the automobile
associations cried foul and pointed without fail to the figure -11% of
95/96 which up to that point was already in decline. Presumably then the
+31% of 96/97 was an outlier? Since then the situation has got worse. Is
it the case that unless the limits are enforced there is no point
posting them? In which case the UK is for once a leader, speed three or
four times and you are out.

Since then Montana has had an increase and a number of rather
interesting public policies regarding speeding, including accusations of
get out of jail free cards etc.

The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world?

France, Portugal, flagrant disregard of speed limits. High fatalities.

Nordic countries, obeyance of limits, low fatalities.


[1]http://leg.state.mt.us/content/audit/download/98l-11.pdf&e=9707


Apologies for the above link. This should be correct at least it works
for me.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=U&sta...-11.pdf&e=9707
  #4  
Old May 27th 05, 04:39 AM
Vincent Wilcox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Vincent Wilcox wrote:
Alistair J Murray wrote:

Just zis Guy, you know? wrote:

On Thu, 26 May 2005 16:53:40 +0100, Alistair J Murray
wrote:




[...safe unlimited roads...]


Which is tragic, considering the Montana experience.


So you say. Sounds like question-begging to me...




Perhaps, but Montana provides the only hard data we have.



I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of our
esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course included
as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It is
basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that is
needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the situation
and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look forward to views.


Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the year
the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in the
later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the
restrictions removed?

Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period
1996/97[1]?

Montana opposed the original 55mph speed limit imposed as a result of
the fuel crisis. They were forced to accept it due to federal government
guidelines. These same government guidelines saw a reduction across the
board of fatalities in states that actively enforced the limit.

A bit of googling uncovers anecdotal evidence that these laws were not
overly enforced in Montana. During the period before the abolition of
the speed limit Montana imposed a stiff $5 fine on speeders. Which
became known as the fuel tax, no points or record was kept of those
found speeding.

Were speed limits routinely ignored in Montana?

When speed limits were re-introduced in the main the automobile
associations cried foul and pointed without fail to the figure -11% of
95/96 which up to that point was already in decline. Presumably then the
+31% of 96/97 was an outlier? Since then the situation has got worse. Is
it the case that unless the limits are enforced there is no point
posting them? In which case the UK is for once a leader, speed three or
four times and you are out.

Since then Montana has had an increase and a number of rather
interesting public policies regarding speeding, including accusations of
get out of jail free cards etc.

The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the world?

France, Portugal, flagrant disregard of speed limits. High fatalities.

Nordic countries, obeyance of limits, low fatalities.


[1]http://leg.state.mt.us/content/audit/download/98l-11.pdf&e=9707


Apologies if the above link doesnt work, this was the one I was using.

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=U&sta...-11.pdf&e=9707
  #5  
Old May 27th 05, 05:00 AM
fbloogyudsr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Vincent Wilcox" wrote
fbloogyudsr wrote:
Speed limit compliance (especially on interstates - motorways for
you UK guys) in the US is not very good. The WA DOT publishes data
showing that:


Ok.


Whoops. Wrong link.
http://www.wsdot.wa.gov/mapsdata/tdo...d%20Report.pdf

Floyd

  #6  
Old May 27th 05, 05:15 AM
fbloogyudsr
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"Vincent Wilcox" wrote
Fine, but which states employ the most effective/draconian (depending
upon perspective) enforcement? How has that affected things?


I'm not sure how "compliance" would be easily measured. Certainly
the WA DOT data don't show good compliance; perhaps the fars
site has that info buried somehow. Here's my anecdotal take on it.

OR(egon) probably has the best compliance - and lowest interstate
limit - on the west coast. You have the WA data; CA is probably
not as compliant: speeds on the (70mph limit) freeways there are
probably 5-10mph higher than in WA, especially as you go south
of San Francisco.

Enforcement in OR is quite a bit more overt than in WA and CA.
However, the "rule" appears to be 10mph over in the 55 limit sections,
and 5mph over in the 65 sections. MT has low enforcement (except
for out-of-staters). ID(aho) seems pretty lax in enforcement.

