Speed Limits....

[Smokeandapancake]

So instead of doing the job you're paid to do (keep the highways safe), you take the lazy route and go after the easy (absolute liability) pickings. So much for that integrity you were bleating about earlier.

By the way, I'm still waiting for your reply to my post #318 on the Whitby Accident thread.

But I guess if you take enough shots at me, maybe some time you will get me. Or maybe not....

[FiReSTaRT]

Our speed limits do affect the speeds that people ultimately drive at. Many will drive at or very near the posted limit. Others will drive over the limit but still within what they think is a speed likely to be "tolerated" by police.

Either way, the posted limit affects the choice of speed. Raise the posted speed and the travelling speeds will increase.

Or, instead of taking your statements for granted, we can look at the results of several non-partisan scientific studies that proved that the average speed on a stretch of the road will be the same regardless of the limit.

[Flashmonkey]

It's not about driver training.. They are already trained to drive safely and observe the rules of the road. I blame the way the police services have been utilized. They have been utilized to rob people by the side of the road and the easiest way was by using radars and setting speed traps. So for decades, Ontario's drivers have been getting away with not signaling, obstructing traffic, driving without due care and attention and driving unsafe vehicles. I have seen people drive past speed traps while yapping on hand-held cell phones with impunity and it's all fine "because I'm a safe driver, I do the speed limit" and the cops don't ticket them for it because they focus on mass production.

Ooo lots of good stuff in here...+1

[AlienTech]

don't be bringing science and such into this one

[Smokeandapancake]

It's not about driver training.. They are already trained to drive safely and observe the rules of the road. I blame the way the police services have been utilized. They have been utilized to rob people by the side of the road and the easiest way was by using radars and setting speed traps. So for decades, Ontario's drivers have been getting away with not signaling, obstructing traffic, driving without due care and attention and driving unsafe vehicles. I have seen people drive past speed traps while yapping on hand-held cell phones with impunity and it's all fine "because I'm a safe driver, I do the speed limit" and the cops don't ticket them for it because they focus on mass production.

Possible maybe......ouch, that hurts...again agreeing with you somewhat.

However I think a large basis for this is the OPP, who have traffic enforcement as a very large part of their workload.

As far as municipal police service, the amount of traffic enforcement cops compared to cops with other duties is likely only 10% if that.

[Graves]

Raise the speed limit???? Whats the point??? I'd like to come CLOSE to the speed limit on the DVP in rush hour. Figure that out and I'll name my first born after you...

[FiReSTaRT]

don't be bringing science and such into this one

Awwww but I was hoping to read up some more on those imaginary metermaid statistics that turbodish keeps mentioning and never directs us to

[Smokeandapancake]

Raise the speed limit???? Whats the point??? I'd like to come CLOSE to the speed limit on the DVP in rush hour. Figure that out and I'll name my first born after you...

Lane splitting, filtering and the shoulder.

My real name is Egbert.

[FUNN]

Raise the speed limit???? Whats the point??? I'd like to come CLOSE to the speed limit on the DVP in rush hour. Figure that out and I'll name my first born after you...

It's rhetorical but if the left lane is for passing only or going "faster" then how and why does that lane come to a dead stop.

I may just send a few MP's the idea to lower the limit on the 401 or within the city as well Let's test my stupid theory out. We just need a website that pretends to care about road safety and a large petition as well as about 100 people willing to show up and dominate a council meeting. They will think they have HUGE support

[Graves]

and the cops don't ticket them for it because they focus on mass production.

I disagree, certain tickets are very he said/ she said. I signalled, no you didn't yes I did and at the end of the day the JP does whatever s/he feels like and you waste your time in court.

Laser evidence is direct and certain. This laser was used, with this ser# on this date at this time. This veh was on road X doing whatever speed. No questions.

[turbodish]

Or, instead of taking your statements for granted, we can look at the results of several non-partisan scientific studies that proved that the average speed on a stretch of the road will be the same regardless of the limit.

And that premise has been shot down by research in Europe. For a certain segment of drivers, the limiting factor for speed is not what is safe, but what they think they can get away doing without getting ticketed for. The net result of setting posted limits to the 85th percentile is constant incremental increases in 85th percentile speed as people use the higher speed limit as a new jump-off point to test the tolerance of police to speeding above the the new limit. Others drive at what they think is a comfortable speed, without regard for keeping a safety cushion to allow for unexpected emergency situations, and without regard for survivability if a crash should occur.

As a result, European countries are starting to look into road safety outcomes and not 85th percentile lemming behaviour to set speed limits.

Sweden is a good example in this sense: in the 1960s limits were set largely to reflect drivers’ behaviour and using the 85th percentile speed – in effect saying drivers were making rational choices and only those in the minority 15% would be judged as ‘speeding’.

As analyses of crash data revealed a growing speed related problem, limits were set that took into account road design factors (sight distance, road curvature and so on).

Economic trade-off then was introduced: with cost-benefit analysis of road projects using estimates of the ‘value of time’ savings to justify investment, there was a natural trend towards faster roads.

Finally, with the current philosophy of Vision zero, the Swedish parliament has said that avoiding death and injury is an absolute priority, and the speed management system as a whole must be based on this philosophy (WHO/FIA/GRSP/World Bank, 200.

[Deanmac]

I'm on the side of higher limits. Lets face it, a road like the 401 outside of the GTA is a straight line for hundreds of miles, is that a real driving challenge?

