We're all in this together!

[dazzler]

Here are the stats from Victoria.

1976 - RBT introduced. Deaths fell from 938 to 654 pa over 3 yrs.

1983 - Red light cameras. No change.

1986 - mobile speed camera trial. Deaths actually went up over trial period from 670 to 775.

1989 - covert speed cameras introduced. Deaths dropped from 775 to 400 pa over 3yrs.

Deaths PA stayed around the same (400ish) until a rise in 2000 up to 444.

2000 - 50kph urban limit, 50% increase in mobile camera hours of operation and speed tolerances reduced. Drop in deaths PA from 444 to 315 over  3yrs.

2006 - drug testing and vehicle impounding. Deaths dropped to 287 over 4 yrs.

Monash Uni have all the stats and research and are world leaders.

Regarding excessive speed causing fatals it is my experience that it is rarely huge speeds that are involved in the crash. Which is why I don't like those style of ads where the lunatic is driving at warp speed.  Most fatal accidents have one of three things;
1. Alcohol
2. Inattention/hurry or deliberate action (red light, hooning etc)
3. Speed in excess of the posted limit

In many fatals two of these are present. So a bit of alcohol and a bit of speed, bit of speed and inattention.

The other thing that really drives me nuts is the stupid argument that you hear from motoring mags that cops tick the "speeding" box for fatals. It's BS. A fatal goes to the coroner and it's the equivalent of a manslaughter criminal brief. Every claim must be proven and a fatal investigation takes days to find the cause by plotting the collision marks, getting statements, toxicology reports and vehicle mechanical inspections.

Cheers.

[MDS69]

Some rule says they have to display a sign....although sometimes by the time you see the sign, it's too late !!

If it WASN'T about revenue raising, they'd have them at black spots or danger areas...not on a straight section of road ( or at the bottom of a hill ) that hasn't seen an accident for 10 yrs !!

Everyone knows it's revenue raising for fixed or mobile cameras and if you speed it's your own fault ( been done a couple of times myself ), but don't try and tell me speeding is unsafe.......might be illegal, but 90% of the time it's not unsafe.

There is a safety camera (combined speed and red light for non NSW people) at the bottom of a hill on Old Windsor Road at the intersection of the Cumberland Highway. The problem is the camera gets people coming down the hill which isn't a huge gradient by any means but the real issue of the intersection and has been for years during morning peak is red light runners coming from Cumberland Hwy turning right onto Old Windsor Rd/Briens Rd. The camera isn't set up on the right corner for that. I have seen many many more near misses on the Cumberland Hwy red light runners than down hill Old Windsor Rd speeders/red light runners.

[krisandkev]

The other thing that really drives me nuts is the stupid argument that you hear from motoring mags that cops tick the "speeding" box for fatals. It's BS. A fatal goes to the coroner and it's the equivalent of a manslaughter criminal brief. Every claim must be proven and a fatal investigation takes days to find the cause by plotting the collision marks, getting statements, toxicology reports and vehicle mechanical inspections.

Dazzler not arguing with your statements, except for your last paragraph.  The stats used are generally extracted from the police reporting system. The police reporting/recording systems have changed over the years but not who collects and generally enters that data, the police. (In some instances a non police person may enter the data but from data provided by the investigating police officer.)  In theory then the data could be incorrectly entered, for example the speed indicator marked as a contributing factor but from my experience this would be a rare occurrence and more of a mistake then a deliberate act.  But as we know statistics can be manipulated either accidently or for a wanted result.  I recall a report that showed a high percent of alcohol related collisions.  After examining the stats the alcohol indicator was for any person in the vehicle or vehicles had been alcohol affected.  The driver may not have been affected.   Also wondering what affect the compulsory wearing of seatbelts had on the statistics. Legislation was introduced in Australia during the 1970s and 1980s.  And the better, safer build of vehicles.  Not saying speeding is not a serious matter, but I hate speed cameras!  And as has been said, in Qld we have had the average speed cameras for a while, but I have seen some really bad drivers in those areas. They may not have been speeding but doing other dangerous acts.  But I think we all agree the way to beat speed cameras is not to speed.   Kevin

[gronk]

  But I think we all agree the way to beat speed cameras is not to speed.   Kevin

Of course, sounds easy, and most of the time it is..

Cruise control has to be one of the best inventions yet for obeying these laws. Ever tried to cruise along the freeway without it and all you do is constantly look down to check /adjust your speed..

Some of those stats are general and don't show how a reduction in deaths was solely the cause of speed cameras being used.

[dazzler]

Some of those stats are general and don't show how a reduction in deaths was solely the cause of speed cameras being used.

Really?

1989 - covert speed cameras introduced. Deaths dropped from 775 to 400 pa over 3yrs.

Go to the Monash site and have a read  it's all there.

