Increase Ontario 400-series Highway Speed Limit

[Bermuda]

Forum Sponsor

How fast do you drive on 400-series when free-flowing and not congested?

Do you realize what someone is telling you if they respond with what you're expecting?

When someones says to that, "I travel at 120km/h", they aren't being hypocritical and contradicting themselves. They know very well that the speed limit is 100km/h, but they CHOOSE to go faster. They are aware of the risks and accept them, acting accordingly - they aren't crusading for the rise of speed limits.

 

[OpenGambit]

I also smoke and watch porn, that doesn't mean I advocate for 14 year olds to do it.
I work 80 hours a week, that doesn't mean I want that to be everyone else's work week.
I also have stood on the seat, ride with no hands, and pulled a wheelie on a "highway", that doesn't mean I think 172 is unconstitutional.

I can go on.

 

[danarchy]

Easy, Bud (have you seen my response above your post?).... I've seen countless numbers like that before, trust me.... That's precisely WHY I said what I said in my long letter on the site www.stop100.ca - such presented info (numbers) are completely useless as according to them we should ban driving altogether or AT LEAST reduce 400-series limit to 65 km/h and be the slowest, most petrified nation in the world - who's in? Shall we make a petition for lowering the limits? Let's sign up! Who goes first... Oh, nobody? But these numbers... ?

What arguments by the way? All these emotions come from a complete misunderstanding of our goal.

We DO NOT encourage people to drive faster! We simply want people to be able to drive at their current speeds of 115-130 LEGALLY! Currently - they do - ILLEGALLY!

I understand your goal but when you tell a politician "well, the current accident rates are with everyone going 120 so lets legalize it" their response will be "no, that means we need enforce the 100 more strictly to lower the rates even further". Like it or not, numbers are what make or break a case.

Don't get me wrong, I'd still like to see the limit increased but I don't see it happening with the arguments presented by both sides so far.

 

[chrison]

OK, thanks to threads like this, I was able to come up with some FAQs. Have at them (still a work in progress, so don't rip it too much).

http://stop100.ca/faq.html

 

[chrison]

Do you realize what someone is telling you if they respond with what you're expecting?

When someones says to that, "I travel at 120km/h", they aren't being hypocritical and contradicting themselves. They know very well that the speed limit is 100km/h, but they CHOOSE to go faster. They are aware of the risks and accept them, acting accordingly - they aren't crusading for the rise of speed limits.

I understand that completely, but the point is - those same people cannot change the law easily - even if they really wanted. Therefore, I want to get a feel for true public opinion in a poll. IF it shows that a vast majority of people WANTS a change, then enough pressure needs to be exerted on those politicians many of you have brought up (very correctly by the way - I know they might be terrified of picking this issue up - they have been for the last four decades!) to actually change it despite their fears... And find out that hell will not break loose...

This is not about convincing ANYONE to go faster. It's about clearer rules for the drivers and police. There is a reason why Police currently don't ticket people for doing 120 km/h and MANY cops prefer to go at the same speed as well! Our speed limit law is bad as it does not correspond to the engineering 85th percentile theory (which BTW is NOT a "moving target" as IIHS will state...) of road characteristics vs speed AT ALL! Look that theory up. I shall repeat one more time - 100 km/h - to which a few people are clinging badly was not established out of safety! Our authorities back then (prior to the change) have recognized a popular demand for GOING FASTER, hence they raised it to 112km/h (and EU countries and states to 120, 130) after investing in some excellent quality roads.

I really cannot make this any simpler - look at the roads and how they're being used. We are no different than ANY country on earth - we have great roads and want to use them as designed! Not worrying that 10km/h faster will cause a .01 % casualty hike on some useless statistic one year or another (do you really think about stats each time you enter 401?). As it stands right now, we are using them and getting a tonne of tickets in the process... This campaign intends on sparing the drivers from unnecessary tickets while preserving the same/similar speeds!

THIS IS NOT ALL ABOUT SAFETY BUT ABOUT A SOCIAL DEMAND AS WELL. GERMANS WANT TO GO 200 KM/H, WE WANT TO GO 125-130 KM/H. I hope that's quite apparent to everyone here. Once we have a final poll numbers out, we will see what people really want...

