Fast Drivers Versus Slow Drivers

Legally, "fast" drivers ARE breaking the law while "slow" drivers MIGHT be breaking the law by "impeding" traffic.

I'm not sure what a "fast" or "slow" driver is.

If I'm in a 70 MPH zone, I go 74 MPH, which is the fastest you can go in that zone and not be ticketable in Florida.

While doing that speed, I am constantly passing slower vehicles, and faster vehicles are constantly passing me.

Am I a fast driver or a slow driver?

Yes.

Reid is correct,... its all relative.... and if you include the earth which travels about 30 kilometers (18.64 Miles) per second or 67,000 MPH you really should slow down,... except if your driving a Chevrolet Caviler... then you're not driving, your pushing and holding up traffic.

I agree. Every other weekend I drive around 50 miles each way on the Illinois tollway.

There are four lanes in each direction the posted speed limit is 65 mph but if I drive at that speed I would get run over even in the "slow lanes" so I drive at 75 to 80 mph and still have cars passing Me. To be fair at that speed I do pass a few cars and most all semi-trucks.

oilcan13

Being from Wisconsin, my first time driving in California freeways was an experience.

The traffic report on the radio was would be like; "overturned car on fire on I-5, expect delays".... was typical

And I quickly learned is, you DO NOT HESITATE. And if your courtesy driver, not only are you out of place, but you're also a threat to others.

Also if there is 40-80 feet between your car and the car ahead of you that's plenty of room for another car, that will get filled... going 80 MPH. . I quickly learn that's how those over turned cars happen.

Your (forgivable!) mis-step is in applying a 'generalization' to a 'specific instance' .

Do allow me to do the opposite: create a generalization from your 'instance' ;) ....

Let's define 'fast' as: "a velocity which most observers would consider fast enough so as to increase the likelihood of a 'bad-outcome' (which we theN must define , too, of course! Now, of course, 'bad outcome' definition needs to be agreed upon by ? a majority of observers??? .. a 50% increase in 'costs of all types' ...

In other words, both you and I would be scurrying around within a 'den of rabbit-holes! .. At the same time, there usually IS a 'common agreement within the universe of observers: a Formula 1 race team might have a different idea than either you or I ;) , as would the 'International Tortoise Racing Commission' ...

But 'costs' of an action, fortunately, are easier to quantify ..

Speeds are governed by law, not by mood or ability...Fast driver's lose their license to drive, slow driver's are killed off in road rage incidents, it evens out.....

Slow drivers creating the obstacles that fast drivers crash into. Who's fault is it?

Why are slow drivers slow and why do fast drivers have to be fast when traffic is slow anyway?

And then why is traffic slow?

Stationary vehicles never collide.

Guess you've never been in a tornado....

That's why you have comprehensive coverage....

I don't think those were stationary when they were crashing into each other

You don't consider 'parked' as a stationary vehicle?

If they were stationary they would not have hit each other. Once the tornado hit, it caused them to move.

Unless they think the world revolves around them...

...."not moving or not intended to be moved."...

A parked car is not intended to be moved....

Tell my daughter that!

Her previous car, legally parked, has been written off at the end of last year (and 4 others as well) by a young lady, driving too fast and using her phone!

The car she bought to replace that has been run into twice, once while legally parked and once on the road, also young people using their phones, but it was repairable each time.....

See here:-

The NEW Impaired Driving!!

We have a law in Texas about the texting and talking while driving, but it fails to stop the practice. The list of tragedies just keeps mounting, and more often than not, involves a teenager driving her new car to school event, texting, and fails to see the large truck emerging onto traffic from a side farm-to-market road.

Or the kid, in Texas, who admitted texting when he passed a truck and ran into a Church school bus , killing at least 9 people.. At that time they said that Texting while driving, in Texas was legal..Has that changed...?

"In the UK you fail your driving test if you drive too slowly. "

There are other things you can do or not do during your driving test which may cause you to fail it. However, that doesn't stop people from doing them once they have their license or have their license revoked (except for certain circumstances).

Anybody that wants to drive faster than the law is not showing concern for the other operators. By faster i mean 10-20 mph above the limit.

