Is HTA 172 really THAT unsuccessful?

[omnivore]

I haven't ridden faster than 120-130 kmh in almost 4 yrs, on Ont public roads......Yes becasue of 172A.

And on my drive tonight to London, I realized, as I toddled along in the minivan with the cruise set to 110 kmh, that when someone passes me going 130, I look atthem and wonder what's their hurry. Gone are the days of seeing cars going 150-160 on the 401.

 

[turbodish]

There were reductions in traffic injuries and fatalities across North America in these years ... not just in Ontario.

Yes, but...

Canada's overall highway fatality rate dropped from 8.3 to 7.3 per billion vehicle km driven between 2007 and 2008. This includes Ontario's stats.
Compare that with Ontario's rate which dropped from 6.2 to 5.0 per billion vehicle km driven.

Work out the percentage drops Canada-wide and for Ontario. Yes, fatality rates dropped in many places, but Ontario's % fatality drop was the greatest among all Canadian provinces. The stats for American states are available online as well, and none came anywhere close to Ontario's drop in the 2007 to 2008 time frame when HTA172 came into effect.

 

[alaywa]

Ever pass an old fart in their Porche or Ferrari as they baby it at 10kph over? That's me now!!! Getting passed by 13 year old Carolas with some broad chatting on the hands free and setting the radio dial.

I got 300kph potential under me, but is mostly for machismo and cafe bragging rights these days thanks to 172.

 

[dankyyz]

Very glad to hear. That was the idea.

Ever pass an old fart in their Porche or Ferrari as they baby it at 10kph over? That's me now!!! Getting passed by 13 year old Carolas with some broad chatting on the hands free and setting the radio dial.

I got 300kph potential under me, but is mostly for machismo and cafe bragging rights these days thanks to 172.

 

[dankyyz]

I was trying to imagine how you'd reply to this one. LOL. You have outdone yourself.

Well, it changed my driving/riding habits a bit...
1) I'm less likely to practice proper lane discipline, because I don't wanna appear to be "weaving" so I sometimes hog the left lane for a bit before moving over..
2) I'm more likely to keep an eye out for cops instead of road hazards
3) I sometimes block the left turn lane because I don't wanna appear to "intend to spin a tire" so I make my left turns extra-slow
4) I've been more likely to stay far back of a left lane bandit and just lay on my horn until he moves over or I reach my exit

So yes, this law did have some effects on the way I operate my motor vehicles. It reduced my level of lane discipline, made me a bit less careful, made me an obstacle at intersections and made me appear rude. I guess it brought me back to the norms of Ontario driving.

 

[dankyyz]

So stopping people from exceeding the posted limit by 50KPH has, in your mind, somehow NOT affected things like tboning left hand turners? Has there been some suspension of inertia and velocity i missed in the news? It's just not the case man.

AND....the people who have been riding 30 years are NOT the problem. It's the new kids. The dolts who have to be treated like...well KIDS, because they are not being manufactured with some of the common sense we had taught to us. And then call this a nanny state. Possibly accurately.

Oh...and there are like a few million more of them in the GTA then when we enjoyed our freedoms on the road. So if you want your insurance reduction, go shake down some 22year sitting petulantly on an R1 at any timmies near you.

Yes, because the rare circumstances in which it changed what I do (and only to a very minor extent, at that), aren't the circumstances which account for the majority of actual collisions (left turn in front in traffic at city-traffic speeds for multivehicle, or misjudge corner for single vehicle). Offsetting whatever tiny theoretical "safety" benefit that it might have in some rare situations, is that it has removed options for me to get away from an errant or misbehaving car driver - which HAS happened from time to time in my 20+ year riding career. Net safety benefit, pretty much nil. Maybe even a dis-benefit because of forcing this experienced rider into doing what's legal instead of what's safest, in situations where the safest thing to do (for example, GTFO of Dodge) isn't the most legal thing to do.

As I said before ... if it were as successful as claimed, where is my 30% insurance premium reduction. Hasn't happened, and in fact it has gone the other direction.

High gas prices encourage slowing down and driving less. That happened in 2008 and it's going to happen again in 2011. Crappy economy with not much work encourages driving less. That happened in 2009 and 2010. Whatever statistical trends one wishes to presume, have to take these factors into account. There were reductions in traffic injuries and fatalities across North America in these years ... not just in Ontario.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Yes, but...

Canada's overall highway fatality rate dropped from 8.3 to 7.3 per billion vehicle km driven between 2007 and 2008. This includes Ontario's stats.
Compare that with Ontario's rate which dropped from 6.2 to 5.0 per billion vehicle km driven.

Work out the percentage drops Canada-wide and for Ontario. Yes, fatality rates dropped in many places, but Ontario's % fatality drop was the greatest among all Canadian provinces. The stats for American states are available online as well, and none came anywhere close to Ontario's drop in the 2007 to 2008 time frame when HTA172 came into effect.

Yes, but....

Continuing the downward trend of something like the past 2 decades. Then we can get into things like population density, gas prices, and weather.

 

[mxs]

Yes, but....

Continuing the downward trend of something like the past 2 decades. Then we can get into things like population density, gas prices, and weather.

