petes wrote:Having read the responses to this post, I agree with MGF's sentiment that in the non-ideal world we live in, slower must mean safer.
I'd actually be as bold as to say that anyone who cannot understand such basic reasoning really isn't fit to drive.
The fact that YOU may be an advanced driver and feel safe and comfortable driving at higher speeds doesn't change the fact that for the general masses, accidents can happen, and when they do, the consequences are more severe is the vehicles involved are travelling faster. Simple.
it is always fascinating to see logic presented out of the context of reality - the proponent argues - this is logical therefore we must do it and only allows discussion around the simplicity of that logic, not the complexity of reality so anyone who disagrees is put down: "really isn't fit to drive"
yes of course we all know and accept the basic logic that in an accident a slower speed can mean lesser consequences...
but to derive from that:
- slower must mean safer
- we should all drive slower
fails on a number of accounts...
we can easily find logic to show that slower must mean safer is not always true, e.g. crossing a railway line with a train coming - lets do it at 40mph - big gap, 30mph - oops a bit tight, 20mph - wow that train is big, 10mph - crash
so at a logical level we can state with clarity that 'slower must mean safer' is not always true...
as soon as you accept that you accept that you can only understand that statement in the context of reality / the situation... and instantly you have a more intelligent approach to driving and understanding speed - in fact I would argue that anyone who cannot understand such basic reasoning really isn't fit to drive
now that we have that understanding we must logically see speed as one of many factors in driving and one of many factors in an accident and one of many factors in the consequences of an accident...
we all know that it is possible to drive a car at over 200mph and not instantly die, in fact it is rumoured you might be able to travel faster than that and still live! Therefore speed does not kill...
equally we all know that going around a corner which is safe at no more than 40mph, but driving at 120 might be painful - which means that there are occasions where speed is an influencing factor in an accident...
so we can simply conclude that inappropriate speed is an issue - and I am sure that we would all agree with that - however much bravado a driver might have there is an inner acceptance that at some point going faster might hurt...
however, while qualifying the relevance of speed, if we are to explore the relationship with safety we must also understand what else can affect safety, and what we mean by it - if for the moment we see safety as a measure of severity of injuries to self and others then we need to explore all the influencing factors... eg:
- if you hop into a zorb (inflatable bubble) and roll down a hill at 20mph you could probably run over a small cat without squashing it, and in hitting a wall may not suffer too badly
- now do the same sequence of actions in a classic mini / a modern mini / a 7.5 tonne truck... fortunately said small cat can only die once, but I am sure that we accept that as we change the vehicle so the consequences to ourselves inside / the cat outside will change - so vehicle choice is an influencing factor in safety - and NCAP ratings make that quite clear...
similarly
- wearing of a seatbelt or not
- the conditions of your tyres
- the mechanical condition of your car
- your levels of agression / caffine / drugs / alcohol / etc. etc.
all of these and many more are factors in an accident - speed is only one of many many factors - yes, if speed was zero an accident might not happen, but lets get real, the world can't operate without people / things moving around...
so for anyone who thinks that driving is as simple as slower = safer, please warn me first - I would prefer to go off somewhere at high speed with a decent AD than at a low speed with you as driver
Alasdair