In Texas there are lite truck drivers that are driving WAY beyond their and the vehicles capabilities.

Yes i will drive up to 5 mph faster than the posted, but i am in control of a lightweight fast responding sports car and i constantly "look ahead".

In my youth i went to a SCCA training course so i could race my Triumph Spitfire.There you learned about control,safety and vehicle maintenance.

IMHO everybody should attend a higher demand driving course to make the roads safer. In the states its just too easy to get a license.

The trouble with that is many drivers (and I don't necessarily exclude myself, specially when I was younger) think it's OK for them to exceed the speed limit by a certain margin, but anybody who drives a bit faster than that should be jumped on!

I see situations more and more, on a daily basis, where other drivers have completely lost their freaking minds, and driving like there is a hot chick in a bikini about to hand them a briefcase full of money when they arrive at the "office".

Then I look again, and it is a woman driver! And she is still putting on her makeup, and talking or texting on a cell phone while munching down an Egg McMuffin, while sipping her Latte'. Talk about multi-tasking huzzies!

They have no problems with peripheral vision, and they are not using the visual cortex at all to process the road to the front, sides, or rear of their vehicle, which is usually a large Dodge pickup with "duelies", but here she is doing 85-90 mph on I-27 North inside Lubbock. I am sitting there in my old Chevy pickup, doing more than the speed limit, and basically just manage a glimpse of her as she vanishes in traffic up ahead. Totally autonomous, anonymous, and oblivious to the surroundings.

Love it!

My all time classic, when I was in Los Angeles, watching as a red Jaguar convertible, came up behind me , passed me on the left, in the carpool lane , driving solo, at about 95 mph, with a good looking blond gal driving , with no hands on the wheel, a cup of Ramen in her left hand, a spoon in her right hand, with her left knee controlling the steering wheel from the bottom and her right foot on the gas. I was in my work van, about 2 feet higher, and had good visibility of the whole scene. I couldn't have caught her if I tried..

I am not making this up...

In some states, the Highway Patrols or Sheriff"s Department offer advanced and Defensive driving courses for the public. I think it should be mandatory, especially here in California.

I certainly agree, at least on the defensive driving course, and it should be required for anyone who drives in California, not just California residents. I'm especially thinking of those who drive into California by crossing the southern border...

It is self-evident that to <...drive faster than the law...> is illegal.

"But how does anybody know fast drivers have faster responses?"

Those who drive fast but DON'T have fast responses don't stay on the road for long.

All of this argument, danger, and misunderstanding could be avoided if we all had one bumper sticker.

"If I passed you on the right... You're an asshole..."

USA

One of my favorite bumper stickers.." I am not in YOUR hurry.."

Which is "safer", fast driver texting or slow driver texting????

Slower is " safer " - you cover less distance per second when you take your eyes off the road.

sure...

This post was deleted because it did not adhere to the behavioral policies of the site. Please review Section 14 of the CR4 Site FAQ and the Rules of Conduct.

Speed is not always the most crucial factor, sometimes it's intent.

CCTV footage of a driver trying to kill a pedestrian in China

Chinese Woman being Crashed and Run over by Irresponsible Driver in Zhumadian, Henan

Why Are Chinese Drivers Deliberately Killing People They Hit?

Maybe a better description would be a comparison of more confident vs. less confident drivers. Faster drivers tend to be more confident, even if that confidence is misplaced. I may be confident in my skills, yet drive slower than the 'fastest' drivers because I am not an idiot. As a long time motorcyclist, I have a heightened awareness whether I am riding or driving. I attended the Keith Code Superbike School at NH Intl Speedway back in the nineties. I used to autocross my V-dub back in the eighties. I am certainly not afraid to drive fast if the conditions allow. On highways and interstates, the problem is not the speed of the traffic per se, but the differential speed between vehicles. Attentive drivers will always have fewer accidents regardless of whether they are 'faster' or 'slower'.

I like to look at it as the traffic is fast or the traffic is slow...

I have seen it bad in both cases.

When a driver is doing the opposite of the traffic flow, that driver can be dangerous, with he's following the law or not.

And example is, when the traffic is fast, and everyone is following the traffic flow (speed in this case) pattern, and you have one driver that is 5-15 MPH slower than the pattern, others increase the risk to try to pass this slower driver.

