Great Article in Vancouver Sun regarding speeding

[Vale46Rossi]

Speed limits should be higher
$
‘Safety’ is a red herring — with better engineered roads and cars, ticketing has become a revenue generator
$
BY IAN TOOTILL, SPECIAL TO THE SUN AUGUST 16, 2012
$

A recent drive between Hope and Kamloops on the Coquihalla Highway confirmed that speed anarchy is the norm in British Columbia. During my trip, it seemed nearly everybody was ignoring rules set by the provincial government and local traffic authorities. Nobody travelled at or under the speed limits of 100 and 110 km/h, not even the lone RCMP truck that caused the bottleneck behind it at 20 clicks over.

If you say you don’t speed on highways, you are likely either not a driver, a member of a small (sometimes annoying and dangerous) minority, or simply a liar. Admittedly, some people are neither skilled nor responsible, and we need laws (plus training and testing) to guide them. However, when the “law is an ass,” as it clearly is on some highways in British Columbia, the predictable outcome is people ignore it. Many drivers in B.C. and Canada simply don’t take speed limits seriously.

Contrary to government propaganda that “speed is killing us,” exceeding the speed limit on highways is not causing carnage and mayhem — other than the kind instigated by police actions and government policies. Our government capitalizes on the ambiguity of what we define as “good” and “bad” drivers. By demonizing speed, they justify tens of millions in revenue from drivers, most of whom are travelling at safe and reasonable speeds. In fact, more than half of the $65 million-plus in annual B.C. ticket revenue is attributable to offences related to speeding.

How is this positive for driving safety and law enforcement integrity? Even the B.C. Government Employees Union’s recent proposal to expand the B.C. sheriffs’ mandate to include traffic enforcement as a “revenue-generating” tool shows the distrust and cynicism that’s developed on a broad level. If B.C. Police Association president Tom Stamatakis finds the proposal, as he says “insulting to B.C. taxpayers,” he might consider addressing the root cause instead of attacking the symptom.

The B.C government claims speed is a “major contributing factor” in more than 40 per cent of fatal crashes. Yet two-thirds of those are not the result of exceeding the speed limit. In the catch-all category of speed, the B.C. government lumps causes such as “too fast for conditions” (such as driving on black ice, although under the speed limit) and crashes where drugs and alcohol are overriding factors. A telling statistic — since exposure to risk is directly attributable to time on the road — is deaths per billion vehicle kilometres travelled. Canada ranks third from last among countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, including Germany, where speed limits and travel speeds are significantly higher. If there was merit to the argument that slower is better, it’s not apparent from the evidence.

We have some of the best roads in the world, with automobiles that are increasingly better engineered for speed and safety than those in decades past.

The Coquihalla originally cost $848 million and B.C. spends more than $1.4 billion on annual highway maintenance and construction. Why are we spending all this money building and maintaining highways and buying ever faster and safer vehicles, only to crawl along at 80 to 110 km/h?

You can travel all over the planet and experience great driving on worse roads and in worse vehicles than in B.C. You will see teamwork among drivers to ensure traffic flow and safety: Drivers signal lane changes, keep right except to pass and pay attention. But come here and drivers are often adversarial. In B.C., too often our laws protect stupid drivers and punish good ones; as a result, awful driving is tolerated and sometimes encouraged.

Not long ago, I followed a faster driver on Highway 1 who, in my opinion, was a very good driver, the kind I felt safe being on the road with. I could anticipate his moves and he was courteous, keeping his distance, keeping right except to pass and using his turn signals. In fact, my passenger and I discussed his driving and concluded it was model driver behaviour. Just west of Hope, an RCMP cruiser, waiting on an on-ramp, apprehended him. It turned out they had tracked him by helicopter on the Coquihalla at more than 40 km/h over the speed limit. A charge of excessive speed in B.C. involves not only a fine and points, but now a vehicle seizure. Those who set and execute the priorities for B.C. traffic enforcement thought it better to spend thousands of dollars in helicopter time to nail a safe and courteous driver, impound his vehicle, forcibly abandon him and his family, and assess thousands in fines, fees and penalty points.

I frequently avoid road travel in the province because I am more terrified of law enforcement than I am of encountering irresponsible and dangerous driving. And I say this as a motorcyclist who twice in the past ended up in hospital and was once nearly killed, after being struck by two drivers, on different occasions, who were dangerous for reasons other than their speed.

The problems on our roads have never been as simple as “speed is killing us.”

There are more than 10,000 vehicles per day travelling the Coquihalla between Hope and Merritt and more than 25,000 travelling all three segments when Kamloops and Kelowna are included.

Think how many more people, goods and services could make use of the road if 30 to 60 minutes were reduced from travel time, and better, if the threat of vehicle seizure was gone for simply travelling as the road was intended.

Until speed limits are set with the principle that the safe actions of the reasonable majority are considered legal, it appears that politics and good intentions trump what society is safely doing anyway.