 

[jc100]

How fast do you drive on 400-series when free-flowing and not congested?

..me...me...pick me.....

I'll hazard a guess he goes with the flow of traffic at around 120kmh or slightly below without fear of getting a ticket. Just like me. Hence the old "if it's not broke....." etc.

 

[Kool]

So the government imposes a speed limit of 100 max but police only give tickets at 120+. Why doesn't the government direct the police to enforce the speed limit?
Just imagine the fatality numbers then if they enforced the speed limit..the politicians would look good...then why?
Why don't the police enforce the rules of the hwy? the passing on the right? the passing on the left and returning to the middle lane? Driving in the passing lane when holding up traffic?
Poor driver training not upgraded?
If all of these issues were enforced....and no limit increase....then the crying would start.

I think the government looks at this way...sure we have some fatalities but traffic flows reasonable...so wtf?
Just like cigs... sure we allow them and people die but we make huge coin on them and the people aren't that mad about it or they would riot in the streets.

Germans might have a slight more fatalities...but look at the time it takes to get places...well worth the cost obviously. Harsh???
Well if our government and or it's peoples were REALLY concerned...they would lower the speed limit or just enforce the existing one.....maybe they just don't care eh? Crap...maybe ban motorcycles too...they are far to dangerous...know how many fatalities we have each season? OMG!
This is about choice and balance...I think we could go a lil faster and remain safe if not safer..what's the big deal?
End of rant.

 

[chrison]

So the government imposes a speed limit of 100 max but police only give tickets at 120+. Why doesn't the government direct the police to enforce the speed limit?
Just imagine the fatality numbers then if they enforced the speed limit..the politicians would look good...then why?
Why don't the police enforce the rules of the hwy? the passing on the right? the passing on the left and returning to the middle lane? Driving in the passing lane when holding up traffic?
Poor driver training not upgraded?
If all of these issues were enforced....and no limit increase....then the crying would start.

I think the government looks at this way...sure we have some fatalities but traffic flows reasonable...so wtf?
Just like cigs... sure we allow them and people die but we make huge coin on them and the people aren't that mad about it or they would riot in the streets.

Germans might have a slight more fatalities...but look at the time it takes to get places...well worth the cost obviously. Harsh???
Well if our government and or it's peoples were REALLY concerned...they would lower the speed limit or just enforce the existing one.....maybe they just don't care eh? Crap...maybe ban motorcycles too...they are far to dangerous...know how many fatalities we have each season? OMG!
This is about choice and balance...I think we could go a lil faster and remain safe if not safer..what's the big deal?
End of rant.

Because all they would do is piss people off big time despite what the 'statisticians' in this thread might believe. Nobody cares about meaningless numbers presented in Turbo's post (neither Ontarians, Austrians, Texans, or Russians) - nobody analyzes them when merging onto a freeway (including Turbo himself, I believe). People want to drive smoothly and comfortably, and not have to watch their speedometer every second or sides of the road for police vehicles. When Ontario increases the limit, most people will feel a sigh of relief and say: "just about time!" Sure, some vocal minority will make it seem like they're a majority (and that's whom the politicians are really afraid of).

I know what the guys were saying - the politicians will be afraid of making the change. And they're right - that's precisely our job! Make sure enough people support it to pressure the gov't hard for long overdue traffic "relief". People need to care first, let's hope enough of them do!

When was the last time you drove on a highway and said : "thank God the limit's so low!". Now, I'd challenge Turbo and others to put their skills to good use to make sure the cause succeeds.... Unless you truly support 100km/h....(and driving at 20++++ over the limit!)

 

[gtm]

It's funny on the highway when an opp is doing just over 100 and everyone is scared to pass them and traffic becomes congested to ****. That's when I blow by at 120 and everyone realizes its cool and traffic resumes

 

[caboose56]

How fast do you drive on 400-series when free-flowing and not congested?

110kph. If the speed limit was 120kph I'd still do 110kph.

