Comments on: Mobile phones and driving http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/ like balloons, only with dancing Wed, 08 Oct 2008 06:50:00 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Skuds http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5224 Skuds Wed, 28 Feb 2007 23:33:59 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5224 The best argument I heard against the phone/driving ban was (and I am defining "best" as "funniest" here) a woman on the radio who said it was ridiculous because the ban is more dangerous than using a mobile phone. Her example was that she was chatting away on her phone when a police car started following her and the police car scared her and made her more likely to lose control. It may be a new definition of chutzpah. The best argument I heard against the phone/driving ban was (and I am defining “best” as “funniest” here) a woman on the radio who said it was ridiculous because the ban is more dangerous than using a mobile phone. Her example was that she was chatting away on her phone when a police car started following her and the police car scared her and made her more likely to lose control.

It may be a new definition of chutzpah.

]]> By: Simon http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5225 Simon Wed, 28 Feb 2007 22:45:04 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5225 Everyone on the road is a wanker ;). At least at certain times anyway. The biggest problem with encountering a slow person is the slight increase it stress it causes. Unfortunately as far as I can see, stress grows exponentially and once you are on tilt you might as well have been drinking/taking drugs as far as your ability to make judgements is concerned. This is not the fault of the slow person, but of human nature and the system as a whole. I am therefore an advocate of technology. The sooner I can get into my car and have it drive me to work the better! Incidentally, it must be ten years since I last saw a prototype self drive system apparently operating on the news. Where the hell is it?! Everyone on the road is a wanker ;). At least at certain times anyway. The biggest problem with encountering a slow person is the slight increase it stress it causes. Unfortunately as far as I can see, stress grows exponentially and once you are on tilt you might as well have been drinking/taking drugs as far as your ability to make judgements is concerned. This is not the fault of the slow person, but of human nature and the system as a whole. I am therefore an advocate of technology. The sooner I can get into my car and have it drive me to work the better!

Incidentally, it must be ten years since I last saw a prototype self drive system apparently operating on the news. Where the hell is it?!

]]> By: Andrew http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5226 Andrew Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:48:52 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5226 J - thanks :-) Ed - I don't think looking at the number of deaths says much. What about serious injuries? What about injuries not life-threatening, but that nevertheless have effects for a long time? I think it's actually the case that most cars are clocked high - when you think you're going at 30, you're more likely going at 27. Call me cynical, but I don't trust Top Gear stats as far as I can throw them :-) Paul - The thing is, I don't think that driving a car gives you any qualifications for judging 'inappropriate' speed limits. It's like saying that using a computer qualifies you to tell me about what firewall I should use - you simply need knowledge of different things. Most drivers think they can judge, but have you ever heard anybody say that a speed limit is too high? It seems to me that such judgements *always* come from a desire to go faster, never any actual knowledge of safety. I agree that driving slowly can be dangerous, but *far* less often than going too fast. I'm sure if we looked at the number of deaths attributable to somebody going too slowly compared to too fast, there'd be no comparison. If you go around a country road corner and can't slow down in time for somebody going 35mph, you're going too fast. But dealing with such things is just part of being on the road - if people can't overtake safely, it's not the fault of the person going slowly. J - thanks :-)
Ed - I don’t think looking at the number of deaths says much. What about serious injuries? What about injuries not life-threatening, but that nevertheless have effects for a long time? I think it’s actually the case that most cars are clocked high - when you think you’re going at 30, you’re more likely going at 27. Call me cynical, but I don’t trust Top Gear stats as far as I can throw them :-)
Paul - The thing is, I don’t think that driving a car gives you any qualifications for judging ‘inappropriate’ speed limits. It’s like saying that using a computer qualifies you to tell me about what firewall I should use - you simply need knowledge of different things. Most drivers think they can judge, but have you ever heard anybody say that a speed limit is too high? It seems to me that such judgements *always* come from a desire to go faster, never any actual knowledge of safety.

I agree that driving slowly can be dangerous, but *far* less often than going too fast. I’m sure if we looked at the number of deaths attributable to somebody going too slowly compared to too fast, there’d be no comparison. If you go around a country road corner and can’t slow down in time for somebody going 35mph, you’re going too fast. But dealing with such things is just part of being on the road - if people can’t overtake safely, it’s not the fault of the person going slowly.

]]> By: Paroxysm http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5227 Paroxysm Wed, 28 Feb 2007 18:11:09 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5227 Thanks for providing some stats Ed. I'm glad you guys agree with me. I am also glad to say I have not had a single point on my license in three years and haven't yet hit any pedestrians. hurrah! Thanks for providing some stats Ed. I’m glad you guys agree with me. I am also glad to say I have not had a single point on my license in three years and haven’t yet hit any pedestrians. hurrah!