Pssst .... you are not supposed spoil their statistical tirade we have all seen and read thousand times.

They will always conveniently leave something like that out (like Fantino has for years). It works on people who cannot comprehend simple percentage math. The fatalities will drop, because people drive less. The fatalities will drop most in Ontario because we drive the most kms and because we have the most cars on the road .... or is there something else to it the Fantino supporters would love to convey to the general public?

 

[dankyyz]

What would a HTA thread be without the Fantino!??!?! LOL.

Pssst .... you are not supposed spoil their statistical tirade we have all seen and read thousand times.

They will always conveniently leave something like that out (like Fantino has for years). It works on people who cannot comprehend simple percentage math. The fatalities will drop, because people drive less. The fatalities will drop most in Ontario because we drive the most kms and because we have the most cars on the road .... or is there something else to it the Fantino supporters would love to convey to the general public?

 

[kamikaze]

The biggest problem I have with this charge is even if you are found not guilty you still have to pay the impound fees(2g's$) and the 7day suspension stays on your record

this. it's guilty until proven innocent and it's unconstitutional. The fact that the law is so poorly written and is wide open to police interpretation is what worries me.

 

[mxs]

So stopping people from exceeding the posted limit by 50KPH has, in your mind, somehow NOT affected things like tboning left hand turners? Has there been some suspension of inertia and velocity i missed in the news? It's just not the case man.

Explain pls how is this supposed to work? So somebody T-boining me doing speed limit vs 50 over is supposed to help me??? How many times have you heard of left turn accident because of excessive speed, rather than running a red light?

 

[mxs]

What would a HTA thread be without the Fantino!??!?! LOL.

Wasn't me claiming the numbers, was it? LOL

 

[turbodish]

Yes, but....

Continuing the downward trend of something like the past 2 decades. Then we can get into things like population density, gas prices, and weather.

Let's put it this way. Ontario enjoyed a sharper drop in the downward trend line than anywhere else.

That's quite a feat, especially given that Ontario was already one of the lowest, if not the lowest, jurisdiction in North America as far as fatality per km driven rates goes. It's relatively easy to improve when you're dealing with an abysmally poor record, but when your record is virtually the best in the pack, additional improvements usually become harder to achieve.

You can quibble and bring up things like weather, population density, but that is not unique to Ontario. Also, Ontario is a pretty big province. Once you get more than 30 km away from the Toronto city core, density starts to take on a sharp downward trend.

Bad weather is another factor that is hardly unique to Ontario. Besides, bad weather has little effect on the bulk of our driving. You still have to get to work, you still have to get to shopping and services. Goods still have to be shipped. Bad weather may have an effect on your trip to the beach, but there are still plenty of recreational travel that is weather-independent.

This is reflected in the actual gasoline consumption stats for Ontario that show a drop of only 1% in the volume of gasoline sold in Ontario for 2008, and part of even that little drop might be attributable to a move to more fuel-efficient vehicles. Also, that drop in volume rebounded back and then some in the very next year.

Gross sales of gasoline (2005 to 2009, thousands of litres) 15,576,477 15,507,629 15,840,468 15,667,959 15,849,943

The effect of bad weather in reducing traffic volume was negligible. Offsetting that however was the increased risk of crash that comes with driving on wet roads with reduced traction and visibility because of rain.

And gas prices is somehow an Ontario thing? The same high oil prices that raised our fuel prices were also a factor in raising fuel prices in every other market in North America. Where is their corresponding drop in fatality rates to match what Ontario enjoyed?

 

[turbodish]

Pssst .... you are not supposed spoil their statistical tirade we have all seen and read thousand times.

They will always conveniently leave something like that out (like Fantino has for years). It works on people who cannot comprehend simple percentage math. The fatalities will drop, because people drive less. The fatalities will drop most in Ontario because we drive the most kms and because we have the most cars on the road .... or is there something else to it the Fantino supporters would love to convey to the general public?

Psst... gasoline consumption in Ontario dropped by only 1% in 2008. It rebounded back the next year. Work that into your theory.

 

[turbodish]

Explain pls how is this supposed to work? So somebody T-boining me doing speed limit vs 50 over is supposed to help me??? How many times have you heard of left turn accident because of excessive speed, rather than running a red light?

Doubling of speed means braking distances increase four times. Slower traffic would have a lot better chance of being able to brake enough to avoid t-boning you.

The same applies to force of impact. Doubling of speed means that impact force increases four times. Even if they do still hit you, a hit by a slower vehicle tends to be more survivable than a hit by a faster vehicle.

The same also applies to maneuverability. Doubling of speed means increased momentum and that affects your ability to change course. Shower traffic has a better chance of being able to drastically change direction to avoid collision, and at the same time is less susceptible to losing control while doing so.

Left turn crashes because of misjudged approach speeds are common enough, especially when the approaching vehicle is a narrow profile vehicle with a single headlight at night. Do some look-up on the comparative difficulties in judging the closing speed of a narrow profile vehicle like a motorcycle compared to a"normal"-sized automobile in daytime and again at night. It has little to do with being a good or bad driver, and much to do with physiological factors in how our brain processes what the eyes can see.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

Let's put it this way. Ontario enjoyed a sharper drop in the downward trend line than anywhere else.

