Subject: Unfair speed limits

From: [email-masked]
Date: Sat, 08 Apr 95 15:49:14

> From: [email-masked] (Angelo_B.V.)

 > Do people agree that it is unfair to have the same speed limit for 
 > different 
 > kind of autos ?
 > 
 > For example, driving a BMW 750 at 140 km/h you can still be looking 
 > at the
 > newspaper on the seat next to you.  At the same speed in a Fiat 
 > Panda, your 
 > are playing with your life.
 > 
 > So, why if you are so lucky to drive a nice car like a BMW,  you 
 > have to 
 > behave like you are driving a Panda?
 > 
 > It seems to me that the law discriminate people having good, safe 
 > cars.
 > 

That's because the people in the 750i driving at 140 km/h are endangered by the
people driving Pandas at 90 km/h.

---

From: [email-masked] (TOM NEUMANN)
Date: Sun, 16 Apr 95 23:00:00 -0500

[email-masked] (John W. Kale) writes:

JK>        Where do these numbers come from? Exactly what is a "sub 30th
  >percentile" speed? That is, are the percentiles based on long-term
  >or short-term averages? Drivers usually slow down in a blinding blizzard,
  >but are more likely to have an accident anyway. If I slow down to what
  >would be 30th percentile speed on a clear day but is 90th percentile in
  >bad weather, and have an accident, where is that accident tallied? At 90th
  >or 30th percentile?

The 30th percentile would be the speed at which 30 out of 100 drivers 
are driving at or less than (ie: 70 of 100 drivers are driving faster 
than them.)

JK>        Do you mean the stats in the chart below? They do no such thing.
  >MOST of the countries on the chart are listed having higher speed limits
  >AND higher death rates than the US, a pretty clear vindication of the
  >"speed kills" point of view.

The numbers show quite clearly that there is no correlation between 
posted speed limits and fatality rates. Other things are at work that 
account for fatality rates and posted speed limits aren't one of them.

(Note also, that regrdless of the posted speed limits in North America, 
limited access highways with the highest limits [ie: interstate 
highways, 400-series highways in Canada] have much lower fatality rates 
than highways with lower limits [that typically are not limited 
access].

Tom
---
 þ 1st 1.11 #3720 þ I sell Volkswagen Audi & Porsche

---

From: [email-masked] (TOM NEUMANN)
Date: Sun, 23 Apr 95 14:18:00 -0500

[email-masked] (Steph Greenberg) writes:

SG>: In article <8A72550.20EA001210.uuout#westonia.com>, [email-masked] 
  >said:

SG>: It seems to me from the statistics above that not only do higher speed limits
  >: not contribute to higher fatality rates, but there appears to be no correlati
  >on
  >: at all between speed limits and fatality rates. 

SG>Wow, talk about misinterpretation of statistical data. In most European 
  >cities that I've driven in the speed limit was like 80 kph (around 50 
  >mph). That includes Germany. On most intercity routes in the US the limit 
  >has been raised to 65MPH (around 112 kph) and some are 70mph (120 kph). 

Where is the misrepresentation? The original post suggested that 
increasing speed limits would lead ot higher fatalities.

The numbers I posted show that there is no correlation between posted 
speed limits and fatality rates.

I agree that there are many factors that lead to fatality rates; 
however posted speed limits on major highways aren't one of them.

Tom
---