]]> By: Paul http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5228 Paul Wed, 28 Feb 2007 12:07:40 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5228 Yeah i'm now a big advocate of staying within the speed limit, but having someone going at 35mph on a country road in good weather conditions, when vehicles will often be approaching it from behind at speeds averaging 60mph is dangerous. I particularly dislike inappropriate 30 zones on major thoroughfares where the speed limit is enforced by lampposts but there is no residential area nearby or the footpath is safely offset by verging or entire forests. Yeah i’m now a big advocate of staying within the speed limit, but having someone going at 35mph on a country road in good weather conditions, when vehicles will often be approaching it from behind at speeds averaging 60mph is dangerous. I particularly dislike inappropriate 30 zones on major thoroughfares where the speed limit is enforced by lampposts but there is no residential area nearby or the footpath is safely offset by verging or entire forests.

]]> By: Ed http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5229 Ed Wed, 28 Feb 2007 11:35:30 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5229 I agree that people should drive within the speed limits, but also close enough to the speed limits that it doesn't cause a danger to other drivers that the driver is driving too slowly. Example: OAP driving down station road at 15mph. Everyone driving has to slow (suddenly) right down. They then want to overtake, which is often tricky around there. That causes problems too. (They were actually arrested for dangerous driving.) That's also why I think that speed cameras can be seen as dangerous; many people slow down suddenly before the speed cameras. I think that this is probably out-weighed by the benefits of people driving more slowly. Interesting point made: =========================================================================================== http://www.transtat.dft.gov.uk/tables/2002/rcas/pdf/rcas01.pdf http://www.transtat.dft.gov.uk/tables/2002/vsgb/pdf/vsgb.pdf Logical proof that speeding does not kill in 99% of cases: * 15,704 child pedestrians injured in accidents in 2001. * 107 child pedestrians killed in 2001. * 65% of cars in 30mph zones free-travel at over 30mph. Therefore * 10,207 vehicles in accidents with child pedestrians use a free travelling speed of more than 30mph. * Assuming that all the child pedestrians were killed by drivers who free travel at over 30mph, we still have 10,100 left who were not killed by cars that have a free travelling speed of over 30mph. Conclusion Out of 10,207 cases where cars use a free travelling speed of over 30mph AND had accidents with child pedestrians 10,100 survived. We know for sure that speeding didn't kill in all these cases where the children survived. In the remaining 107 it is possible that speeding killed. The 107 who tragically died are just 1% of the total. =========================================================================================== Comment: got to take into account really good healthcare! I thought that the above was interesting. I'd be interested to see what the dead rates / accident rates were on the German Autobahns / roads on the Isle of Man. Anyone? Does anyone remember that study about the actual speed your car shows in relation to what your car is actually going. In tests on Top Gear I think that they showed one car reporting it was travelling at 30 whereas it was actually driving at 37 mph. "How do you plan on enforcing the ‘fine for Jaywalking’ bit? We have the all important red route where I live and nobody has ever enforced that." Blanket fine: fine everyone called J? ;-) This sounded cool, so I wanted to add it: Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Speed doesn't kill people, people kill people. At the end of the day you should drive safely, and follow the speed limits. They're there for a reason. It's your responsibility if you are driving too fast / inappropriately, and unfortunately people tend to learn the hard way. I agree that people should drive within the speed limits, but also close enough to the speed limits that it doesn’t cause a danger to other drivers that the driver is driving too slowly.
Example: OAP driving down station road at 15mph. Everyone driving has to slow (suddenly) right down. They then want to overtake, which is often tricky around there. That causes problems too. (They were actually arrested for dangerous driving.)

That’s also why I think that speed cameras can be seen as dangerous; many people slow down suddenly before the speed cameras. I think that this is probably out-weighed by the benefits of people driving more slowly.

Interesting point made:
===========================================================================================
http://www.transtat.dft.gov.uk/tables/2002/rcas/pdf/rcas01.pdf
http://www.transtat.dft.gov.uk/tables/2002/vsgb/pdf/vsgb.pdf

Logical proof that speeding does not kill in 99% of cases:

* 15,704 child pedestrians injured in accidents in 2001.
* 107 child pedestrians killed in 2001.
* 65% of cars in 30mph zones free-travel at over 30mph.

Therefore

* 10,207 vehicles in accidents with child pedestrians use a free travelling speed of more than 30mph.
* Assuming that all the child pedestrians were killed by drivers who free travel at over 30mph, we still have 10,100 left who were not killed by cars that have a free travelling speed of over 30mph.