So, overall I would say that compliance has no effect - even
in some cases negative effect - on fatality rates. Note the
CA/WA/OR rates: OR, with highest compliance, has a higher
fatality rate than WA/CA.

Floyd
  #7  
Old May 27th 05, 05:55 AM
Vincent Wilcox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

fbloogyudsr wrote:
Vincent Wilcox wrote:

I apologise in advance for the crosspost but would like the input of
our esteemed US counterparts in this discussion. I have of course
included as closely as I can match the same or similar two groups. It
is basically a question of Montana providing the hard evidence that
is needed to drop speed limits, below is my initial take on the
situation and a repost to the above, this is opinion and I look
forward to views.



You don't state your opinion very well, your post is very disorganized
and incoherent. I'm guessing that you want lower speed limits and
want to find statistics that say that lower speed limits save lives. That
is demonstrably not the case, in terms of fatality *RATE*.


Its true, long night, sorry. No I am looking/thinking more about
compliance. Countries where the majority comply seem to do better than
countries where compliance is lower. I'd love to see the figures for
Mogadishu.

Think Greece versus Sweden for example, population of Greece 11M Sweden
9M but which country do you suppose is better at obeying simple things
like limits?

http://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=U&sta...003.pdf&e=9707

Montana had a reduction in fatalities from 1995 to 1996 of 11% the
year the speed limit was removed. It is noted that the fatalities in
the later part of the year are reduced[1], what time in 95 were the
restrictions removed?

Why did Montana have a 31% increase in fatalities for the period
1996/97[1]?



It was a blip. They immediately went back down the next year. See:
http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates


Whats the margin here? It looks like Montana has barely changed over the
entire period.


The question is this, is Montana representative of the rest of the
world?



No. They are not even representative of the US. Note that the fatality
rate is different for MT than the majority of the US (see my reference.)
Since about 2000 they have had a 75mph limit, with very poor compliance
(I've driven there, and it's more like 85mph, as is Arizona, where the
fatality rate is in line with the US average.)


Poor compliance. Greece versus Sweden?


Please read in the report you posted: the rural (non-interstate)
roads have a very high fatality count and rate. Speeds on interstates
haven't affected the rate, and in fact it is now lower than in the period
before '97, in line with the rest of the US.


But not lower than earlier figures. A plateau? Why?


Speed limit compliance (especially on interstates - motorways for
you UK guys) in the US is not very good. The WA DOT publishes data
showing that:


Ok.

http://www-fars.nhtsa.dot.gov/finalr...Fatality_Rates


Also, please note the section in the report you mention that talks
about *HOW* speed limits should be set (on page 5: FHWA). There
is no way to align your opinion with demonstrated facts from scientific
studies that support these guidelines.

Floyd



Fine, but which states employ the most effective/draconian (depending
upon perspective) enforcement? How has that affected things?
  #8  
Old May 27th 05, 06:40 AM
Vincent Wilcox
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

fbloogyudsr wrote:
"Vincent Wilcox" wrote

Fine, but which states employ the most effective/draconian (depending
upon perspective) enforcement? How has that affected things?



I'm not sure how "compliance" would be easily measured. Certainly
the WA DOT data don't show good compliance; perhaps the fars
site has that info buried somehow. Here's my anecdotal take on it.

OR(egon) probably has the best compliance - and lowest interstate
limit - on the west coast. You have the WA data; CA is probably
not as compliant: speeds on the (70mph limit) freeways there are
probably 5-10mph higher than in WA, especially as you go south
of San Francisco.


Britain has on the whole pretty good compliance, hence the
figures.Portugal is **** poor as is Spain and France. The French are
rather embarassed about it and they've had around a ~20% drop but
they've really been clamping down, hard. I live in France work but work
in the Britain. I am unsure how the German figures changed after
re-unification.

