This Is The Best Takedown Of The 'Speed Kills'Myth

[GURPS]

This Is The Best Takedown Of The 'Speed Kills' Myth You'll Ever See



You're going to click play and then realize that this video is 15 minutes long, but it's totally worth it. I don't want to ruin the crux of the story and the evidence, but the use of actual facts and logic to get rid of the notion that lower speed limits is mind blowing.

I already thought that speed limits were low, and that was without any facts. This video will make you go nuts with anger about speed limits. Seriously. You'll go all Hulk on the next limit sign you see after watching this.

This was sent our way by Afroduck, yes the Manhattan record breaking Afroduck. He has a vested interest in this. Was he trying to prove how awful limits are with his Manhattan record run?

 

[GURPS]

Utah Raises Some Speed Limits To 80 MPH Because It's Safer


After multi-year studies, Utah has raised a number of its highway speed limits to 80 miles an hour. They cited the same reasons of safety as the now-famous 'Speed Kills Your Pocketbook' documentary. Finally, a government making sense about speed.

KSL News reports that yesterday the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) installed 80 MPH signs on some of its rural highways after multi-year studies found that higher speed limits would be safer than lower ones.

"We had to look at geometry and speed ... speed-related crashes, just to see if it made sense," said John Gleason of UDOT. "And in these designated areas ... 80 miles per hour is the optimal speed."​

 

[PsyOps]

So, what is the underlying reason that you want to go faster?

 

[czygvtwkr]

A deer jumps out in front of you at 45 mph and at 80 mph, which is more likely to kill you?

 

[PsyOps]

The one thing that comes to mind is, if speed doesn't kill, then we have to assume our roads can be a free-for-all. Everyone just max out the throttle. Or perhaps, go at the fastest speed you feel safe. So, going up route 4, given all the potential deer, people pulling out from side roads, and left turn options, I feel safest doing 70. Oh but crap, someone else wants to do 90. So now what? I have to do 90 because I’m driving too unsafe for the bugger going 90? Oh and that person isn’t going fast enough for the person wanting to do 110.

So, what kills?

 

[kwillia]

Utah Raises Some Speed Limits To 80 MPH Because It's Safer


After multi-year studies, Utah has raised a number of its highway speed limits to 80 miles an hour. They cited the same reasons of safety as the now-famous 'Speed Kills Your Pocketbook' documentary. Finally, a government making sense about speed.

KSL News reports that yesterday the Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) installed 80 MPH signs on some of its rural highways after multi-year studies found that higher speed limits would be safer than lower ones.

"We had to look at geometry and speed ... speed-related crashes, just to see if it made sense," said John Gleason of UDOT. "And in these designated areas ... 80 miles per hour is the optimal speed."​

Okay, but this had absolutely nothing to do with St. Mary's County. There isn't a road in our county that should be more than 55 mph.

I can't speak for all of Calvert as I don't know all the roads in Calvert. I can say I can't think of a road in Calvert that should be more than 55.

 

[glhs837]

So, I can safely assume none of you actually watched the presentation, did you? He never advocated a free for all, nor did he say speed doesnt kill. It sure does, stupid speed. Meaning speed unsafe for condition, including traffic. If we dont allow for the fact that some speed is safe, we would never do anything but walk.

The point was that speed limits set lower than the recommended 85th percentile make no sense outside some extenuating circumstance like a school zone. czy, do you never travel faster than 40 because it's less likely that a deer might kill you at that speed? Of course not, you judge when 80 is safe and do that speed then, not on Hermanville road when the deer are active.

 

[GURPS]

The one thing that comes to mind is, if speed doesn't kill, then we have to assume our roads can be a free-for-all.

when the speed is set at the 80% mark the roads are safer

66 headed to Front Royal @ 234 / 66 bridge bumps up to 65, out past Hay market the limit is 70

the average speed on the beltway is NOT 55 .... and driving is inherently dangerous when you get some fool in the left center lane doing 55 / 60

 

[glhs837]

Okay, but this had absolutely nothing to do with St. Mary's County. There isn't a road in our county that should be more than 55 mph.

I can't speak for all of Calvert as I don't know all the roads in Calvert. I can say I can't think of a road in Calvert that should be more than 55.

I might go 60 for some of the more open sections of 235/5 where there are fewer driveways, but generally you are right. But there are sections that are a bit low. I think 40 on Willows is about 5 low as is 40 on Chancellors Run. But I also think that 45 from FDR south to GMR is 5 high, it should drop to 40 through there. Rt 4 in Calvert should be 60, I think.

But the best way to go is a traffic study, then set it to the 85th percentile. Thats what the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration here, and evidently whatever the Canuks use for such stuff both recommend. Limits lower that that set up deadly speed differentials. You can raise and lower all day long, but people will travel the speed they feel safe, generally speaking.

