| Maybe we are getting into semantics here,
How many times when someone is pulled over for speeding do you hear "you might have had an accident"/collision or whatever it might be labelled.
Yes the individual was speeding, irrefutable fact (hopefully) but they haven't had a an accident/collision or whatever, that was merely pointing out something that might have happened that is un-related to speed. Thank you for pointing out something that might happen in the future but hasn't yet become fact.
Perhaps someone can tell me the threshold at which an accident/collision is inevitable or even perhaps some sort of graduated scale.
70 MPH a 0 chance of a collision/accident
90 MPH a 50/50 chance of a collision/accident.
Sure you can't rule out becoming the victim of someone else's accident/collison or whatever but then you are reduced to the lowest "safe" speed 0, zero, nada, nil, to have a zero chance of a collision/RTA or whatever.
Sure other people on the road are a variable but thats where risk management, anticiptation, road craft call it waht you will comes into it.
Use the lowest common denominator and assume that no one can drive/ride "properly" and then again the only safe speed is 0, zero,.............
Raising driving/riding standards is the key, NOT rigidly enforcing a Limit which is what the powers that be are upset about.
Unfortunately improving standards costs money but rigidly enforcing limits brings money in.
"Speed Kills" is just Spin, it doesn't collisions/accidents do and the fast you you the more serious the consequences of such an event becomes,
How about "Speeding can have serious consequences", not quite as snappy is it??
Ray.  |