The past few weeks have been spent travelling both in this country and a delightful trip to Scandinavia which was fascinating on a number of levels. I was struck by the proliferation of 20mph (or kph equivalents) both streets and complete residential areas in Scandinavia. I Although 20mph areas are not so common in Wales as in England, they are becoming much more common as a case can be made to local authorities by individuals, concerned parents groups, PTA’s, and schools themselves to introduce them, along with the appropriate traffic calming measures and any parent who’s child walks or cycles to school will be happy to see them. This is happening all over the world as communities realise that speed kills; Canada, USA, Australia as well as Europe. As for whole residential areas, to give children that same degree of safety, and for anyone who lives in an area to have had to listen to the ‘boy racers’ screaming around the streets at night, they are a blessing. Whilst there have been many sensible and informed posts off the subject of speed and speed limits on this forum, and it’s enforcement for the safety of us all, sadly, the fact that ‘speed kills’ appears to have been missed by certain people in, amongst other places, North Wales.
And as for statistics, of which I have had far too much to do with, including compiling, collecting and extrapolating, they have been described as one of three types of lies, ‘lies, dammed lies and statistics’, by either Twain, Disraeli or Churchill, dependant on who you prefer, although everything is normally supposed to be a quote by Churchill. The results of statistics can easily be skewed accidentally or inadvertently, or even deliberately by asking the same questions in a different manner or in a different format, often to support a thesis or argument - as we have all seen with local authorities ‘consultants’, whose reports on local affairs always include statistics in favour of the authorities preferred result; the ‘he who pays the piper’ syndrome.
But facts are facts, that is why they are facts. If a child runs into the road and is hit by a vehicle, the cause of the accident is the child running into the road. Fact. The vehicle, if being driven within the speed limit, cannot be considered as the cause of the accident. The next fact is that the speed that the vehicle hits the child is the critical factor as to whether the child lives - or dies. Again, if a vehicle pulls out of a side road into the path of another vehicle, that is cause of the collision. The fact is that the speed at the point of impact greatly determines the amount of damage and injury, or if someone dies. This is not rocket science but a basic principle of the simplest of physics, the faster two items collide, the greater the damage caused. Whilst there are a myriad of other ancillary issues, the fact is that speed is by far the major factor that determines injury or fatality and is the only constant.
Many years ago I gave evidence at Coroners court in the case of a lady (passenger) that was killed in a vehicle driven straight out over ‘give way’ markings directly into the path of a lorry. The lorry was determined by tachograph analysis to have been travelling at 28mph prior to the impact, within the 30mph limit. Both the driver of the lorry and the driver of the car were utterly devastated, and I’m sure they are to this day. The cause of the collision was the car driver not concentrating and failing to see the junction’s ‘give way’ markings. Interestingly, and perhaps poignantly, those roads are today within a 20mph zone. I believe that if if that collision had occurred at 20mph, that lady would not have died.
Driving at lower speeds gives the driver a longer ‘time to react’, which is defined as the time between the presentation to the driver of a hazard and the subsequent response. Within the field of Mental Chronometry this period is known as ‘Reaction Time’. Much published research has been done in this field for many years, but the bottom line in respect to motoring is that the greater the time for the driver, to see, appreciate and react to the hazard, the greater possibility to avoid or mitigate the possibility of collision. You’d think this would be rather obvious, but it certainly isn’t to some drivers. Nor apparently, is the need to concentrate on the matter in hand, i.e. driving; it appears to have become ancillary to texting and telephoning.
So, speed may not be the statistical reason for the RTC, but it is by fact the highest reason for serious injury or death. The impact speed in a collision may be within the speed limit, (whether it is an excessive speed for the circumstances is another matter) however, that does not take into account the speed prior to the impact; the driver may well have been able to significantly reduce the speed of the vehicle in the ‘reaction time’ before the collision, but unable to avoid an actual collision. We’ve all seen the skid marks. (I could go into reams here about Accident Investigation at this point, but as you are probably bored already, I’ll leave that out.)
So it's pretty obvious that speed limits do have to be set, and enforced, for the safety of everyone - and as previously pointed out on this forum, speed limits are the absolute maximum speeds allowed, it does not mean that it is safe to drive at the maximum speed in all conditions.
Unfortunately, and to me it’s unbelievable, that some people really do seem to consider over 1,750 deaths and over 25,000 serious injuries every year on British roads an acceptable risk. I consider it abhorrent, avoidable and an awful tragedy.
Mrs B would contribute to this, but I doubt if her reaction to the idiocy of the defence of speed would be as subtle or refined as mine; as a Consultant Pathologist she did too many post-mortems on the victims of road traffic collisions. At one point, due to the deaths and serious injuries on one particular stretch of dual carriageway she and the local Coroner prevailed on the agencies to reduce the speed limit. They did reduce the speed limit, from 70mph down to 50mph. The number of deaths and serious injuries on that stretch of road instantly reduced.
To read that someone who was trained to drive 50 years ago brag that they enjoy the challenge (with 'challenge' comes risk, and that risk is to every other road user) of driving fast today is proof that sadly, the misplaced (and sometimes fatal) belief in one’s own ability is not confined to the young. It’s ludicrous, stupid and life threatening. Speak to any ‘boy-racer’ speeding around your housing estate or the Evo Triangle and they will also tell you that they enjoy driving fast, and that they are safe drivers. I’m sure Richard Brown would have said the same before he crashed his car into a tree killing three teenage passengers and crippling a third in Menai Bridge.
And this is my last post to the TTF, as I ask that the administrators remove my registration and membership to this forum.