There are those who have a concern that if you raise speeds to, say, 140 on the 400 series highways that drivers will naturally pick a speed 20 kph higher as we do today on our 100 kph highways. I disagree as many drivers will find their comfort zone likely in the 130 range, for example, and this imaginary 160 kph limit (20 over) will not come into play.

Further, someone in this thread questioned lane discipline and where in the HTA does it state what lane to choose? I don't have the act in front of me but lets be practical here. If you use the left lane to pass and to only pass we'd end road rage on our roads in 5 minutes. Nothing is more frustrating than seeing one car stuck at 99 kph in the left lane with 30 cars lined up behind him and a half kilometre stretch of open road ahead of him. What is the love affair with left lane anyway? Why do you have to get to it the second you enter the highway, regardless of who you cut off to get there?

We can have both safe roads and higher speeds if we practiced proper lane etiquette. If only the police would try enforcing proper lane use for once to see if that made us all happy campers instead of road taxing us for speeding.

[FiReSTaRT]

I disagree, certain tickets are very he said/ she said. I signalled, no you didn't yes I did and at the end of the day the JP does whatever s/he feels like and you waste your time in court.

Laser evidence is direct and certain. This laser was used, with this ser# on this date at this time. This veh was on road X doing whatever speed. No questions.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. He-said-she-said scenario doesn't have the certainty of "my lidar unit measured the vehicle's speed at 136km/h." I find the chronic non-signaler to be a hell of a lot more dangerous than someone doing 136 on the 407.

[FUNN]

I disagree, certain tickets are very he said/ she said. I signalled, no you didn't yes I did and at the end of the day the JP does whatever s/he feels like and you waste your time in court.

Laser evidence is direct and certain. This laser was used, with this ser# on this date at this time. This veh was on road X doing whatever speed. No questions.

video camera in cop cars
LOTS of problems solved and they can now provide 100% proof leading to safer roads and higher guilty pleas BUT then again the Unions on the court side of things may no like it since there will be less court dates scheduled due to the CLEAR proof.

[Smokeandapancake]

That's exactly what I'm talking about. He-said-she-said scenario doesn't hav the certainty of "my lidar unit measured the vehicle's speed at 136km/h." I find the chronic non-signaler to be a hell of a lot more dangerous than someone doing 136 on the 407.

The actual case law surrounding not signalling is actually suprising....

[turbodish]

The actual case law surrounding not signalling is actually suprising....

There is no absolute requirement to use your signals. The HTA currently states that you must use turn signals if your movement "may" affect the movements of other traffic. That's a pretty big loophole to exploit when fighting a failure to use turn signals ticket.

[FiReSTaRT]

The actual case law surrounding not signalling is actually suprising....

I'm familiar with that section and I can see how it can be interpreted to charge a person for not signaling even when not pulling over/turning/changing lanes, so it's a two-edged sword. In general, I agree that it's poorly written.

[FiReSTaRT]

(WHO/FIA/GRSP/World Bank, 200.

Link to the article or at least the title, please..

Here are a couple that I came across, the most credible being the one published by the DOT-FHA (Report No. FHWA-RD-92-084, http://www.ibiblio.org/rdu/sl-irrel.html)

The results of the study indicated that lowering posted speed limits by as much as 20 mi/h (32 km/h), or raising speed limits by as much as 15 mi/h (24 km/h) had little effect on motorist' speed. The majority of motorist did not drive 5 mi/h (8 km/h) above the posted speed limits when speed limits were raised, nor did they reduce their speed by 5 or 10 mi/h (8 or 16 km/h) when speed limits are lowered. Data collected at the study sites indicated that the majority of speed limits are posed below the average speed of traffic. Lowering speed limits below the 50th percentile does not reduce accidents, but does significantly increase driver violations of the speed limit. Conversely, raising the posted speed limits did not increase speeds or accidents.

I also came across the article citing Matthew Thornton and Richard W. Lyles reported their research on this topic in "Freeway Speed Zones: Safety and Compliance Issues." The report appeared in the Transportation Research Board's Transportation Research Record No. 1560, Traffic and Highway Safety: Occupant Restraints, Safety Management, and Emergency and Commercial Vehicles, published in 1996. Link to the article: http://www.usroads.com/journals/aruj/9709/ru970901.htm It indicates the following:

By and large, those results lend credence to the argument that motorists drive at speeds that they feel are appropriate, apparently independent of the posted speed. On urban-55 segments, where drivers are more confined by the geometric characteristics and more likely to encounter congestion, speeds are considerably slower than in fringe-55 areas, which are more open and less congested. This also indicates that freeway speed limits set closer to the 85th-percentile speed may be more appropriate and would lead to better compliance.

And this interesting tidbit:

Further analysis, described in detail in the report, also suggested that speed limits had relatively little effect on accident rates and frequencies. The type of zone, however, continued as a stronger contributor.

While the scope of this second study was relatively narrow, it's more relevant to Ontario due to similar terrain/climate/demographics.

[Smokeandapancake]

There is no absolute requirement to use your signals. The HTA currently states that you must use turn signals if your movement "may" affect the movements of other traffic. That's a pretty big loophole to exploit when fighting a failure to use turn signals ticket.

As well, I believe there is case law that dictates not only could it affect the movement of other traffic, but did it cause other traffic to take evasive measures.

[Smokeandapancake]

Originally Posted by Smokeandapancake
(WHO/FIA/GRSP/World Bank, 200.




I DID NOT POST THIS....