 

[PsyOps]

when the speed is set at the 80% mark the roads are safer

66 headed to Front Royal @ 234 / 66 bridge bumps up to 65, out past Hay market the limit is 70

the average speed on the beltway is NOT 55 .... and driving is inherently dangerous when you get some fool in the left center lane doing 55 / 60

I see, so my question stands... what is the underlying reason that you want to go faster? Why is 55/60 not fast enough?

 

[glhs837]

I see, so my question stands... what is the underlying reason that you want to go faster? Why is 55/60 not fast enough?

Here in America, it should always be a question of "Why can't I?", Not "Why do you want to?" Unless my behavior harms society in some way, there should not be a reason to restrict it. You of all people should get that.

So, unless going 70 is unsafe, there should be no reason for the government to restrict me to lower speeds. 65-70 seems perfectly safe on the beltway, as shown by the hundreds of thousands of cars that travel on it at that speed every day without crashing. So why cant I travel at 65 or 70?

 

[GURPS]

I see, so my question stands... what is the underlying reason that you want to go faster? Why is 55/60 not fast enough?

because it is stupid ..... IMHO alot of the traffic on the beltway travels 65 / 70 in the 2 left lanes



on 66 past Hay Market I am doing 70

 

[GURPS]

So, unless going 70 is unsafe, there should be no reason for the government to restrict me to lower speeds. 65-70 seems perfectly safe on the beltway, as shown by the hundreds of thousands of cars that travel on it at that speed every day without crashing.

it is the occasional moron doing 85 / 90 weaving in and out .... or as I stated earlier, the clueless driver doing 60 in the left center lane


this is the way it should be IMHO:


Left Lane | Left Center | Right Center | Right Lane [exit lane]

..... 70 ......... 65 ........... 55/60 .......... 45 / 50

 

[glhs837]

it is the occasional moron doing 85 / 90 weaving in and out .... or as I stated earlier, the clueless driver doing 60 in the left center lane


this is the way it should be IMHO:


Left Lane | Left Center | Right Center | Right Lane [exit lane]

..... 70 ......... 65 ........... 55/60 .......... 45 / 50

This, what sensible people, even folks who have a left foot twice as heavy as the right one, call stpid speed. There are places even those speeds are safe, depending on conditions and equipment, but the beltway isn't one of them.

https://www.google.com/maps/preview?hl=en#!data=!1m8!1m3!1d3!2d-105.050736!3d34.979372!2m2!1f98.55!2f86.5!4f75!2m4!1e1!2m2!1sfmzZPTVNnbIXGOGTdSGP8A!2e0&fid=5

 

[czygvtwkr]

The point was that speed limits set lower than the recommended 85th percentile make no sense outside some extenuating circumstance like a school zone. czy, do you never travel faster than 40 because it's less likely that a deer might kill you at that speed? Of course not, you judge when 80 is safe and do that speed then, not on Hermanville road when the deer are active.

No but to say that this takes down the Speed Kills myth is stupid.

I like traveling on the highway (a real highway not this crap we have down here) with cruise on about 70, but I know that trucks will slow down, sometimes alot, pulling hills and frankly alot of people are too stupid to handle going 80 and a truck in front of them starts slowing down because it is pulling a hill.

I know a stretch of highway in WV that definately increased its accidents when the speed limit was raised from 65 to 70, and it is a pretty well designed stretch of highway.

 

[glhs837]

No but to say that this takes down the Speed Kills myth is stupid.

I like traveling on the highway (a real highway not this crap we have down here) with cruise on about 70, but I know that trucks will slow down, sometimes alot, pulling hills and frankly alot of people are too stupid to handle going 80 and a truck in front of them starts slowing down because it is pulling a hill.

I know a stretch of highway in WV that definately increased its accidents when the speed limit was raised from 65 to 70, and it is a pretty well designed stretch of highway.

The Speed Kills Myth isn't that speed cant kill, we all know it can, the myth t is the one promulgated by the powers that be, the idea that every speeder is a killer in the making, and that sitting roadside with a radar gun is the way to greater highway safety. Look at Calver counties latest stupidity, this thing of two deputies going exactly the speed limit for 20-30 miles side by side. Very few of Calverts fatal accidents are caused by speeding, but the Sheriff kows if he "slows everyone down", he will make news and people will think they are safer. It's about being visible, even if it's not effective. At what point do we not set limits because of stupid people? And that silly slow speed limits save lives, when they dont. That's the myth. What stretch of highway is that? I would like to research it.