That's quite a feat, especially given that Ontario was already one of the lowest, if not the lowest, jurisdiction in North America as far as fatality per km driven rates goes. It's relatively easy to improve when you're dealing with an abysmally poor record, but when your record is virtually the best in the pack, additional improvements usually become harder to achieve.

You can quibble and bring up things like weather, population density, but that is not unique to Ontario. Also, Ontario is a pretty big province. Once you get more than 30 km away from the Toronto city core, density starts to take on a sharp downward trend.

Bad weather is another factor that is hardly unique to Ontario. Besides, bad weather has little effect on the bulk of our driving. You still have to get to work, you still have to get to shopping and services. Goods still have to be shipped. Bad weather may have an effect on your trip to the beach, but there are still plenty of recreational travel that is weather-independent.

This is reflected in the actual gasoline consumption stats for Ontario that show a drop of only 1% in the volume of gasoline sold in Ontario for 2008, and part of even that little drop might be attributable to a move to more fuel-efficient vehicles. Also, that drop in volume rebounded back and then some in the very next year.
The effect of bad weather in reducing traffic volume was negligible. Offsetting that however was the increased risk of crash that comes with driving on wet roads with reduced traction and visibility because of rain.

And gas prices is somehow an Ontario thing? The same high oil prices that raised our fuel prices were also a factor in raising fuel prices in every other market in North America. Where is their corresponding drop in fatality rates to match what Ontario enjoyed?

And I disagree, whole heartedly. If your numbers are small, to start with, then one single point of data has a much greater effect on the whole.

And, as we've gone 'round and 'round so many times before, the bulk of travel isn't discretionary, whereas it seems that the spikes in collisions occur at times when discretionary travel occurs. Therefore the impact on overall sales is relatively small, but the effects on discretionary travel may be large.

 

[turbodish]

And I disagree, whole heartedly. If your numbers are small, to start with, then one single point of data has a much greater effect on the whole.

True, which is why you look at years for trends and not just one.

The drop in fatality rates for 2008 was attributed to let's see - bad weather, high fuel prices, poor economy. Logic would suggest that if any one of these issues reversed themselves that the traffic fatality rate should see upward pressure again.

The high mid-2008 gasoline prices fell dramatically in August 2008, eventually reaching 4-year lows and remaining there for all of 2009. Unusually heavy rain during June/July ended around the first week of August, and both the rest of the year and 2009 saw mostly lower than average rainfall. Even the economy started to pick up again.

So all the factors that were attributed by some here as the cause of lower traffic fatality rates essentially reversed themselves, and most did so in a drastic about-turn. Where is the predicted rebound in traffic fatality rates? How could it be that fatality rates continued a downward trend by posting a further 6% reduction? When the numbers come out for 2010, then we can all look again. If there is still no rebound in fatality rates, then odds are very good that you're not looking at a momentary statistical blip, but instead at an enduring drop that can't be attributed to weather, fuel prices, the economy.

And, as we've gone 'round and 'round so many times before, the bulk of travel isn't discretionary, whereas it seems that the spikes in collisions occur at times when discretionary travel occurs. Therefore the impact on overall sales is relatively small, but the effects on discretionary travel may be large.

If the bulk of traffic is non-discretionary, and if you're trying to attribute much or most of the fatality drop to reduced discretionary travel, then surely there must be virtually zero discretionary fatalities by now.

I think you're posting a theory that you cannot support. Provide data that shows that the bulk of reduction in fatalities came out of discretionary travel, especially in light of further reductions in 2009 when the weather and fuel prices and economy were all in better shape than in 2008. If you can't produce that data, then you're just postulating a theory without foundation.

 

[Rob MacLennan]

True, which is why you look at years for trends and not just one.

If the bulk of traffic is non-discretionary, and if you're trying to attribute much or most of the fatality drop to reduced discretionary travel, then surely there must be virtually zero discretionary fatalities by now.

Funny, but that's usually my line and I look at TEN year trends, not two or three.

I think you're posting a theory that you cannot support. Provide data that shows that the bulk of reduction in fatalities came out of discretionary travel, especially in light of further reductions in 2009 when the weather and fuel prices and economy were all in better shape than in 2008. If you can't produce that data, then you're just postulating a theory without foundation.

Didn't we also go 'round and 'round on this one, where ultimately a post was made showing that there is a spike in accidents on weekends, and the days on either side of them? Feel free to peruse our past MASS of discussions on the matter

 

[CrazyKell]

I haven't ridden faster than 120-130 kmh in almost 4 yrs, on Ont public roads......Yes becasue of 172A.

And on my drive tonight to London, I realized, as I toddled along in the minivan with the cruise set to 110 kmh, that when someone passes me going 130, I look atthem and wonder what's their hurry. Gone are the days of seeing cars going 150-160 on the 401.

When I see trucks/suvs and even cars blowing by me on the 401 I look at them and wonder why they have so much money to burn that they can't be fuel conscious. LOL.

 

[roadtoruin]

Turbodish in a HTA172 thread? it's like flies on...