9L/100km in a 4400lb SUV is pretty good.

 

[turbodish]

Because all they would do is piss people off big time despite what the 'statisticians' in this thread might believe.

There are jurisdictions with speed limits comparable to ours where enforcement is tough. Think New York, where the usual Interstate ticket threshold is 5mph or 8kmph over the limit, and where roadside ticket lowering is the exceptionand not the norm. The broader general public doesn't get "****** off" at that level of enforcement at all. They just see it as a fact of life and adjust their driving expectations according.

The same thing would happen here over time. For most drivers there is no compelling NEED to drive faster. It's a want for those drivers that they will act on if they think they can get away with it. Nothing more, nothing less. Tougher enforcement would cause some to be disgruntled for a time, and some to be disgruntled forever, but most drivers will simply adjust their driving wants to slide in under the enforcement criteria with barely a second thought.

As for statisticians, like it or not numbers are important when it comes to setting policy. Numbers define an issue in more solidly objective terms and remove the "want" and emotion from an issue. Both laboratory and real world experience shows that incremental increases in crash speed is generally accompanied by exponential increases in crash severity, and with the exponential increase in crash severity comes exponential increases in crash injuries and fatalities.

Look to that German study. Reducing speeds by 1% should have a 4% reduction in road fatalities. Imposing a 120 kmph speed limit on the Autobahan would lead to a 20% reduction in road deaths, or going even further to a 100 kmph speed limit would lead to a 37% reduction in road deaths. That's a fairly significant difference in projected fatalities at 120 kmph speed limits versus 100 kmph speed limits, and that's coming from the experts in the land of the Autobahn.

Now apply those numbers to Ontario with its publicly-health care system. The health care cost repercussions of increased risk of crash are borne not just be the driver who wants to drive faster, and not just by the victims who are run into by that driver should he or she crash, but also by the general taxpayer. The government could simply shiftthat cost back to the insurance companies, but guess what effect that will have on insurance rates. There is no compelling argument in support of high speed limits when you balance in the negatives that would accompany the higher speeds that would result.

 

[Wasted]

It's funny on the highway when an opp is doing just over 100 and everyone is scared to pass them and traffic becomes congested to ****. That's when I blow by at 120 and everyone realizes its cool and traffic resumes

Sorry, I just couldn't resist.

 

[fastar1]

It's funny on the highway when an opp is doing just over 100 and everyone is scared to pass them and traffic becomes congested to ****. That's when I blow by at 120 and everyone realizes its cool and traffic resumes

I think the cops do it for kicks too. Annoying buggers.

 

[Kool]

There are jurisdictions with speed limits comparable to ours where enforcement is tough. Think New York, where the usual Interstate ticket threshold is 5mph or 8kmph over the limit, and where roadside ticket lowering is the exceptionand not the norm. The broader general public doesn't get "****** off" at that level of enforcement at all. They just see it as a fact of life and adjust their driving expectations according.

The same thing would happen here over time. For most drivers there is no compelling NEED to drive faster. It's a want for those drivers that they will act on if they think they can get away with it. Nothing more, nothing less. Tougher enforcement would cause some to be disgruntled for a time, and some to be disgruntled forever, but most drivers will simply adjust their driving wants to slide in under the enforcement criteria with barely a second thought.

As for statisticians, like it or not numbers are important when it comes to setting policy. Numbers define an issue in more solidly objective terms and remove the "want" and emotion from an issue. Both laboratory and real world experience shows that incremental increases in crash speed is generally accompanied by exponential increases in crash severity, and with the exponential increase in crash severity comes exponential increases in crash injuries and fatalities.

Look to that German study. Reducing speeds by 1% should have a 4% reduction in road fatalities. Imposing a 120 kmph speed limit on the Autobahan would lead to a 20% reduction in road deaths, or going even further to a 100 kmph speed limit would lead to a 37% reduction in road deaths. That's a fairly significant difference in projected fatalities at 120 kmph speed limits versus 100 kmph speed limits, and that's coming from the experts in the land of the Autobahn.

