anyone else sick of hearing this mindless mantra?
does anyone who touts it actually give it any thought?
speed doesn't kill
does anyone who touts it actually give it any thought?
speed doesn't kill
very true, but we already need to get about half of all our local drivers off the streets.jixxer said:I know for a fact however, that the road test (for cars) in the UK is much harder and much more thuro then the one here in BC. So a harder road test would mean more elite drivers on the road. Correct me if im wrong.
doesn't mean that it doesn't happen.Smoke said:I'm the last guy to support the "speed kills" thoery, but at the same time I've never lost a friend because they got in an accident while doing the speed limit.
Ratzilla said:Increase their insurance - breaking the law = dangerous = more insurance.
There is a similar system in place here. The more you cause crashes, the more your insurance premiums. The more tickets/driver's penalty points, the more your license....and now that you can't renew your insurance without paying your DPP (shoulder shrug....I know this by experience) the result is almost the same.and this friends, is the basis of facilitated insurance. private insurance has this. bad drivers punished, good drivers rewarded.
I remember an article in "Car and Driver" some years back.michael said:Ever hear "Speed related collisions.....?"
The faster the objects are moving, obviously the more carnage.
I'm a proponent of of "Smart driving saves lives."
Speed, by itself, does not kill. It is the related errors that are compounded by speed...
I was a bad driver, and I have taken the initiative to reevaluate or improve my skills.kamen rider said:Unfortunately, no one ever admits to being a bad driver and would never take the initiative to reevaluate or improve their skills.
amen brother doug!doug said:and this friends, is the basis of facilitated insurance. private insurance has this. bad drivers punished, good drivers rewarded.
icbc? bad drivers subsidized by good ones. everyone suffers.
Chumly said:I was a bad driver, and I have taken the initiative to reevaluate or improve my skills.
Exactly the same situation is with "alcohol related accidents".slam said:Some aspects of the statistics are really messed up.
example:
The forms that were used in documenting accidents basically had a checkbox to indicate whether speed was involved.
The police would check mark the box if anyone involved was speeding.
So, if a person is speeding along and going through an intersection, but gets T-boned by someone running a red light (at legal speed), then it would be documented as "speed involved", with a check mark.
Pretty messed-up methodology.
michael said:How about this as an alternative?
I do agree, if you are a bad driver, pay through the nose. If you are a really bad driver, your vehicle should go to the crusher.
Impaired driving conviction? Vehicle crushed.
Not finished with the payments? Regrettable, vehicle still crushed.
Driving with no insurance? Vehicle crushed.
Driving with no license? Vehicle crushed.
Not your vehicle, borrowed from someone else? Vehicle crushed.
Just a thought......