Road crash fatatilty/injury statistics

[irish2]

Sudzy, speed limits were set to 100km/h on undivided dual carriageway's before we even had radial tyres. If engineers deemed it safe then well why would it not be safe to do slightly more than that speed in a much more advanced vehicle and on better roads?

[b0son]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Whether you are being devious or just outright dumb I don’t know

Neither.

Using your line of thinking, the introduction of speed cameras should have resulted in an immediate drop from that point onward ... at worst, minor improvement as people got with the programme, then the following year a more significant improvement as people nabbed learned their lesson, or through greater awareness.

Neither was true. 2007 (the year of introduction) was worse than 2006, 2008 was worse than 2007. 2009 fell, but 2010 went up again.

What it points out is that there's a lot more to the road toll than the degree of enforcement of speed limits.

I havent got the time or energy to go through all your claims, but anticipate there is more of the same misrepresentation as displayed as with your NT claim.

Dismissing them altogether? Convenient. I can only therefore write you off as a troll and would suggest others do likewise.

[SEZ213]

Alright...in doing some searching for statistics for some other 'stuff'...I have managed to find this 'stuff'...

population in 1930, approx 6 million - road fatalities - approx 1200
population in 2005, just under 21 million - road fatalities approx 1650

So...the population increased by almost 15 million people, but the fatalities only increased by 350. I know, 350 is a lot, but over a span of 75 years...and given the increase to the population...ratios are looking a hell of a lot better than they were.

There is one slight downside though. From looking at the stats (I know, scary word)...there was actually an increase in fatalities that corresponded with compulsory seat belt legislation coming in (1970) and the implementation of breath testing (1978)...

edit...my bad...the complete peak was when they were introduced...the steep decline came shortly thereafter...

http://www.infrastructure.gov.au/roa...ats_Aust_6.pdf

So more cops on the road, might not necessarily be the answer. Yep, sure, people slow down when they see a cop car, but then they speed right back up again...and it's the slowing down that bothers me. They do it with such haste, that the person behind them has to always assume that the people around them are idiots. I'll probably get a lot of slack for this, but I'm honestly all for unmarked, with a reasonable limit, instead of being set to 2 or 3k's out, set them to 5k's out, to cover for a small amount of human error.

[GTP owner]

Went and checked those NT deaths for myself. Governments like to use the last 5 years of data, but if you have a look you can go back to '98 on that website provided by sezzy.
So what does it show?
1998 69 deaths
1999 49
2000 51
2001 50
2002 55
2003 53
2004 35
2005 55
2006 44
2007 57
2008 75
2009 31
2010 50

Conclusion - that average deaths per annum is around 50 (51.8 to be exact)
Standard deviation from the mean is fairly large (range is 31 to 75)

What difference has the introduction of speed cameras made? None according to my eyeball figures. If they really worked, why did it hit the average for the past 10 years? Nothing you can do can convince me of anything other than that. And if it is 31 this year? - It still fits within the standard deviation of average beforehand. So it still did not work.

That's my 2cents

[SEZ213]

actually have some data going back to 1925 if you're interested...it's not real in depth, but it has some good data...

http://www.bitre.gov.au/publications...oadDeathsB.pdf

[Trevor 57]

Originally Posted by GTP owner

Went and checked those NT deaths for myself. Governments like to use the last 5 years of data, but if you have a look you can go back to '98 on that website provided by sezzy.
So what does it show?
1998 69 deaths
1999 49
2000 51
2001 50
2002 55
2003 53
2004 35
2005 55
2006 44
2007 57
2008 75
2009 31
2010 50

Conclusion - that average deaths per annum is around 50 (51.8 to be exact)
Standard deviation from the mean is fairly large (range is 31 to 75)

What difference has the introduction of speed cameras made? None according to my eyeball figures. If they really worked, why did it hit the average for the past 10 years? Nothing you can do can convince me of anything other than that. And if it is 31 this year? - It still fits within the standard deviation of average beforehand. So it still did not work.

That's my 2cents

ummmmm, the discussion around NT was around them dropping their speed limit fron NO speed limit (in some areas) to 130km/h, not sure the discussion was around speed cameras in the NT.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

ummmmm, the discussion around NT was around them dropping their speed limit fron NO speed limit (in some areas) to 130km/h, not sure the discussion was around speed cameras in the NT.

Actually the topic is about statistics and how they can be manipulated ..... and this does go towards showing that a statistic is used to suit the argument. Small snap shot suits some while a longer take shows a different perspective.

Road crash fatatilty/injury statistics ....... this was the topic just as a reminder.

[xtremerus]

Originally Posted by delete94

No disrespect taken Sudszy. To answer your question though, yes, speeding does put most people into the category of breaking the road rules. However, I’m not quite sure what your point is, as I don’t believe I said that speeding is not breaking the road rules.

My point is simple, and I’m not condoning speeding, if that’s what you were thinking, however, speed is only one of the many attitudinal problems you see displayed on the roads every day. However, there is a disproportional response by authorities to this one aspect.