Ian Tootill is the principal of an investor relations firm in Vancouver and co-founder of SENSE (SENSE BC - Safety by Education Not Speed Enforcement), an advocacy group for B.C. motorists.

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

Original source article:$Speed limits should be higher


Read more: Guest editorial: Airport bilingualism deserves a second look



Read more: Guest editorial: Airport bilingualism deserves a second look




Speed limits should be higher

[Energy]

Too much politicking needed and red tape for the rules to change any time soon.

[radioman]

Great read.

[dangonay]

As soon as I saw the writer is trying to take statistics from the "causes" of crashes and correlating them to the "severity" of crashes I knew there was no point in reading what else he has to say.

How can I take someone seriously if they're too stupid to even get this simple difference?

[q0192837465]

Speed doesn't kill. Stupid kills.

[Gridlock]

This whole 40 over impound thing is bullshit.

There is a HUGE difference in 40 over a 30km zone, and a 100km zone. I'm not saying either should be a free pass, but this taking people's cars thing is just not right. At least get a day in court for a JUDGE to determine whether I should lose my car for a week, and not in the hands of police officers at the side of the road.

[mafiakid]

I am all for increasing speed limits where necessary.

City should be 60km/h
Sea to sky highway should be 100km/h.

But it would probably mean that police will no longer give that 10km/h over grace they most likely do now. A lot would be doing 70 in the city since they are used to driving 10 over or 120 on the sea to sky since majority do 20 over currently.

So effectively we may see drivers doing 20km/h over in the city or 40km/h over on sea to sky from their original 50 and 80 limit So if speeds were to increase, I believe that enforcement would be even more strict.

But the opposite can be seen and that is the speed limits increase and people are no longer speeding because majority do 60 in the city and 100 on the sea to sky and they woud keep to those speeds since they are reasonable. so their cash grab ticket system would be null. Except knowing the government, they would tweak it back in their favor.

[bballguy]

Driving 140km/h in a 100km/h zone is the same thing as driving 42km/h in a school zone (30km/h limit).....Can you imagine getting your vehicle impounded going 40km/h in a school zone....

That said, going 70 in a school zone (30km/h limit) (which is what it takes to get you impounded) is the same thing as going 233km/h in a 100km/h zone......

Seems a lil flawed....

[46_valentinor]

to be honest, and im expecting fails and flaming for saying this, i don't care what the speed limit is and how much they are going to increase or decrease it. i will drive the speed i think is the most suitable depending on the situation such as traffic flow, weather, time of the day, location, passengers.
if i get a ticket for speeding then so be it, i take full responsibility just like how i would in any circumstances.
i think the main problem i witness on a daily basis is the fact that so many drivers are basically oblivious to what is going on 360degrees around them. drivers here tend to have the mindset that there is no need to look behind or beside them, forward view only matters.
passing lane on the left? I AM PASSING, IM DRIVING THE SPEED LIMIT (personal experience).

[Energy]

Originally Posted by 46_valentinor

to be honest, and im expecting fails and flaming for saying this, i don't care what the speed limit is and how much they are going to increase or decrease it. i will drive the speed i think is the most suitable depending on the situation such as traffic flow, weather, time of the day, location, passengers.
if i get a ticket for speeding then so be it, i take full responsibility just like how i would in any circumstances.

I do too. Or I usually just go with the flow of traffic which is normally ~10-20km higher than the limit anyway.

[dangonay]

Originally Posted by bballguy

Driving 140km/h in a 100km/h zone is the same thing as driving 42km/h in a school zone (30km/h limit).....Can you imagine getting your vehicle impounded going 40km/h in a school zone....

That said, going 70 in a school zone (30km/h limit) (which is what it takes to get you impounded) is the same thing as going 233km/h in a 100km/h zone......

Seems a lil flawed....

Only thing flawed is your math if you think you can use something as simple as a percentage to make a comparison between speds.


I would personally like to see higher speed limits, but it'll never happen. We don't have the same type of driver education as other countries do so we have a wide range of driver skills sharing the same roads. As such, limits are set to the lowest common denominator of drivers which sucks for everyone else.

I wish they made getting a license significantly harder (and I mean a lot harder) than they do now so we would have fewer idiots on the road. Enough with this "driving is a right" BS. If you lack the skills you shouldn't get your license.

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by bballguy

Driving 140km/h in a 100km/h zone is the same thing as driving 42km/h in a school zone (30km/h limit).....Can you imagine getting your vehicle impounded going 40km/h in a school zone....

That said, going 70 in a school zone (30km/h limit) (which is what it takes to get you impounded) is the same thing as going 233km/h in a 100km/h zone......

Seems a lil flawed....

What? no... that's not how it works.

In your scenario,
42km/h is a difference of 12km/h.
140km/h is a difference of 40km/h.

And +40km/h is going to cause a lot more damage than +12km/h.

Originally Posted by dangonay

I wish they made getting a license significantly harder (and I mean a lot harder) than they do now so we would have fewer idiots on the road. Enough with this "driving is a right" BS. If you lack the skills you shouldn't get your license.

