It's 30 for a reason...

Soldato
Joined
18 Oct 2002
Posts
3,400
Location
Leicester
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/news/default.asp?storyId=22494

The Department for Transport has revealed that the government's long-running Think! road safety campaign greatly exaggerated the chance of a pedestrian dying when being hit by a car at certain speeds.

The campaign suggested that a car travelling at 30mph had a 20 per cent chance of killing any pedestrian it hit, while at 40mph the probability of death rose to 80 per cent.

But these figures are based on data from the 1970s - since when both car safety design and emergency medical have improved markedly - and latest research now puts the chance of pedestrian death at 31 per cent at 40 mph and just 7 per cent at 30 mph.

Mike Penning, the road safety minister, said: "Road safety is a priority for the Government, but misleading statistics only serve to undermine our case, not help it".

What's most interesting is that the newer figures actually mean it is proportionately even more dangerous to pedestrians for cars to travel at 40mph in urban areas. The old figures meant you were four times more likely to be killed if hit by a car at 40mph than 30mph - the latest figures make death 4.5 times more likely if hit at 40mph, even though the probability of death or serious injury is severely reduced in both cases.

The Government criticised Labour for not releasing the updated information sooner, but accepted that the previous administration had originally used the figures in good faith.

Consider improvements in tyres and brakes since the 70s also, and teach people to cross a ******* road safely and we wouldn't need to be burdened by speed 'calming' measures...
 
Nothing will change out of this You can use statistics anyway to make your point across.
And it's nothing new from labour
 
not exactly something you should be shouting about to dis prove a campaign to try get people to stop speeding even though they suggest you are more likely to die even with the improvements.
 
A road near me that was a 40 was turned into a 30 because an old man drove along the *wrong* side of the road into a lorry and was killed.

Now it's 30... for a reason :rolleyes:.

Still the camera got torched within days which I approve and disapprove of at the same time :p
 
you could be doing 25mph and people will STILL just walk out in front of you. I think Speeding saves life's, because people wont cross in front of a car that "looks" dangerous, yet will quiet happily walk in front of me doing 30mph.
 
you could be doing 25mph and people will STILL just walk out in front of you. I think Speeding saves life's, because people wont cross in front of a car that "looks" dangerous, yet will quiet happily walk in front of me doing 30mph.

All cars should have V8's.

If they sound more aggresive people wont step in front of them :)
 
http://www.pistonheads.co.uk/news/default.asp?storyId=22494



Consider improvements in tyres and brakes since the 70s also, and teach people to cross a ******* road safely and we wouldn't need to be burdened by speed 'calming' measures...
No, stick to 30 and pay attention and maybe there wouldn't be the ****ing great big black lines ACROSS the pedestrian crossing on my road.

Drivers prove time and again that they can't be trusted to stick to 30 because 'in their opinion it's safe to go faster' so we end up with traffic calming measures.

Anyway, it's not just about pedestrian safety. 30 is a sensible speed that keeps the noise down in town, allows people to cross the road without having to run and allows other cars to pull out without traffic closing on them at 45mph. It's quite simple. Why don't you people get it?
 
So it's only a 7% chance someone you hit will die at 30 and 31% at 40mph... And? Still no reason to drive faster. If you want to drive like a muppet book a track day
 
80/20 = 4 times more likely to kill somebody when doing forty not thirty
31/7 = 4.4 times more likely to kill somebody when doing forty not thirty

So new statistics tell us that in fact doing forty will actually cause a greater increase in deaths compared to thirty than we originally thought ;)
 
Regular from the pub I work at was recently rundown in the road outside the pub, he's broken both his legs and an arm. This was on a 30 limit very busy road.

Do you think the speed should be changed?








What if I said he is practically blind and steps straight out on the road without looking?

Does that mean there should be traffic light crossing there?

What if I said there was one 50 metres down the road?

Does that mean there should be speed bumps?



When will it end?!?!?!
 
Back
Top Bottom