I assume you actually get out on the roads, I know I do, it’s part of my job. Just a quick list of some of the things I’ve seen in the last week: drivers ignoring the most basic road rule, ie. keeping left, some of those same drivers crossing two or three lanes of traffic because they suddenly realise they’re at their exit on the freeway, drivers edging out of their driveways onto main roads as they think if they get out far enough, someone will have to stop to let them out, drivers not indicating in roundabouts, drivers pulling out from side streets when the way is not really clear, drivers on single lane roads passing on the approach to the crest of a hill and again, drivers on single lane roads passing on double lines.

These are not “non-deliberate mistakes” as you mention, but are quite the opposite. And some of these actions are extremely dangerous, even if you are travelling at the posted speed limit. These are the sorts of things I’m talking about when I say many drivers seem to have a lack of respect for the rules of the road, or even worse, a lack of knowledge of those rules or no idea of the consequences of their actions. And I certainly don’t believe that speed enforcement changes the attitudes of drivers who display this type of behaviour.

If you’re serious about road safety, you can’t look at speed in isolation, it’s ludicrous. One of the outcomes with such a top heavy emphasis on speed is that so-so drivers have the mistaken belief that they are actually good drivers simply because they don’t speed. The fact that they may display some of the attitudes above is lost on them.

A system needs to be in place that teaches drivers, especially new ones, the dangers of being on the road and the possible consequences of their actions, as well as respect for other road users and the road rules. And yes, that includes speeding, but not in isolation.

Lets be honest though Sudszy, you do sound like you’re pro speed enforcement as the overarching fix it, and that’s fine. Me on the other hand, I’m not a believer in speed cameras as a God send that saves lives and, from my own observations, they appear to have done little or nothing to change driver attitudes. So I guess neither of us will ever be convinced otherwise.

Wise words. I totally agree.

[GTP owner]

Originally Posted by Big Trev

ummmmm, the discussion around NT was around them dropping their speed limit from NO speed limit (in some areas) to 130km/h, not sure the discussion was around speed cameras in the NT.

I think you need to look at the title of the thread and the original post that started it all. I looked at supposed evidence to support a viewpoint, which it actually contradicted. I was manipulating statistics, which everyone does to prove their point.
As another example. They use accidents and injuries per 100,000 registered motor vehicles. This always shows a consistent downward trend to support their current regime of punitive taxes based on exceeding a lowly limit. I however disagree with this as the method because as we have become more affluent, we own more cars. I have 3 registered cars now, where once I had one. I still drive the same number of kilometers, but according to the stats I have altered the numbers on the registered vehicles. In fact I have reduced the chance of an accident by 2/3.....amazing!

[geckoGT]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Gecko also believed that hitting a fixed barrier head on at 150km/h is survivable in a formula one car and that the ke of large vehicles was transferred to the occupants if the vehicle didnt have a crumple zone etc.

If you are going to quote me, at least quote the whole comment and a clear description of the context. Rather than using your incorrect interpretation of my comment and giving a misleading representation of what I said.

Originally Posted by sudszy

High proportion of collisions involve people not braking at all, verification?

Originally Posted by gecko GT

Interesting thought there that I can see an element of truth in. I can not think of a single fatal that I have been too that all cars involved had hit the brakes, each fatal crash had at least one car that did not brake at all

Again, quote what I actually said rather than your interpretation. If you had you would have realised where my information came from, my on road experience.

Verification? I would love to be able to take some photos of the crashes I attend and post them up here, everyone here would take a bit more care when they drive and I am sure I could have a positive effect on road safety. Then you could see the lack of skid marks (yes ABS does leave initial marks at point of brake application) which leads me to my comment. In fact I have thought of one crash where both vehicles obviously had brakes applied, only one out of quite a number of fatals. Unfortunately I am not allowed to take photos so you will just have to trust me on this one.

I am going to be a little blunt on this, this is not theory, it is not what I have read or been told. It is a result of observations from a long list of both fatal and serious injury crashes that I have attended in 7 years as a full time paramedic, a few road crash cutouts that I have done as a volunteer firefighter in Karatha WA and a few that I attended as a Army Advanced Medic operating in a mechanised infantry/armoured environment. Lets just say it is a blood on gloves and screams in ears experience.

That is a snap shot of my experience and credentials, what is yours?

Originally Posted by gtxb67

no he did not. he never said that. you assumed he did, because of the context of the thread - no one else did because the context of the thread did not lead that way at all. we all understood what gecko said

Thank-you, a very astute observation regarding the context of that thread.

Originally Posted by gtxb67

the weird thing is the 3 people you are arguing with most in this thread are the three that always stick up for the police, do not put down speed cameras and have a very healthy respect for authority even when others consider it unfair.