[prodigyrf]

Cruise control schmooze control. Soon your cars are OURS! Mwahahahahah!

http://www.carsguide.com.au/car-reviews/testing-the-car-that-drives-itself-30257?utm_source=cg&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=theguide&utm_source=cg&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=

Dunno what all those Gummint folks will do for revenoo but I guess the rollies will definitely have to go then 

[Mace]

http://www.abs.gov.au/ausstats/abs@.nsf/featurearticlesbytitle/9AFD4E13D7DA281FCA2569DE0028B40C?OpenDocument

Vehicle deaths in Victoria reduced by approx 35% following introduction of compulsory seat belts in 1970.

[dazzler]

Yep. So did the ACT. best thing ever.

[DarWen]

Of course, sounds easy, and most of the time it is..

Cruise control has to be one of the best inventions yet for obeying these laws. Ever tried to cruise along the freeway without it and all you do is constantly look down to check /adjust your speed..

Some of those stats are general and don't show how a reduction in deaths was solely the cause of speed cameras being used.
[
Sorry Gronk, I disagree on cruise control, for the exact reason you like it. In my opinion setting the cruise control allows you to forget about having to be aware of the the speed your traveling, that leads to forgetting to be aware of what else is happening around you. I see it all the time, drivers sitting in lane 3 of 4 3k's under the speed limit totally oblivious to what is happening around them

[edz]

We have better roads than we have ever had, we have better cars than we have ever had before.
The bigger  problem is unskilled untrained drivers and their attitude when  driving that causes the majority of crashes ..
Still reckon the costs of these new systems would be better invested in driver education / training from an earlier age .

[Bird]

Really?

1989 - covert speed cameras introduced. Deaths dropped from 775 to 400 pa over 3yrs.

Go to the Monash site and have a read  it's all there.

yes speed cameras are solely responsible for the drop in deaths.. honest.. Put an extra 100 cops on the roads every day in MARKED cop cars and you'd have the same result.

[dazzler]

Again over to you bird. The floor is yours. Can you explain what caused that decrease over that period?  What other factors were in play? 

[dazzler]

Is it?

The floor is yours sir.  Make your argument......

Don't forget you are still standing on this bit of floor, shuffling your feet, looking to the left, the right, to heaven, thinking of something to say. 

[Pog]

I am not a fan of fixed point to point speed cameras (mainly because I speed a bit on open roads).

The Sturt Highway from Adelaide to Renmark has had an aweful record for fatalities in the last 20 years. We have lost many locals, and I have lost 2 x close friends on this highway.

However, What has caused these fatalities is generally inattention and fatigue. The stupid Shit you see on the road from other drivers is unsafe, yet, they might be doing it 20km below the limit.. drifing across lanes beacuse they are on the phone, adjusting the radio, falling asleep... FATIGUE and INATTENTION have to be more of a threat than someone that is alert and attentive doing 10kms over the limit...

Poor roads with a lack of over-taking opportunites do not help the situation.

Focus needs to be levelled at those travelling slowly that hold up long ques of traffic (especially on long weekends & holidays). This often causes people to take risks, they shouldn't otherwise have to take.

I don't like or condone dangerous driving in any circumstances.

[DarWen]

Focus needs to be levelled at those travelling slowly that hold up long ques of traffic (especially on long weekends & holidays). This often causes people to take risks, they shouldn't otherwise have to take.


Agreed, hear in Queensland we had a ad campaign every K over is a killer, in these cases every K under can also be killers.

[GanG]

The big thing that has been overlooked in this discussion is the changes in vehicle design and engineering. Vehicle handling, Crumple zones, airbags, ABS, ESC etc.

There have also been substantial changes in the organisation of medical emergency services, establishment of specialist trauma centers in the city, specified patient transport and referral models for trauma patients for ambulance.

The biggest issues with road safety stats are the multifactorial nature of collisions and injury survival. Like any hypothesis we have to be careful that the relationship we hope to see is not predetermined by the method of analysis, I am not entirely sold on speed camera and as a massive contributor to road safety because the waters are too murky with multiple systemic changes occurring that skew the data. The raw fatality number does not take into account variables such as number of vehicles on the road, average age of vehicles, age of vehicle involved in fatality etc. To be better illustrative it should be reported as road deaths per 1000 registered vehicles as it would show rate by volume of users.

I personally think that driver attitude and concentration are major factors and are always going to be the tricky part to engineer out of the equation, I spend alot of time on the road and continue to see idiots do their best to have a collision such as overtaking in unsafe manner, impatience and carelessness, using mobile phones etc.

To illustrate my point I nearly got taken out on my motorbike yesterday by a tray truck coming over double lines on a narrow road, he was clearly going too fast for the road and couldn't keep it in his own lane, I would not estimate his speed at over 100kph, but it was too fast for the corner........that's driver error and attitude and stuff like that is why the road toll will never be zero. We have hit the point of diminishing returns the numbers are not changing significantly over the last few years..and I think this is why.

[discoteddy]

Focus needs to be levelled at those travelling slowly that hold up long ques of traffic (especially on long weekends & holidays). This often causes people to take risks, they shouldn't otherwise have to take.


Agreed, hear in Queensland we had a ad campaign every K over is a killer, in these cases every K under can also be killers.

Sorry mate disagree, taking a risk is the drivers choice, no one forces any driver to take a risk by travelling slowly. We all need to look at our kids in the back seat before we do anything silly on the road, let's choose wisely people


Travel safe during the holiday period swaggers!

