...and behavioural analysis, which I think would have the biggest effect on the outcome.
Increase Ontario 400-series Highway Speed Limit
- Thread starter chrison
- Start date
...and behavioural analysis, which I think would have the biggest effect on the outcome.
An ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure.
If a pedestrian is hit and they had the right of way, odds are that the vehicle was turning and thus already going much less than 40km/hr. The survivability rates of 40km/hr versus 50km/hr are meaningless and changing the speed limit likely will have no effect on whether or not a driver turns right on a red without stopping and runs over a pedestrian. How does one fix this type of driving? I'm not sure but decreasing the speed limit won't accomplish anything.
If a pedestrian is hit away from an intersection by a car moving 40km/hr of faster I'd be willing to bet that they did not have the right of way. If they choose to cross a road in such a location then they do so at their own peril. The onus is on them to cross safely.
If a driver runs a red light and hits someone at 40 versus 50.. that's worth considering, but what percentage of pedestrian collisions at intersections are due to this?
EngineerJoe
Well-known member
Physics supports the argument that reducing the speed will reduce the severity of a collision. BUT you have to look at WHY people are looking at dropping the speed limit. Do they want to reduce the severity of a collision, the likelihood of a collision, or both? Once we understand what the goal is, you'll also have to show that
1. Reducing the speed limit will reduce the likelihood of a vehicle-pedestrian collision?
2. Reducing the speed limit will reduce the speed at which vehicles drive.
As I'm sure you're aware, reducing the speed and reducing the speed limit are two different things.
Regarding reducing speed limits in the city; some questions need to be asked:
Does reducing limits to even lower than current cause drivers to pay less attention to driving and more to texting, etc?
Does making potential crashes potentially more survivable encourage pedestrians to pay even less attention to where they walk than they do now?
Does reducing limits to incredibly low levels cause even higher apathy for driving laws?
Does reducing limits cause school zones to have higher pedestrian crash rates since the especially low speed limits that were once limited to school zones are no longer unique?
Is higher amount of road rage likely due to high driver frustration?
Does higher driver frustration result in more crashes overall?
Is pollution increased due to higher levels of congestion?
..Tom
Does reducing limits to even lower than current cause drivers to pay less attention to driving and more to texting, etc?
Does making potential crashes potentially more survivable encourage pedestrians to pay even less attention to where they walk than they do now?
Does reducing limits to incredibly low levels cause even higher apathy for driving laws?
Does reducing limits cause school zones to have higher pedestrian crash rates since the especially low speed limits that were once limited to school zones are no longer unique?
Is higher amount of road rage likely due to high driver frustration?
Does higher driver frustration result in more crashes overall?
Is pollution increased due to higher levels of congestion?
..Tom
OpenGambit
Banned
well I don't think the actually statistics about surviability rates of 50 vs 40 are foregone conclusions, to me, that part was informative.
I also don't disagree with the idea that walking and cycling should be encouraged, especially in the core. <--- that is key, I am not talking about mt pleasant.
I have lived in a number of cities and always near the applicable downtown core, I find that cars are the thing that is most out of place there. The trend in the downtown is to make it more pedestrian friendly and cycling friendly - bixi bikes, the diagonal crosswalks.. etc.
OpenGambit
Banned
Sounds to me like they are looking at the severity for the most part, and I don't think its a contentious point to say that a speed limit decrease combined with enforcement would lower speeds. I also don't think that as doctors, they should have to "show" an actual reduction in speed, its an assumption and not a unreasonable one.
Then I guess I may have read a bit more on that subject, as there wasn't much new to me in it.
The fact remains he made a conclusion about something that, as stated by caboose483, isn't fact. You can reduce the amount of injury incurred by reducing the nominal speed limit by 10 Kmh. Will that have a real and fundamental effect on the number of such injuries in Toronto? Unknown, as he has no findings regarding the type of incidents that are experienced. I could as easily state that putting an alarm in your cottage could reduce your exposure to theft but if it's on an island where people rarely go, and there's no one around to hear the alarm anyway, I'd be talking out of my butt.
OpenGambit
Banned
I kinda take the view that the type of information you are looking for is the expertise of a different professional.