Enforcement in OR is quite a bit more overt than in WA and CA.
However, the "rule" appears to be 10mph over in the 55 limit sections,
and 5mph over in the 65 sections. MT has low enforcement (except
for out-of-staters). ID(aho) seems pretty lax in enforcement.


Err, sorry I've got OR being Oregon (correct?) but I have to look up my
WA and CA definitions.WA is Washington and CA California? Verbosity here
would help.

I still don't understand what you mean though. Is this fact?

So, overall I would say that compliance has no effect - even
in some cases negative effect - on fatality rates. Note the
CA/WA/OR rates: OR, with highest compliance, has a higher
fatality rate than WA/CA.

Floyd


Thats not what we see here. The French have increased the number of
cameras, cue. Someone saying but not since ... or whatever, but in the
interim there were a mass of warnings before they were introduced. A
lorry/truck driver friend was on the ball about this years before they
were introduced, although as he said at the time. I didnt have to worry
because I had a British number plate. Not so now.
  #9  
Old May 27th 05, 09:41 PM
Wiggums
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

I really don't think the UK has good compliance. The posted limit is
70 mph on motorways, but it's common to see drivers hitting 90 to 95 on
the M4 towards London.

Also, Germany's fatality rate is now lower than that of the United
States. I got it straight from FHWA... scroll down to the second
chart.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/ohim/hs02/in6.htm

It shows Germany at 1.3 deaths per 100 million freeway kilometres. The
United States is showing 1.6. Even France with its blatant disregard
for the 130 km/h limits has lower fatalities than the United States.
Having been all over Europe, I can say that the motorways in the UK are
more comfortable and safer than that of Europe (i.e., shoulders,
signage clarity, etc.).

Furthermore, in 1995, the top 1 percentile would be about 200 km/h (125
mph). I recently went to Germany a few months ago and had an Audi A8
TDI V-8. I think the regular petrol models have a speed governor at
250 or 255, but the TDI apparently did not have any because the
governor stopped the car at 280 km/h. That's 175 mph. There were just
four cars going from Berlin to Madgeburg on a very smooth
nearly-straight three-lane autobahn A2 that was almost new. Seeing
that the S600 topped at 255 km/h, it could not catch up with us
travelling over 275 km/h, so there were just the three of us at 6 in
the morning on a Sunday when there's nobody out there. Bliss!

Lorries are still limited at 90 km/h or 100 km/h, and that's with cars
screaming nearby in excess of 260 km/h. Far safer than lorries doing
90 km/h and cars going 200 km/h? Well, the numbers show a substantial
decrease in fatalities. Look at this one:

http://www.driveandstayalive.com/inf..._1988-2001.htm

This one is not per kilometre mile driven, but I can assure you more
people are driving cars in Germany compared to 1988 (especially with
the fall of the Berlin wall). Still, from 1988 to 2001, there was a
huge decrease of 36% in overall deaths. During the same timeframe, the
U.S. only dropped 4 percent - the worst of all the 30 countries on the
list.

  #10  
Old May 27th 05, 10:16 PM
Brimstone
external usenet poster
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Wiggums wrote:
I really don't think the UK has good compliance. The posted limit is
70 mph on motorways, but it's common to see drivers hitting 90 to 95
on
the M4 towards London.


I'm sorry that's not true.

It's common to see cars travelling at that speed all over the country.


 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Common Cause - Just zis Website Alistair J Murray UK 111 June 2nd 05 06:44 AM
Rec.Bicycles Frequently Asked Questions Posting Part 1/5 Mike Iglesias General 4 October 29th 04 07:11 AM
Common Shimano Failures, AKA POS STI Levers. Mark Wolfe Techniques 24 October 1st 04 02:21 PM
ICYCLES Inventory List ICYCLES Marketplace 0 July 26th 03 08:25 PM
Check out my new website, Guennadi's Auto Center Unicycling 0 July 20th 03 01:46 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 CycleBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.