Cheers,




Disco teddy

[McTavish]

Agree with most statements so far (and particularly GanG's comments above) as this is a complicated issue - and there is no easy solution.   

In the 80's we also used to lie the seats down in the old Mitsubishi L300 so my brother, sister and I could go to sleep in the back when coming home late.

Fast forward to 2014 - driving car with Child seats for kids with 3 point harness - a gazillion airbags, ESC, Traction Control, Crumple Zones (L300 crumple zone was the bumper bar only), speeding paranoia... making it all safer to drive.   

Car manufacturers get very little credit for the drop in fatalities in Australia.   That's wrong.   I'd rather be in a crash in my 2014 car than my first car being a 1974 Honda....

Maybe a side note - But - They say inattentive drivers.   Out of curiosity I counted all the road signs including ads, speed signs painted on the road, side of the road, over the road, instructional signs - you get the gist - from Toowoomba to Brisbane.    I got bored counting after I was over 500 and this was not including checking my speed every xxx seconds to make sure I wasn't speeding.    How Ironic !!   Too busy being "safe" by being a good lad checking my speed and all the signs rather than concentrating on the road and other drivers.

Funny how you get a different point of view when you speak to someone from the UK.    70 Mile/hr limit on the Freeway limit.   My mate tells me that you can pass a police car at 80-90 MPH and they don't care - in his words "because he is driving safely".  I was able to test this theory from Sheffield to London and he was right.  However, do this whilst tailgating someone or change lanes and cut someone off and they will pull you over and crush you like a bug as this is dangerous driving...    I believe it is Mandatory for trucks to stay in the left hand lane and are only aloud to overtake then must get back in the left lane asap or they will be booked as they don't want to slow the traffic down when trucks go uphill even just a little bit.   

Seems like we've taken the whole speeding thing in isolation and not as it should be - as only part of the problem.   

Ps - according to my fuel consumption figures I do pretty good so obviously just drive like a Granny....

[Jeepers Creepers]

We have better roads than we have ever had, we have better cars than we have ever had before.
The bigger  problem is unskilled untrained drivers and their attitude when  driving that causes the majority of crashes ..
Still reckon the costs of these new systems would be better invested in driver education / training from an earlier age .

Yep, Magilla Gorilla has hit the nail on the head.

[GeoffA]

..........
I personally think that driver attitude and concentration are major factors and are always going to be the tricky part to engineer out of the equation, I spend alot of time on the road and continue to see idiots do their best to have a collision such as overtaking in unsafe manner, impatience and carelessness, using mobile phones etc.
..........

Yep.

I reckon if they could somehow take those 2 ^ out of the equation, just about everything else would fall into line.

"Guns Cars don't kill people".......it's the nut holding the steering wheel that does the damage.....

[D4D]

I believe it is Mandatory for trucks to stay in the left hand lane and are only aloud to overtake then must get back in the left lane asap or they will be booked as they don't want to slow the traffic down when trucks go uphill even just a little bit.   

Don't get me started on this!

[KingBilly]

Yep D4D, often on a motorway, 4 lanes, most vehicles at the speed limit of 100 or 110, and there's a semi or b double, sitting in the right lane, with a line of traffic stuck behind, trying to make up a couple of minutes after having driven all night or day from interstate.  C'mon 

KB

[Rumpig]

Yes, I agree. The speed limits are set for a reason and that is to try and make our roads safer for us all to travel on and if we are caught exceeding these limits then we only have ourselves to blame.

gotta sort of disagree here...i reckon you see some lowered speed limits introduced on some roads lately due to the fact the government doesn't want a lawsuit from people after several crashes have occurred in that area. A prime example i'm thinking of is the 90kph speed limit on the highway North of The Sunshine Coast, where several people have died on that stretch of road there due to IMHO not driving to the conditions at the time, the road surface got the blame for people crashing around there in the wet instead of the drivers being blamed for not driving to the conditions. I've driven that road section numerous times in all conditions (including torrential rain where you can hardly see where you are going stuff) and my slowing down and driving to the conditions at the time made the road perfectly safe to drive IMHO. I've driven plenty of highways over the years that are in nowhere near as good condition as that is in and they still have a 100kph posted speed limit on them, so i can only assume that road section had the speed limit reduced due to possible future litigation from all the media attention it got before the limit was reduced.

[edz]

Yep, Magilla Gorilla .
[/quote ].
Hey fella  I resemble that remark ..
Interesting comparisons on different countries tolls http://www.monash.edu.au/miri/research/reports/papers/fatals.html

[KingBilly]

and my slowing down and driving to the conditions at the time made the road perfectly safe to drive IMHO

Exactly, you drove to the conditions BUT the "stupids" don't get that basic little concept of how to drive safely and sensibly, so the authorities have to think for them, reduce the speed for everybody (or make a law for everybody) and then enforce it to ensure another "stupid" does not die or kill somebody else.  And the "killing somebody else" is the truly concerning aspect of this whole arguement I think.

KB