 

[PsyOps]

Here in America, it should always be a question of "Why can't I?", Not "Why do you want to?" Unless my behavior harms society in some way, there should not be a reason to restrict it. You of all people should get that.

So, unless going 70 is unsafe, there should be no reason for the government to restrict me to lower speeds. 65-70 seems perfectly safe on the beltway, as shown by the hundreds of thousands of cars that travel on it at that speed every day without crashing. So why cant I travel at 65 or 70?

I happen to believe speed does kill. It reduces reaction time. When there is an accident the mess is proportionately worse. You can’t because your belief that you can handle 80 and still react the same to an unexpected situation ahead of you as you can doing 60 is just false. If you're trailing someone and you're doing 80 and that person slams on their brakes because they realize they had to turn left, you're far more likely to rearend that person than if you were doing 60. Sure the person slamming on their brakes might be in the wrong for last minute decisions, but that doesn't change the laws of physics - the inability to react at faster speeds.

But since you believe 65-70 is safe, someone else out there believes 75-80 or 85-90 is safe. What say you? If someone believes doing 100 is safe you’re okay with that?

 

[GURPS]

But since you believe 65-70 is safe, someone else out there believes 75-80 or 85-90 is safe. What say you? If someone believes doing 100 is safe you’re okay with that?

you are being Obtuse today ...
... did you miss the point about the 80th percentile

set the speed limit at the rate 85 % of the people drive .... ticket the rest

traffic flows nicely on the beltway @ 65 / 70 for the left lanes MORONS darting in and out doing 90 ... are disruptive to the traffic flow



traffic flows very smoothly on 66 west of Manassass

 

[glhs837]

I happen to believe speed does kill. It reduces reaction time. When there is an accident the mess is proportionately worse. You can’t because your belief that you can handle 80 and still react the same to an unexpected situation ahead of you as you can doing 60 is just false. If you're trailing someone and you're doing 80 and that person slams on their brakes because they realize they had to turn left, you're far more likely to rearend that person than if you were doing 60. Sure the person slamming on their brakes might be in the wrong for last minute decisions, but that doesn't change the laws of physics - the inability to react at faster speeds.

But since you believe 65-70 is safe, someone else out there believes 75-80 or 85-90 is safe. What say you? If someone believes doing 100 is safe you’re okay with that?

When did I say I can react in the same time at 80 as I can at 60? Don't think I ever said that. I might say that compared to the average driver, I might be as safe at 80 on a stretch as they are at 60, given I pay a lot more attention to the roadway with a larger "bubble" of awareness than they and have better equipment at my disposal than most of them and have learned my equipment's limits to a T. Would that make it okay for me to do 80 in a crowd doing 60? Of course not. No more than it makes sense that someone doing 40 in a crowd going 60 is safer.

Like Gurps said, don't set the limits forf whats safe for my car, with a 125 foot 60-0 stopping distance, and .9gs of grip and a top end closer to 200 than 140, set them like recommended, to what the 85th percentile goes in any given stretch. Science, not myth, should set limits.

 

[PsyOps]

you are being Obtuse today ...
... did you miss the point about the 80th percentile

set the speed limit at the rate 85 % of the people drive .... ticket the rest

traffic flows nicely on the beltway @ 65 / 70 for the left lanes MORONS darting in and out doing 90 ... are disruptive to the traffic flow



traffic flows very smoothly on 66 west of Manassass

I think I’m asking legitimate questions. Different people feel safe at different speeds. What I’m trying to get to is, is there a speed where you wouldn’t consider it safe? 90? 100? 120? I’ve been driving for 35 years and have learned that there is always someone that wants to go faster than everyone else; and there is always someone that feels safer going at (what you might call) excessively slower speeds.

I do 60 up route 4. I don’t care if 85% are going faster. I – I – feel safe at that speed. I don’t care what speed YOU think I should drive. And if I happen to be in the left lane, I just want to know why you think because you want to drive at 80, I should adjust my behavior for you?

But even you admit folks doing 90, darting in and out of traffic, are disruptive; and I would assume you mean potentially dangerous. I would argue that they feel you are going too slow for them and you are the danger.

But this is how human behavior seems to work… the speed limit on the beltway is 55 so folks go 65-70. So let’s bump it up to 65. Now folks will bump their ‘comfort speed’ to 75-80. Then folks will complain about the pokies doing 65-70 in the left lanes.

I just want to know what speed is too fast? And I want to know why folks feel a need to go so fast? I get the point "Why can't I?” vs. "Why do you want to?" We’re not talking about a person’s choice to buy 5 Big Macs vs. 1 where that choice only affects them. A person’s decisions on the road can affect everyone around them. So YOUR personal choice to do something is irrelevant. What’s relevant is… how do you justify your DESIRE to do something over the safety of everyone else?