On the other hand,...

When the traffic is slower at/or below the posted limit< you get that driver where that isn't good enough and they also increase the risk.

As you have probably observed, average speed keeps creeping up, until this is strictly a race to the final finish line (death).

Wisconsin increased their interstate speed to 70 MPH from 65 MPH in June of 2015

That high, huh? We have been going 80 ish for a long time (when we don't get caught by the State Troopers). They have a narrow view of such things, especially through town.

that's Texas, where you need to pack camping supplies, just for the trip to the grocery store so you don't starve on the way there.

Not in town, silly man!

But we do drive uphill both ways to work and back in the snow, even at the end of June (only going to be 104 °F today, almost blustery balmy).

A good driver keeps an eye on the other vehicles.

It was called defensive driving, I avoided a lot of accidents, by putting my efforts in avoid accidents as the start to unfold, other then laying on the horn, letting others know your going to hit them.

A good driver keeps an eye on the other vehicles.

Not just the vehicles but the drivers. I learned , the hard way, that someone who is changing lanes and tailgating and going excessive speed will glance at their rear view mirror

before changing lanes. This has saved me many times especially on my motorcycle.

I notice this started about 15-20 years ago, that people are ignoring the solid yellow lines on curves (no passing zones) by usually younger drivers. I was in the group where drivers ed. you had classroom and behind the wheel instruction as part of the high school curriculum.

Someone who is driving fast is not necessarily driving with "keener reflexes". They may be drunk, they may be in a hurry. Either of these situations can result in an accident because they were not focused on driving well. If they are driving fast for the pure enjoyment of it then maybe they are driving with keener reflexes as well, or perhaps they just got their license and think they are indestructible! IMHO, the safest speed to travel is the speed that most of the vehicles around you are traveling. Going faster or slower causes issues. (BTW, have you ever noticed anyone who is going faster than you is a maniac and anyone going slower than you is an idiot)?

Much as I was saying in #16

And a crispy moron is an oxymoron!

I tend to drive a few miles above the posted limit, but I also don't like to travel "caravan" style. That style of driving requires you to keep your eyes on the car ahead of you at all times, not knowing when that driver will decide to jam on his brakes or pull some other manoeuver that requires you to take evasive action. I like to have a clear road in front of me to minimize unforeseen dangers.

"People drive fast because it is exhilarating. "

Not me! I drive fast because time while driving is basically wasted time, and I hate wasting time. Obviously, I adjust my speed according to conditions, but when the road is clean and dry, I'm usually going 5-8 mph above the posted limit, and, like WJMFIRE, I'm passing some cars, but some are regularly passing me too. I always figure (hope) that as long as people are passing me on a somewhat regular basis, they should be the ones getting tickets, not me. I know that is no legal protection...

Anyone who is driving so fast that it is exhilarating is a danger to everyone else on the road!

"Roads must accommodate both the fast and slow driver"

NO! Drivers must adjust their driving according to the road conditions. Do you only drive on roads with multiple lanes in each direction? How can a two-lane (one in each direction) road accommodate both fast and slow drivers?

It won't be too long now before this becomes a moot point. Autonomous cars will adjust their speeds according to an algorithm that includes legal limits, road conditions, and other vehicles, among other factors. I rather suspect that once autonomous vehicles become the norm, speed limits will be raised a bit, and since they won't be tailgating, they will still be safer than current cars.

I'm really looking forward to this, since it should occur more-or-less at the same time as I get too old to drive safely!

Why wouldn't AV's tailgate. They should have faster response times by at least an order of magnitude!

There are degrees of autonomy. If the autonomous vehicle is independent of a driver and also of all the other traffic, then its only advantage is to lack the 0.7-1sec reaction time of the driver, meaning it could travel no more than 60-90 feet closer at 60mph and still have time to brake. On the other hand if the autonomous vehicle is in communication with all the similar vehicles ahead, to the extent that it may be commanded by a leader, then all the vehicles can bunch up very close indeed and form a road train. This would be a very intimidating situation for a human to navigate.