Conclusion

Out of 10,207 cases where cars use a free travelling speed of over 30mph AND had accidents with child pedestrians 10,100 survived. We know for sure that speeding didn’t kill in all these cases where the children survived. In the remaining 107 it is possible that speeding killed. The 107 who tragically died are just 1% of the total.
===========================================================================================
Comment: got to take into account really good healthcare! I thought that the above was interesting.

I’d be interested to see what the dead rates / accident rates were on the German Autobahns / roads on the Isle of Man. Anyone?

Does anyone remember that study about the actual speed your car shows in relation to what your car is actually going. In tests on Top Gear I think that they showed one car reporting it was travelling at 30 whereas it was actually driving at 37 mph.

“How do you plan on enforcing the ‘fine for Jaywalking’ bit? We have the all important red route where I live and nobody has ever enforced that.”
Blanket fine: fine everyone called J? ;-)

This sounded cool, so I wanted to add it:
Guns don’t kill people, people kill people. Speed doesn’t kill people, people kill people.

At the end of the day you should drive safely, and follow the speed limits. They’re there for a reason. It’s your responsibility if you are driving too fast / inappropriately, and unfortunately people tend to learn the hard way.

]]> By: J http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5230 J Wed, 28 Feb 2007 09:21:00 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5230 How do you plan on enforcing the 'fine for Jaywalking' bit? We have the all important red route where I live and nobody has ever enforced that. By the way, I feel totally comfortable as a passenger when Andrew's driving because I know he sticks to the speed limit. If you think about it, every time you get into a car, you're putting your life in the hands of the driver. Nobody's thought about the helpless passenger yet. How do you plan on enforcing the ‘fine for Jaywalking’ bit? We have the all important red route where I live and nobody has ever enforced that.

By the way, I feel totally comfortable as a passenger when Andrew’s driving because I know he sticks to the speed limit. If you think about it, every time you get into a car, you’re putting your life in the hands of the driver. Nobody’s thought about the helpless passenger yet.

]]> By: Lil http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5231 Lil Tue, 27 Feb 2007 20:53:24 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5231 ...anywayyy "If somebody steps out in front of me and dies, I’ll spend the rest of my life wishing it hadn’t happened. If I’m going too fast, or on the phone, I’ll spend the rest of my life knowing they might still be alive if I’d been obeying the law" Perfectly put - exactly how I feel! Everyone at work thinks I'm weird because I don't have points on my licence(!) …anywayyy

“If somebody steps out in front of me and dies, I’ll spend the rest of my life wishing it hadn’t happened. If I’m going too fast, or on the phone, I’ll spend the rest of my life knowing they might still be alive if I’d been obeying the law”

Perfectly put - exactly how I feel! Everyone at work thinks I’m weird because I don’t have points on my licence(!)

]]> By: Paroxysm http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5232 Paroxysm Tue, 27 Feb 2007 19:13:34 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5232 Well if we're going to go that slow we could all buy a bicycle. Cars are designed to get us there faster than any other widely available transport, 20mph would make them largely redundant. You can hardly blame society, life expectancy would significantly increase without McDonalds but it's convenient and stress free. The government need to be the ones who set the example - and not by punishing or criticzing those acting within their jurisdiction but by imposing restrictions and tightening existing laws at all levels of the legal process. Furthermore it's the government's duty to do this! Individual choice in this case as in the case of global warming is bound to fail. The people of this country cannot be expected to get the spoon in their mouth (and shouldn't be) so crack out the bib Labour! Well if we’re going to go that slow we could all buy a bicycle. Cars are designed to get us there faster than any other widely available transport, 20mph would make them largely redundant. You can hardly blame society, life expectancy would significantly increase without McDonalds but it’s convenient and stress free. The government need to be the ones who set the example - and not by punishing or criticzing those acting within their jurisdiction but by imposing restrictions and tightening existing laws at all levels of the legal process. Furthermore it’s the government’s duty to do this! Individual choice in this case as in the case of global warming is bound to fail. The people of this country cannot be expected to get the spoon in their mouth (and shouldn’t be) so crack out the bib Labour!

]]> By: B4L http://wongablog.co.uk/2007/02/27/mobile-phones-and-driving/#comment-5233 B4L Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:14:20 +0000 http://wongablog.djcounsell.org/?p=2339#comment-5233 When you think that if everyone drove at 20 mph, virtually nobody would be killed on the roads (either drivers or pedestrians), don't so many of these other objections pale into insignificance, Paroxysm? When you think that if everyone drove at 20 mph, virtually nobody would be killed on the roads (either drivers or pedestrians), don’t so many of these other objections pale into insignificance, Paroxysm?

]]>