[geeks] Stuff fo' sale

[Mike Meredith]

On Fri, 11 Aug 2006 16:40:46 -0400, Charles Shannon Hendrix wrote:
> If safety were the real concern, then the authorities would stop
> focusing on speed and start focusing on road and vehicle design,
> driver training, and driver behavior.  All of those kill far more
> people every year than speeding ever has.

Authorities have been focusing on vehicle design, driver training and
road design for many years. Compare cars built in the 1960s with
those made today. Indeed some of the UK funds raised from speed cameras
do go into that area.

And it isn't an either/or thing. A stupid driver will survive an
accident at 20mph; and quite possibly die at 40mph. Certainly the
pedestrian he hits will likely survive at 20 and die at 40. Whilst speed
doesn't kill, speed does make accidents more risky.

> The law is not perfect or absolute.
> 
> Lot's of illegal things are not immoral or unethical, and even good
> laws can be made abusive.

Of course the law isn't perfect but complain about the law and not the
enforcement of it.

> Or it could be the statistics are created by people with a vested
> interest in making them say things are improving, even if they aren't.

Same applies to those who claim cameras increase accidents of course!

> The UK might also have different traffic patterns than other
> countries, so I don't really think you can make an overall comparison
> anyway. You'd have to compared individual intersections with

Especially in comparison to the US ... after all most of our roads (and
cities) were built long before cars and those that haven't been upgraded
aren't suitable for upgrading. In some parts of the UK it is common to
find yourself on a 6-foot wide road with very solid stone walls on
either wide curving enough that you rarely can see more than 30 feet
from where the car is.