If doctors said that banning cigarettes would make people healthier, i don't think anyone would expect them to also have information about how people would continue to get cigarettes dispite a ban.
Its just a piece of the puzzle, not a complete answer.
If doctors said that banning cigarettes would make people healthier, i don't think anyone would expect them to also have information about how people would continue to get cigarettes dispite a ban.
Its just a piece of the puzzle, not a complete answer.
Unfortunately, in our current political climate, it will likely be latched onto as the salvation of the pedestrian, at least by a few politicians.
OpenGambit
Banned
Well, I guess I don't disagree with that.
at least our crazys in AB didn't win.
at least our crazys in AB didn't win.
invictus43
Well-known member
That reminded me a lot of the election a few years back..where some of the candidates were slipping up when speaking..and a lot of people said "WTF are these people??" I think it was the Reform Party.. Talk about hoof in mouth disease.. Gays will spend eternity burning in lakes of fire in hell?? Seriously??
invictus43
Well-known member
EngineerJoe
Well-known member
I can agree to the point in bold, but it may not address speed issues in a collision in all situations (i.e. when a vehicle is turning). Although I don't think the severity of a collision in those situations is primarily a function of speed, so it very well may be a moot point.
I don't think doctors should be recommending changes in speed. I think they should present the facts as they find them and leave it to those experienced with traffic flow and enforcement to determine a reasonable lower speed. There are MANY other factors to consider when changing speed, vehicle-pedestrian interaction is only one factor.
OpenGambit
Banned
requiring that that any one action that is only part of a solution to address "all" situations is unrealistic in my view.
I don't see why doctors can't recommend a change in speed, the same way they can recommend that a substance be banned or restricted, surely you don't believe that their responsibility only starts at the operating table. Its not like they are the final word.
EngineerJoe
Well-known member
Agreed... although there was a point I was going to add but it slipped my mind... office distraction. You might find a reply to this in a couple hours or a couple weeks.
Doctors are well respected in the community. The issue I have with doctors making recommendations outside their area of expertise is because their opinion carries a lot of weight. Perhaps limit their recommendation to re-evaluate speed limits given the new findings.
I think you're stretching a bit with the alarm analogy..
Far less so than the average politician, by orders of magnitude.
viper84737
Well-known member
Ok so WTF.
I went riding into downtown Toronto today for the first time in a while, just cause I was in the area. Some retard pedestrian steps out from between two cars jay walking across the street and I have to swerve to miss him. What speed was I doing? I don't remember, I was trying not to get my bike damaged by the bones of some moron. Fine, I put two fingers to my eyes telling him to watch where he's going, and life goes on.
Later on, I'm reflecting on that incident momentarily. This is at least one solid hour later. At this time, coincidentally, some oblivious lady darts out in the same manner, jay walking across the street from my left. She's looking TO HER LEFT. Lady, you won't want to be looking at the cars that aren't going to hit you, look to your right, cause you almost stained my motorbike with your obliviousness. What speed was I going? Whatever the hell speed I was comfortable going, given the conditions.
Stop freaking stepping out in traffic towards my bike, stupid Torontonians.
I went riding into downtown Toronto today for the first time in a while, just cause I was in the area. Some retard pedestrian steps out from between two cars jay walking across the street and I have to swerve to miss him. What speed was I doing? I don't remember, I was trying not to get my bike damaged by the bones of some moron. Fine, I put two fingers to my eyes telling him to watch where he's going, and life goes on.
Later on, I'm reflecting on that incident momentarily. This is at least one solid hour later. At this time, coincidentally, some oblivious lady darts out in the same manner, jay walking across the street from my left. She's looking TO HER LEFT. Lady, you won't want to be looking at the cars that aren't going to hit you, look to your right, cause you almost stained my motorbike with your obliviousness. What speed was I going? Whatever the hell speed I was comfortable going, given the conditions.
Stop freaking stepping out in traffic towards my bike, stupid Torontonians.
I think you're stretching a bit with the alarm analogy..
A bit, but only a tiny little bit.
Please consider.