Now apply those numbers to Ontario with its publicly-health care system. The health care cost repercussions of increased risk of crash are borne not just be the driver who wants to drive faster, and not just by the victims who are run into by that driver should he or she crash, but also by the general taxpayer. The government could simply shiftthat cost back to the insurance companies, but guess what effect that will have on insurance rates. There is no compelling argument in support of high speed limits when you balance in the negatives that would accompany the higher speeds that would result.

There is no NEED to drive faster ... the police seem to allow us to break the rules to whatever extent they want us to. Were just saying if the allowable speed limit on 400 series hwy's seems to be 120 ish right now....why not make it the legal maxium? Even if the max is 130 nobody forces you to drive at that max limit.
Point is people drive 125 130+ even with zero reprocussions at the police's discretion. Where is the logic?

The German public and political types are well aware of the costs and numbers of driving on the autobahan...more so than we are. But that is the cost of doing business and they are willing to pay that cost.
We could reduce the speed to 80 as I've said...we would have less fatalities even so....why not?

Sure we need stats to make any case....but there is alot more to this than stats, as they can be manipulated to favour pro and against anytime. Of course there will be a fatality cost ...has to be or they would ban all vehicles. Balance. We are one of the best in Ontario...and we drive 120 + with insane antics from drivers now. What if we corrected this further...wouldn't that make sense?

Health..?? If we were concerned at all about cost...we would lower speeds...lol. Why does the public/politicians not force the police to folow the letter of the law if health costs or insurance costs were a concern eh?
The compelling part of this is we already drive the speeds on the hwy's which some of you are arguing against... what the **** is it? Do you like breaking the law everyday? Why not just simply legalize it and take it out of the polices hands...they are the ones controlling health costs, insurance costs, road repair costs, reckless drivers......etc. I just want to drive down the freakin hwy at 120 and know I'm legal and safe.....not askin too much.

 

[Bermuda]

Chrison, Kool, why is it that you both expect non-supporters to justify themselves? You're constantly asking people who contest you to provide a better argument for why, when there is no incentive to. The current system is what they are supporting, and if you don't like it the expectation is on you to change their opinion. The discussion is great, but you're trying to sell people something they already have or don't want, by asking them why they wouldn't want it.

You're critisizing people, suggesting that they are hypocritical and because they don't support you, they instead support even lower speed limits. If no one here had yet made a single argument for why the speed limit shouldn't be increased, you'd still be in the same position and we'd all still driving and riding the way we do. I can come here and help suggest to you how you can make a better case, but in the meantime nothing is changing.

I think you also need to realize that you are asking people to support you in spending their time and money so that you may continue doing what you and everyone else is already doing, creating a huge uphill battle for yourself.

 

[OpenGambit]

I love how when you are confronted with statistics all you do is challenge them to do it for you instead.

Good argument tactic, but no one is going to help out someone who can't even make a decent case for their cause.

So far you have neither the sales pitch nor the data, what do you offer really? if someone wants to actually raise the speed limit, they would be well served to not have you on the team.

 

[chrison]

Chrison, Kool, why is it that you both expect non-supporters to justify themselves? You're constantly asking people who contest you to provide a better argument for why, when there is no incentive to. The current system is what they are supporting, and if you don't like it the expectation is on you to change their opinion. The discussion is great, but you're trying to sell people something they already have or don't want, by asking them why they wouldn't want it.

You're critisizing people, suggesting that they are hypocritical and because they don't support you, they instead support even lower speed limits. If no one here had yet made a single argument for why the speed limit shouldn't be increased, you'd still be in the same position and we'd all still driving and riding the way we do. I can come here and help suggest to you how you can make a better case, but in the meantime nothing is changing.

I think you also need to realize that you are asking people to support you in spending their time and money so that you may continue doing what you and everyone else is already doing, creating a huge uphill battle for yourself.

Bermuda, I don't think we are forcing anyone to justify anything. On the contrary - I don't even pretend to want to convince you - I am simply stating what I believe to be true in response to your arguments (which I would simply call a discussion) and what vast majority supports based on our poll numbers so far (80%+) - but you have to admit, I have repeatedly stated that if someone's opposing the idea, they are most welcome to give us a negative vote on www.stop100.ca. I really appreciate each vote - positive and negative.

