Ireland had 6th best road safety record in EU

murphaph

Cheeble wrote: »

ok, here we go.

If I see somebody at a junction, ready to pull out, and not looking my way (which can be seen way before you're actually passing them) I have some choices: I can carry on at 100kmh on the basis that I have right of way and rely on them to wait; or I can slow down. There are other things I can also do: check escape routes, sound horn etc, but one of my choices is definitely to slow down.

I drive most days, and most days somebody, somewhere pulls out in front of me. If I always took the "carry on at 100kmh" option, chances are I wouldn't be here to write this, and chances are also that somebody else wouldn't be putting their children to bed tonight.

So, I slow down. Each incident generally lengthens my daily travelling time by about 4 seconds, and statistically prolongs my life by several decades.

There are at least two ways of viewing this: either it's an unacceptable infringement of my inalienable right to drive right up to the speed limit whenever I have right of way; or it's a reasonable expectation that, in an imperfect society, responsible road users will make allowances for the mistakes, or carelessness of others.

In accidents which involve more than one vehicle, there is often one person who is responsible; but two people who could have prevented it from occuring, or reduced the consequences, often by simply slowing down.

there are soooooo many ways you can lengthen your life statistically. Do you practice them all? It would be statistically MUCH safer for you NOT to drive at all.

ardmacha

there are soooooo many ways you can lengthen your life statistically. Do you practice them all? It would be statistically MUCH safer for you NOT to drive at all.

This thread has people talking at cross purposes. The point about driving is that it is a question of assessing the situation and responding accordingly. Global statements about going at certain speeds, high or low, do not work. You cannot say that you must assume that anything can happen, for on a single carriageway road this would mean traffic coming the opposite way would come onto your side of the road, so that you could not drive at all. Similarly you cannot proceed as it people are going to drive out of side roads, through red lights etc, but you can observe things and slow down if required.

KevR

Cheeble wrote: »

(which can be seen way before you're actually passing them)

As I said it was not a case of the other car pulling out of the side road way before I was actually passing it, the other car pulled out as I was passing the side road. If it had have been a case of her pulling out way before I actually passed the junction I would have slowed down obviously.

So you think you can always see well in advance that someone is about to pull out?

Cheeble

murphaph wrote: »

Rubbish. Travelling at 100km/h on an N road with good visibility is perfectly safe driving. You can't drive at 50 just in case some idiot pulls out from a side road without stopping. We just hope that such stupid people kill only themselves before they can kill others with their stupidity.

Well, firstly, the scenario was: travelling at 100kmh; at a junction; with somebody waiting to pull out.

Secondly, I like to rely on a little more than just "hope".

But anyway, what's your problem with the slowing down option? It seems irrational to me to dismiss it just because you're relying on other people to obey the rules. (btw, this isn't intended as sarcastic or anything, it's a genuine question, I'd like to understand your reasoning).

Cheeble

KevR wrote: »

So you think you can always see well in advance that someone is about to pull out?

I was referring to somebody not looking my way, which often can be seen.

Cheeble

murphaph wrote: »

there are soooooo many ways you can lengthen your life statistically. Do you practice them all? It would be statistically MUCH safer for you NOT to drive at all.

I don't understand your point. We all take risks, every day, whether we get out of bed or not. That's not a good justification for not slowing down in the light of a developing situation on the road ahead.

jaffa20

Cheeble wrote: »

I was referring to somebody not looking my way, which often can be seen.

Why would someone not be looking in the direction traffic is coming Would you stop on a roundabout in case someone decides to drive onto it because they might not be looking your way :pac:

murphaph

I read it differently to you cheeble-I read it that the car just came out of the side road without stopping so the poster here had no chance to react. If I am travelling along and a car is waiting in a side road to come out I pay more attention than the average motorist because aside from driving a car I ride a motorcycle. I look at the wheels for that characteristic 'twitch' because I have had drivers look me straight in the eye on the bike and still pull out. Their eyes see me but their brain doesn't. My point was that I wouldn't ride my bike/drive my car at a reduced speed on a clear road (that's the inference I got from the original post) a to do so defeats the purpose of driving instead of walking everywhere. naturally if I see a car etc. waiting in a side road I slow down and watch very carefully for that twitch and as a motorcyclist I am looking for my escape route should they just pull out. I have read Roadcraft from cover to cover and it's a good read even for car drivers;

Cheeble

I think we agree then :cool:

AP50/RD125/RD400/GS1000S (though 'twas a few years ago)

Cheeble-eers

Cheeble

jaffa20 wrote: »

Why would someone not be looking in the direction traffic is coming

I don't know, but it happens all the time.

Would you stop on a roundabout in case someone decides to drive onto it because they might not be looking your way :pac:

Have I said that?

Cheeble-eers

whosedaddy?

KevR wrote: »

Some other causes of accidents:

• People overtaking when they shouldn't (the speed they're doing is irrevelant)

actually even where overtaking as such is ok, but actually speed matters a lot here.
Not so much the absolute speed, but the speed difference!

I have seen it soo many times where a car crawls past another (and even worse the car that gets overtaken speeds up) and the lenght of time the overtaking car is out on the other lane is scary. I've seen many near misses.

In other countries like Germany the rules of the road stipulate that you have to travel significantly faster than the car you want to overtake (without breaking the speed limit of course).
Ie. if i had a car doing 90 in a 100km/h zone, you are not allowed to overtake.... if you do, it would be reckless driving.

And also please remember the speed limit is not a target that has to be hit at all times... Just because some old n windy country roads have speed limit of 100, doesn't mean I have to travel that fast...

Accidents happen - some cannot be avoided. The rest can be reduced..

Using your brain does make you a safer driver

Victor

KevR wrote: »

If we all drove around at 5kmh we would never have any serious accidents (make no mistake there would still be accidents, just nobody ever getting hurt). But the whole country would grind to a standstill and wouldn't be able to function properly. There is a need, where roads are of an appropriate standard, to travel at higher speeds and we therefore must look at the causes of accidents and we must work towards eliminating these causes.

Actually, many of the cyclists and pedestrians that are killed die at this type of speed when a truck is turning - its the mass, not speed that does the killing. hence the cyclops mirror campaign, etc.