Yup, driving slower is not the solution. If an average person couldn't handle driving faster than 50km/h,
I would say they are a pretty shitty driver that doesn't deserve to drive.

[bballguy]

Originally Posted by AzNightmare

What? no... that's not how it works.

In your scenario,
42km/h is a difference of 12km/h.
140km/h is a difference of 40km/h.

And +40km/h is going to cause a lot more damage than +12km/h.

In my opinion, it's the same thing...Going 42km/h in a school zone is just as dangerous as driving 140km/h on the highway....

[AW607]

I remember those days of my road tests and driving lessons, going along at 50km/h. To be honest it was outright excruciating because I get passed and cut off left right and center, makes me feel like I'm going at a snail's pace compared to everyone else because they're going 60 - 70km/h. Once I passed my tests, I left ICBC going right back up to the 'normal' speed on the roads

[AzNightmare]

Originally Posted by bballguy

In my opinion, it's the same thing...Going 42km/h in a school zone is just as dangerous as driving 140km/h on the highway....

I understand where you're getting at, and I don't outright disagree with you in the principle.
But in the end, your opinion doesn't overrule law of physics.

It's +12km/h vs +40km/h
and it only gets worse at higher speeds.
It's inevitable that more damage will be done the faster a car goes before it suddenly hits 0km/h in a collision.

Everyone will debate what's considered more dangerous, but the way the law is set right now,
they are pretty much dumbproofing it, with the assumption everyone will lose control and crash.
So they would rather have people crash at lower speeds. It's a flawed system, but that's pretty much what it is...

[Marco911]

Originally Posted by dangonay

As soon as I saw the writer is trying to take statistics from the "causes" of crashes and correlating them to the "severity" of crashes I knew there was no point in reading what else he has to say.

How can I take someone seriously if they're too stupid to even get this simple difference?

You realize that ICBC and the OSMV use that kind of spurious correlative evidence all the time to justify their gestapo like enforcement of speed limits, right?

[Marco911]

The strategy has been to dumb down driving to the point that nobody is aware of what they are doing anymore. Crash frequency may increase but let's keep the speeds down so people come out of crashes ok. Meanwhile, those of us who are good drivers, and the things that keep the economy moving like uncongested highways all take a major hit to this small-mindedness.

I am so glad I am now a citizen of the world and get to drive in countries where I can enjoy fast cars the way they were engineered to be driven, rather than having to deal with the b.s. BC driving laws.

[MK-EK]

jeremy clarkson said something on the lines of

speed never killed anyone ... its suddenly stopping that kills u!

[punkwax]

The thought of C-Lais thinking they HAVE to drive 140 is more frightening than anything else.

I've always thought highway speed limits should change late at night. Say, between 11PM - 6AM they go from 100 to 120 or something. I guess the risk is drunk drivers going even faster.. but they would likely anyway. I used to work a job where I got off at 3AM every night and let me tell you, driving along barren highways doing the limit seems impossibly slow.

[JaPoola]

Originally Posted by Nodnarb

The thought of C-Lais thinking they HAVE to drive 140 is more frightening than anything else.

I've always thought highway speed limits should change late at night. Say, between 11PM - 6AM they go from 100 to 120 or something. I guess the risk is drunk drivers going even faster.. but they would likely anyway. I used to work a job where I got off at 3AM every night and let me tell you, driving along barren highways doing the limit seems impossibly slow.

Great idea! Raise the limits at night when you can barely see 50 feet in front of you and all the wild animals are out and about! Let me tell you, last year I rode my bike from Penticton to Van at night. Doing 160 on the Coquihalla in pitch black is pretty scary!

Also, in regards to new cars being better and safer today: I drove to Penticton for the long weekend in a rental Chevy Impala. Taking turns on the Coquihalla at 140 in that thing, again, was pretty scary. New does not automatically mean better.

[punkwax]

Please, allow me to be the first to fail you.

I said from 100 to 120 and you spout off about being the cool guy going 160 down the Coq on a bike.

[bballguy]

^lolz

Jeep Grand Cherokee moose test -- the full story - YouTube

[JaPoola]

Originally Posted by Nodnarb

Please, allow me to be the first to fail you.

I said from 100 to 120 and you spout off about being the cool guy going 160 down the Coq on a bike.

I was talking about raising the speed limit at night in general. I didn't even look at your 100 to 120 suggestion since it's a dumb idea anyway. By the way, in the US they have different speed limits for day and night in some states. The night limits are lower than the day limits. Go figure!

They should raise the max speed limit and people should drive according to road conditions, ie. not driving at or over the speed limit in fog, torrential rain, in pitch black at night etc...

[penner2k]

Originally Posted by q0192837465

Speed doesn't kill. Stupid kills.

Speed doesnt kill. Stopping does

[falcon]

Originally Posted by Nodnarb

Please, allow me to be the first to fail you.

I said from 100 to 120 and you spout off about being the cool guy going 160 down the Coq on a bike.

Does it make me cooler that I've been 100kms faster than him on the Coq?