And the number of cardiac arrests for passengers should also show a large uptick, but humans are not necessary in that scenario, and will be "repaired".

I suppose that depends on your definition of "tailgating".

My definition involves the appropriate distance such that the ability to avoid the unexpected remains high. I think the "one car length for every 10 miles per hour", that I was taught around 60 years ago, still remains a good guideline. Of course, 60 years ago, I never expected that to require 8 car lengths!

As someone else said in an earlier post, There are commonly times and places in California where it is impossible to keep a safe distance, because another vehicle will quickly fill any space remotely close to a safe separation.

One related item: It's only been in the last four or five years that I've had a real-time mileage indicator. I've been very surprised to see that, at least in these cars (VW Passat diesels), driving 55 mph does NOT give better mileage than driving 75 mph, at least on essentially flat freeways. It's harder to judge on the hilly freeways where I usually drive. Has anyone else here paid attention to real-time mileage at different speeds?

I don't mind them getting in front, I find that better than them trying to get into my exhaust pipe from behind! Its easy to allow them a few meters more road.....

I always say, I like looking at a great "a**e" from behind and there are plenty around on the roads to look at!!

Over the last 53 years plus of driving with a full license, I have been Rammed (I am still talking about vehicles!) from behind, 16 times. Once was a truck!!!!

Up to now, I have managed to be not the "cause" of any accident, more by luck than judgement probably....lets hope it stays that way!!

16 times? WOW!

I've been driving regularly for just a year longer; I had a license several years earlier, but didn't have a vehicle available. My dad always said: "You can drive the car any time you like, as soon as you pay the extra insurance." I chose to save the money I earned in order to pay for college, and a few electronics components to build stuff... Both of those were very productive investments!

I've only been rear-ended once, and never had an accident where both vehicles were moving. My wife has only been driving for 50 years, and never had an accident of any kind 'till she got rear-ended at a stoplight just a year ago. Like someone else here, I taught her to drive.

Most of them were in the UK, only one here, and my car was still drive able as I usually have a tow hitch on my cars, only had one in the last 36 years without one!

That tow hitch "gutted" a (then) new For Sierra Cosworth, going through the rad and breaking the Turbo off the motor!! = not drive able!!!

The driver cried, 6 month old car, 4 day old motor! Car was a write off.

I only needed a new bumper and tow hitch, on a 10 year old Mitsubishi!!

Following too close, even after he "shoved" me, I still had a couple of meters to the next car!!

I was hit in the UK by a delivery van in fog, I was following a landrover with trailer, no brake lights on either, but I noticed and stopped in time, my car WITH brake lights was simply rammed......that was the usual story.

Don't forget, I was driving 50,000 to 80,000 miles a year on very congested roads.... Some not very wide, but VERY windy (Kent, UK for example!)

"That tow hitch "gutted" a (then) new For Sierra Cosworth, going through the rad and breaking the Turbo off the motor!! = not drive able!!!

The driver cried, 6 month old car, 4 day old motor! Car was a write off.

I only needed a new bumper and tow hitch, on a 10 year old Mitsubishi!!"

I hear that tale a lot about cars with tow hitches. Makes me glad the US auto insurance lobby didn't succeed with their push a few years back to make 'aggressive design' a factor to jump the insurance rates. They wanted people who had sturdier vehicles, ones that typically caused more damage than they received in a 2-car collision, to pay higher rates because of that sturdiness, even though the vast majority of vehicle collisions in the country are 1-car collisions (hit a tree, hit a building, hit a guard rail).

In my opinion, they need to get rid of the 'crumple zone' concept in cars (which cause cars to be incredibly expensive to repair, if not totaled, from low speed 'fender bender' impacts) and have front and rear bumpers mounted on shock absorbers to control the transfer of impact energy.

Andy forgot to mention his bumper sticker: "Move closer so you can read this".

LOL!!!

How did you know?

I don't mind them getting in front,...

or getting in front and proceed to slow down below the speed limits.

I'll digress further...

From my post earlier about the road construction going on for the past 2 years on my way to work.

There's a stretch of road (17 miles at the time) where the speed limits goes down from 70 to 55 MPH. And rightly so with one lane blocked off. I like to get to work before 6:00 AM, so 5:30 AM, the road construction crews are starting their day.