There are some older offramps around that are tricky. Most offramps don't require heavy braking and you can easily navigate them at 60-70km/hr with gentle braking. There are however, a handful of older ones that for whatever reason require significant reduction in speed. If a driver or rider is not paying attention it's fairly easy to get in trouble on these such offramps. Once upon a time I actually hurled my ZX-7R like a frisbee off a double apex 270 degree offramp. I admit that it was 100% my fault but that offramp was somewhat known for unscheduled offroad adventures.
The fundamental cause of those rabbit chasing excursions is a combination of two things. Drivers not paying attention, and the fact that the offramp is a lot tighter than most. Would it be better to re-design the offramp to eliminate the problem? Or would it be better to drop the speed limit on that section of the 401 to 70km/hr so drivers are less likely to blow the corner?
Fix the problem. Don't put your bubble gum in a crack in the dam to stop the leak. The problem isn't speed. The problem is inattentive/selfish drivers and oblivious pedestrians. Dropping the speed limit to increase pedestrian safety might have unintended consequences. Given an increased (and false) sense of security it's certainly possible that the decreased speed limits might result in EVEN MORE stupid pedestrians assuming they have the right of way all the time, no matter what.
canadacupid
New member
I use 401 daily between 3:30pm and 5:30pm, actual speed is below 20km per hour, people do not move and turned 401 into a parking lot, what is the point of raising speed limit above 100km when people can not even drive at 100km ?
I am not against raising speed limit, but raising speed limit when people are unable drive at 100km, is total waste of time and energy...
So let's ask people to stop driving slow before we ask for right to drive faster...
I am not against raising speed limit, but raising speed limit when people are unable drive at 100km, is total waste of time and energy...
So let's ask people to stop driving slow before we ask for right to drive faster...
There are some valid points being made here.
There are some points to consider:
1. We can not accommodate every person and every scenario. This is not Burger King.
2. Impose a licensing fee for cyclists and ebike riders. Why are these people on our roads with NO basic training for the rules of the roads.
How are cyclists supposed to know the rules of the roads when they have not passed the basic written test?
3. If a cyclist plows into your car and damages it, who pays for the damages.
4. The more time spent on the road driving the higher the risk of an accident therefore a higher speed limit will reduce the risk as well as fatigue.
5. Why are skateboarders and rollerbladers allowed to use said roads?
I see a group of people using the roads without any training or knowledge of the official regulations. They also do not have for the most part any responsibility should they damage your car. It is the auto drivers that pays for the roads via license fees and gas fees. We spend money taking away space from auto drivers to give to cyclists yet they bare no costs and have next to zero responsibility.
Why does my car have to have headlights and tail lights but a bicycle on the same dark road does not?
Why are pedestrians given a false sense of safety by shifting the entire burden of road safety to the auto driver? Pedestrians need to be held accountable and be a part of proper road sharing. The end result of a car hitting me tends to make me the loser in that scenario therefore I take it upon myself to ensure that even if I have the right away I still look around and ensure the path is safe to proceed.
There is an old saying, you can be right but you might be dead at the same time.
There are some points to consider:
1. We can not accommodate every person and every scenario. This is not Burger King.
2. Impose a licensing fee for cyclists and ebike riders. Why are these people on our roads with NO basic training for the rules of the roads.
How are cyclists supposed to know the rules of the roads when they have not passed the basic written test?
3. If a cyclist plows into your car and damages it, who pays for the damages.
4. The more time spent on the road driving the higher the risk of an accident therefore a higher speed limit will reduce the risk as well as fatigue.
5. Why are skateboarders and rollerbladers allowed to use said roads?
I see a group of people using the roads without any training or knowledge of the official regulations. They also do not have for the most part any responsibility should they damage your car. It is the auto drivers that pays for the roads via license fees and gas fees. We spend money taking away space from auto drivers to give to cyclists yet they bare no costs and have next to zero responsibility.
Why does my car have to have headlights and tail lights but a bicycle on the same dark road does not?
Why are pedestrians given a false sense of safety by shifting the entire burden of road safety to the auto driver? Pedestrians need to be held accountable and be a part of proper road sharing. The end result of a car hitting me tends to make me the loser in that scenario therefore I take it upon myself to ensure that even if I have the right away I still look around and ensure the path is safe to proceed.
There is an old saying, you can be right but you might be dead at the same time.
