Quote:
Originally Posted by Seminole
If a 5.56mm bullet went 5fps instead of 3000fps, would it be as likely to kill you?
Yes. I lived in Germany from 1983-85, have you? It takes a lot more money and effort to get a license for the average German, and they show a level of consideration (faster traffic to the left) that I've never seen on American highways. The autobahns are also better built, with very large radius turns, and barriers that prevent anyone from crossing the median.
The question was, are lower speeds inherently safer. Ask yourself, 'is an accident at 5mph safer than an accident at 100mph'?
You have less time to react at higher speeds, even if you're reaction speed is the same, because of the rate at which you are traveling (your speed). Notice the extra 50 feet required to stop from 70mph vs 60mph? That's the ground you cover just slowing to 60mph (meanwhile someone going 30mph could have come to full stop and you're still going 60mph)
I asked you a question to answer yours. How many fatalities do you think we'd have if speeds were limited to 5mph? Answering that honestly will answer your initial question of whether or not slower is inherently safer.
I'm telling you that they are associated with driving faster. Good luck causing a fatality in a modern car governed to 5mph.
force = mass x (velocity / time)
Raise the force in the accident and you make it less safe for the participants.
We're losing over 37,000 people a year in the balance between safety and convenience. How many more to fill your need for speed outside the track?
|
We're nitpicking here, although I appreciate your opposition. It gives me a chance to further explain and demonstrate my points and fill holes in my discussion.
Is an accident safer at 5 mph than 100 mph? I believe it is safer, but it is also more likely. You'll have 1 accident at 100 mph and 100 at 5 mph. It might on average be safer, but someone will still die somehow. Is your solution that we all jog at 5 mph instead of using cars at all?
You stated that you lived in Germany and that it takes more to get a license there. What I'm proposing is that we implement similar standards here. The way people behave when they drive is downright reckless, but somehow that is acceptable in this country. If the average driver were more responsible, then fatalities would drop. Since irresponsible drivers are driving fast, people die. Maybe if everyone on the road put down the phone, stopped messing with their GPS unit on the freeway, and used their blinkers, we'd all be safer. Unfortunately, the irresponsible ones tearing down the highway at the speed limit with a coffee cup in one hand and a burger in the other stop those of us driving at the same speed or faster from arriving safely. You're argument proposes that speed is the factor, but I'd much rather get passed by someone driving fast between the lines than someone driving slow with neither hand on the wheel. When the first person passes me, I have no complaints. When the second person passes me, I wonder who they're going to kill. In Germany, the first person is far more likely to get a driver's license than the second. Why do we let the second person on the road in the United States?
You're also missing an important variable in the highway math you're doing. While you have the same reaction time but travel further on the highway than on other roads, everyone else is moving at a similar rate in the same direction. As a result, you are less likely to find someone at a complete stop on a highway than any other road because other roads have intersections that require either yielding or stopping altogether. Traffic tends to be gradual, so people on the highway expecting to go 65 will find themselves gradually reaching the 45 mark. Meanwhile, someone driving on a major street will find themselves going 45 but having to stop abruptly because a fool decided to shoot the gap between 2 cars, nearly causing a collision. This produces 2 statistics worthy of discussion: intersections cause more accidents than highways and highway pileups tend to affect more vehicles at a time. That being said, the sheer number of intersection collisions outnumbers highway collisions by such a large number that the fatality statistic you posted is more likely to be happening below highway speed or by people driving recklessly fast on roads where traffic is going substantially slower.
I'm not advocating the repeal of every speed limit. I'm advocating that speed be enforced more frequently, that speed limits be raised according to that enforcement, and that other rules be enforced more frequently. This policy change creates a culture of obeying the law rather than regularly exceeding the law by 5 mph or more.
On the other hand, you're proposing 5 mph speed limits. Maybe we all should start looking for ponies to train.