From a my review mirror I see a white Kia bearing down behind me she must have been going least going 70+. She got behind me and started tailgating, and I mean at 55MPH there was less the 10 feet between us, she was flashing her lights, giving me the finger as I watched her.

I couldn't even brake check her she was so close. And close, I could tell she was wearing scrubs, and see her name tag. So much for healthcare workers thinking they're superior. (a few will be insulted by that, and why I treat them like I would anyone else...which is why they're insulted. )

Well, she would slow and back off and then speed up and get on my tail again as though she was ramming and then she resumed tailgating. I did increase my speed slightly, to try to pull away, but there were construction crews working within 6-8 feet.

Then in the review mirror I saw her take both hands off the wheel waving it above her head like some kind of frustrating monkey dance. As though it my fault she late for work.

When there was a clearing with no construction workers, I tap on the brakes just to brake check her, She damn near lost control of her car. I then continued for the next 8 miles at 55 MPH.

Next few days after that, there was a state patrol posted on the stretch.

In the past two years, there was only one other incident that happened a week prior, and that was when a fellow actually passed me in this one lane construction area. Again, most likely late for work…

Those road crew,... I have to give them credit,... not only for the risk,... but if you are at the side of the road,.. it is very loud with the vehicles passing just feet from you.

That sounds like my marginally insane first ex-wife. She was perhaps the worst driver I have ever known.

I find the article interesting to say the least. I am in the UK where there has been an attack in lowering the speed limits to ridiculously low limits which in many decent drivers' opinion is totally unnecessary.

That anomaly could well be down to a desire to make money for the authorities.

Although I have no claims bonuses of 55 years my wife who I taught to drive when she was 20 is always telling me I drive too fast. She is a good driver who has never ever had an accident in all her driving career.

Whether or not a driver has accidents is what I would deem to be a good driver whether that driver is fast or slow in driving style. I do not think it is possible for the slow drivers to realise that fast drivers have a measurably faster response than those who drive slower. In many cases much much slower.

A pal of mine in Warminster PA was a very adept motorcyclist and never came of his Tiger 110 ever and if I told him he was scaring the sh''t out of me he would then go faster to prove he could handle that bike.

One thing that should be indelible in all drivers minds is that anyone can make a mistake=-------- period.

Reminds me of my daughter's "boyfriend"/so-called first husband.

They were in for a visit while he and she were living in L.A., and recounted this tale of him having her on his crotch rocket on the freeway there at over 135 mph. He said her fear made the bike a bit unstable.

I had him alone in my pickup at the time, and I let him know if that ever happened again, and I heard about it, there are places in West Texas where there are caves in the limestone that have yet to be discovered and explored, and he could be the first volunteer, so to speak.

Well done.

They lose a few few of those guys every year, in California, going over the Angeles Crest Hwy, or Hwy 33 out of Ojai, or one of the runs above and over to Malibu, especially in winter, on the north sides of the turns, where the ice doesn't melt, or becomes black ice. Those guys call themselves "Canyon Runners", and they ride in packs often. Every so often a hiker will come across one of these guys who blew off the road, solo, learned how to fly for a while, and came to an end in a pile of machinery. Best friends' nephew ended up that way, north of Big Sur.

As a subset of fast/slow driving conditions, I think that when I clear a small slot from the snow or frost on my windshield, it is definitely better to drive fast. That way, I get past anything/anyone that I didn't see coming that I would have otherwise hit if I were driving slow. If some guy can drive an Abrams tank through a forest at 50 mph looking out a small slot, I think I can navigate pavement fine. Being able to see the whole road is way overrated.

jhammond

Apparently, keeping your cranium attached is also way overrated. Keep driving. Good luck, you will need it.

Driving a vehicle with the snow/ice load you describe is illegal in many states.

I suspect #33 was written with tongue firmly in cheek, but perhaps jhammond will comment

When in doubt, vote for trolling. Just don't troll for trouser trout.

Actually, I find you wrong on all accounts (sorry!), especially mentioning race drivers, who are some of the best drivers around and are usually law abiding when on normal roads, and I have known quite a few over very many years......Plus they can usually rely on no traffic lights (after the start!), few crossroads, and seldom traffic in the opposite direction, to name but a few.....