As to how to make the case better, I will need to give this some thought.


Read more and support the cause at www.stop100.ca and LIKE us on facebook www.facebook.com/stop100

 

[LannyNguyen]

You know, it's not going to work.
Do you remember the 50km/h+ law?
Look at people on the highway already going 115km/h-120km/h. The OPP already is giving people a break doing that.
Now you're going to get hassled if you break the 120km/h mark.

Now you want to increase the speeds? It's not going to work, and never going to work. The reason the speed limit 100km/h is made is for drivers to controling their speeds. Not only in the summertime but also in snow/rain/ice. 100km/h is there for you so you don't screw up, and if you do manage to get off traction and fish tail, that speed is there enough for you to get your control back on your vehicle.

Just a hint, if you plan on doing things about the law, government related. Facebook isn't the place to do it.
I can guarantee you 110% that it's not going to work.
In a couple of years, with population growing, you're not even going to be hitting the 100km/h speed limit mark.

 

[turbodish]

Germans might have a slight more fatalities...but look at the time it takes to get places...well worth the cost obviously. Harsh???
Well if our government and or it's peoples were REALLY concerned...they would lower the speed limit or just enforce the existing one.....maybe they just don't care eh? Crap...maybe ban motorcycles too...they are far to dangerous...know how many fatalities we have each season? OMG!
This is about choice and balance...I think we could go a lil faster and remain safe if not safer..what's the big deal?
End of rant.

Slightly more fatalities? Ontario 4.2 vs Germany 7.2 fatalities per billion km driven is "slightly more"? Percentage-wise, Germany's fatality rate is over 71% higher per km driven than Ontario's. In real terms, that is a LOT higher fatality rate.

 

[chrison]

Slightly more fatalities? Ontario 4.2 vs Germany 7.2 fatalities per billion km driven is "slightly more"? Percentage-wise, Germany's fatality rate is over 71% higher per km driven than Ontario's. In real terms, that is a LOT higher fatality rate.

Sure, Turbo... so what? In all sincerity - do you really think about this when cruising our roads? I would trade our system for theirs in a heartbeat - heck, I'd pay $2k per year in extra road/drivers license "taxes" if I was allowed to drive on such roads (over here) with freedom of speed. I would presume millions of bikers would too... (now, just to be fair, I don't think unlimited speed is safe at all - 200/300 km/h is truly to dangerous by ANY standards, as speed differentials become way too extreme).

The point is, as I tried to explain a few posts above, vast majority of drivers are not concerned with the fact that 3 more people might die PER BILLION KMs. It really is a very low number. Many European countries do not enforce highway speed limits at all - it's basically permitted to drive 160-180 with rather small penalties if caught (and still, you just won't ever get caught) - yet, nobody fears driving on those roads, casualties are not lined up on the shoulders and most drivers are simply cruising happily at 130-140 with no fear of a ticket... Statistics can paint a HORRIBLY WRONG PICTURE of what actually happens on the roads... And those countries that I have in mind have a much higher casualty rate (>15 per billion), yet you can't ever see it, neither nobody is really afraid. The lane etiquette is better and the road flows in a very "civilized way". I have driven on those highways, just in case you say I am speculating... I can guarantee you (if I had funds for this campaign and could buy you a ticket to fly there to ride), that you'd have one of the most memorable experiences of your life (that is of course if you like going faster than 105 km/h). Read ANY accounts from people who have visited Germany and driven the autobahns - upon return to their home countries (US, Canada) they almost feel "imprisoned" the moment they step on the gas.

And all that in the name of "safety". Safety from a remote chance of death for daily "threat" of tickets and insurance hikes. Look at GTA roads today - most drivers easily trade that ultimate safety for freedom of driving - hence speeds of 120-145 on a daily basis - too bad we are heaviliy penalized for that behaviour with the current law, since it's clearly OUR CHOICE.

Forum Sponsor