Driving too slow is probably almost as bad as driving too fast. Driving legally should be the aim of all road users.....its usually cheaper as well.....fewer fines!

I have a simple question, that I thought of many years ago, that I direct at people who are not driving legally (often too fast for the situation!), that few of them want to answer, which is:-"in your estimation, does it take more intelligence to drive faster than allowed, or to drive legally?"

When I watch their reactions, they are often stumped for an intelligent reply......I wonder why?

If you look here:-

Top-causes-of-serious-car-accidents

You can see that the 2nd biggest cause of accidents is speeding!!!! I am pretty sure thats true the world over......nothing new at all!!

You can see that the 2nd biggest cause of accidents is speeding!!!! I am pretty sure thats true the world over.

I agree with you there, I've felt, that for the more part of the accidents, And I use the term accident loosely, is because the driver is not as competent of a driver they think (or like to believe) they are.

Under safe driving, the vehicle handles like it should, at higher speeds, it gives a false impression that it still handles the same, but unknown to the driver, when speeding, its on the edge, and the edge is;

• the tire bite on the road, is just barely, when it lets loose, its over,
• the momentum of the vehicles, in back in drivers ed. in high school, we we're introduced the braking horse power, which is basically can you stop as fast as you accelerate.

just to name a few.

Now on my 42 mile drive to work, on my 60% of the road is under construction where there is a single lane traffic, most on the Interstate 43, and its been that way for 2 years with the speed limited dropping from 70 MPH to 55 MPH, for the most part, drivers have been pretty considerate where it's excepted, and people spread their driving time around. (leave for work earlier).

Plus having it patrolled heavy helps keep drivers in line.

As far as speed, I had read that places like the Autobahn, its actually safer driving, its just that the accidents when they do happen, is pretty nasty.

The Autobahns are not as good for high speed driving as they were, there are thousands of places where speed limits have been introduced for safety reasons.

But on a Saturday night, you can find plenty of places where you can safely drive fast.....little traffic.

I believe it was Mario Andretti, who flew into Los Angeles for a race out at the old Ontario track, who replied to his greeter, "No , you drive..I am far safer on the track , than I am in Los Angeles traffic"..

I can't even begin to enumerate the errors of logic here, but let us start with some physics, namely that two separated objects moving with the same velocity can never collide. That in itself provides a justification for a speed limit.

Second, look at transport statistics. Both aeroplane and rail transport are orders of magnitude safer than cars, the reason being that control of velocity is enforced by an external authority rather than determined by the pilot/driver. Note that general aviation, with the private pilot determining his own progress, is littered with more fatalities than general aviation.

In my experience, the people who most praise the Autobahn are the ones with the least knowledge of it. It may surprise you to learn that there are large sections of the Autobahn that are subject to speed limits anyway. On the remainder there is a recommended limit of 130 kph; if you are involved in in an accident while exceeding that limit you will have great difficulty with the insurance, never mind the law.

As a member of what used to be called the Institute of Advanced Motorists, now IAM RoadSmart, I have had my driving tested by a policeman twice, once on a bike and once in a car. The standard of police driving in the UK is very high, with the emphasis on paying attention to what one is doing rather than exploring the limits of the vehicle.

I can't even begin to enumerate the errors of logic here,

and

In my experience, the people who most praise

You see, it's not illogical, it's what people experience and that's what's being relayed here or maybe it's because your have a form of Peripheral Vision Loss when discussing this.

Or your experience is just a special case compared to everyone else,... no, I think it's tunnel vision.

What do you think?

Please don't go there. In enumerating the errors of logic I draw on the background of published statistics. If I say "In my experience" that is the entirely separate situation of my own opinion, freely declared as such.

Your "because your have a form of Peripheral Vision Loss when discussing this." is frankly insulting. I have been reading the journals on the subject of accident prevention for over 20 years, as well as having had to deal professionally with the consequences of bad driving.

I asked what you thought about it, and your insulted... ok,... too late, we're there.

reading your post of,

I can't even begin to enumerate the errors of logic here,

and

If I say "In my experience" that is the entirely separate situation of my own opinion, freely declared as such.

I read it as though your experience carries more merit than the rest, you being well read is great to weigh in. It's also my opinion that experience carries just as much weight to be heard/shared.

I have been reading the journals on the subject of accident prevention for over 20 years, ...

That's fine, we all do that,

...as well as having had to deal professionally with the consequences of bad driving.

I don't believe you need to reference your intellect, but its also not with out value ... just keep in mind some of us are first responders here, and yes we deal with it also. or is that what you mean by; 'I can't even begin to enumerate the errors of logic here,"? I.e. having to deal with the results,... That I can understand.

All right then, please justify this statement of yours

"your have a form of Peripheral Vision Loss when discussing this."

You just justified it with that post. But I'll reiterate.

Until you justify or clarify your post of "I can't even begin to enumerate the errors of logic here,", hence 'Tunnel Vision'

As if your opinion carried more weight that others.

And I'm not going to speculate what you mean here, it has to come from you, not me.

Understand?

OK. Just for you, I will explain. Formal logic depends on axioms accepted as true, or on conclusions accepted as true. Any logic based on false premises fails.

Now

1. fast drivers are more focused on their driving. No evidence for this. False premise.

2. their reflexes are keener than a slow driver who's reflexes are slower. Ditto.

3. The fast driver has quick reflexes. Not universally true, therefore also a false premise

4. The fast driver has quick reflexes and can react more quickly in an emergency. The quick reflex part is a repeat of 3 and there is no evidence that the quick response, if it occurs, is going to be an appropriate response. False again.

Now for you.

1. I have been reading the journals on the subject of accident prevention for over 20 years, ...

That's fine, we all do that, No you don't. Googling titles is not the same as reading the article properly. If you had kept abreast of the literature we would not be having this conversation.

2. just keep in mind some of us are first responders here, and yes we deal with it also. For heaven's sake I trained first responders myself, and i know how daft some of them can behave.

Let's face it. You live in a country with a poor record of road safety by comparison with the UK. You have not demonstrated any personal qualification in the study of road safety. All it comes to is that you have no special insight into the problem, so you choose to aim personal abuse as an alternative to a reasoned argument. That's what bullies do the world over, and it does you no credit whatsoever.

As for tunnel vision, I have looked at reports from all over the world on the relation between traffic speed limits and accidents. With one single exception, all demonstrate that speed is a major cause of road traffic accidents. The other main causes, by the way, are youth, the male gender, inexperience, the hours of darkness and alcohol. The combination of young male with passengers is particularly hazardous, even without alcohol and the hours of darkness. Those are the classical causes, now, of course, joined by texting.

Feel better? with the difference between you and me is, I'm not insulted when challenged.

2. just keep in mind some of us are first responders here, and yes we deal with it also. For heaven's sake I trained first responders myself, and i know how daft some of them can behave.

Yes some can be daft, and some not. I'm sure some Trainers can be also. ^{(for heavens sake ).} It really sounds like you have a problem here...

When one realizes and accepts that the world doesn't revolve around ones self, it may be humbling at first,... but it's well worth it because life is more enjoyable.

Indeed. I have offered you every opportunity to demonstrate your insight and you have failed. I now believe that if your understanding of engineering were as laughable as your understanding of road safety you would have been unemployable.

Really, that's your defense? then I suggest you pack your bloated ego and move along.

I've got your measure now. Basically you don't like the idea that an academically-inclined Brit can expose a redneck as an ignoramus, and all you can do about it is swing your balls. Well, don't swing them too far in the direction of my scalpel or you may acquire a certain fame as the Engineer with No Ball Bearings.

<unsubscribe>

I've got your measure now.

I doubt that.

basically your don't like the idea that an academically-inclined Brit can expose a redneck as an ignoramus....

Your wrong,... again, I don't know what you're trying to salvage here. I always believe in a strong education. You demonstrate that you're quite sensitive fellow when challenged. And your threats shows your unprofessionalism as someone in the medical healthcare industry, or as you put it, academical-inclined (i.e. student), but I understand that's just your bloated ego talking.

I advice you to stay in school.

Message received... and GA.