Again, thank you, you are on the ball. In the past I have often been the most critical, not at people speeding but at their inability to take responsibility for their actions. Now it seems that some stranger, someone that seeks to hide behind anonymity, sees fit to criticise me and place me in the "speed demon" bucket. Perhaps if he had done some research through my 6 yrs of posts he would have learned otherwise, he is welcome too, I have nothing to hide. There is something to be said for transparency, it breeds trust.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Ben73

Last thing you want in peak hour is a stupid thing going BEEP BEEP every time you drift up to 61. It startled me if I was just cruising with the windows up, no music on.

Geez Ben, you find the beep irritating, how irritating is having to wait for the bus when you've blown all your points or thrown some more dollars away so I can pay less tax then you do ?

Ive only been driving a car with a speed alert for a few years now, but couldnt tell you how often it goes off, its just an automatic reaction now that if it beeps I back of the loud pedal a little.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by b0son

Neither.

Using your line of thinking, the introduction of speed cameras should have resulted in an immediate drop from that point onward ... .

Nice Strawman, I dont know how long it takes for people to adjust to the presence of speed cameras or lower speed limits, perhaps it takes a whole year for people to snapped in front of one before the message sinks in.

Originally Posted by b0son

Dismissing them altogether? Convenient. I can only therefore write you off as a troll and would suggest others do likewise.

Sorry, anyone who believes they can draw anything meaningful statistics from the NT data where the standard deviation/variance is huge, has no clue about the validity of statistics or is deliberately seriously misrepresenting their case, why bother checking anything else out you claim

I could claim that the people take at least a year to get used to the idea of lower limits and the toll went from 75 to 31 between 2008 and 2009 a 59% drop!
But Im not going to!

[flappist]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Nice Strawman, I dont know how long it takes for people to adjust to the presence of speed cameras or lower speed limits, perhaps it takes a whole year for people to snapped in front of one before the message sinks in.



Sorry, anyone who believes they can draw anything meaningful statistics from the NT data where the standard deviation/variance is huge, has no clue about the validity of statistics or is deliberately seriously misrepresenting their case, why bother checking anything else out you claim

I could claim that the people take at least a year to get used to the idea of lower limits and the toll went from 75 to 31 between 2008 and 2009 a 59% drop!
But Im not going to!

Well we will see what happens when it goes back up after the next election.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

If you are going to quote me, at least quote the whole comment and a clear description of the context. Rather than using your incorrect interpretation of my comment and giving a misleading representation of what I said.

No worries:

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...&postcount=140
As these improve, one day we will be at a point where a car can hit a solid barrier at 150 km/h and all occupants will walk away, like they do in F1 racing.

How did I take the comment out of context?
Unless you want to tell us you only meant a glancing blow with the barrier?(long bow)
But that could mean anything, I could hit a concrete barrier at 150km/h in an XC falcon with just a glancing blow that would perhaps pop off a door handle that I could walk away from.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...&postcount=114

Here you fight to the last breath claiming basically Newton’s 3rd laws of motion is wrong and that crumple zones stop the ke of the larger vehicle being transferred to the occupants.

While your misconception is not a hanging offence you were of the opinion that your years on the roads as an ambo somehow qualified your opinions on these matters and that from that you have a good understanding of crash and vehicle dynamics. That is why Im not particularly impressed on anyone quoting you as an expert in that area.

Im sure you are a good ambo and it sounds like you'd be the one we'd want turning up to our accident scence if/when it happened.

[Keepleft]

Originally Posted by geckoGT

Finally, someone that understands what I have been saying on here for years. It is not the total of deaths that occur each year that paints the road safety picture, it is the number of deaths per 100,000 road users, that is the figure that matters.

Per 100mvkt, 100k measure is too vulnerable to variation.

[Auslandau]

Originally Posted by sudszy

Geez Ben, you find the beep irritating, how irritating is having to wait for the bus when you've blown all your points or thrown some more dollars away so I can pay less tax then you do ?

Ive only been driving a car with a speed alert for a few years now, but couldnt tell you how often it goes off, its just an automatic reaction now that if it beeps I back of the loud pedal a little.

What do you set it at? 40? 50? 60? 70? 80? 90? 100? 110? or do you pull over before every change in restrictions and alter it? Heaven forbid you do it while driving or are you the one who sticks at 40 even on the Freeway because you think you are better and safer than everyone else ??????

Could you tell me how a speed limiter works around town? Just curious .....

[b0son]

Originally Posted by sudszy

why bother checking anything else out you claim

Like I said, convenient. Convenient to take issue with one point raised and use that as justification to dismiss all other points.

You've asked people to justify their position, yet have offered nothing other than opinion to justify yours. You're just someone else who drank the kool aid.

[SEZ213]

Originally Posted by sudszy

No worries:

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...&postcount=140
As these improve, one day we will be at a point where a car can hit a solid barrier at 150 km/h and all occupants will walk away, like they do in F1 racing.

How did I take the comment out of context?
Unless you want to tell us you only meant a glancing blow with the barrier?(long bow)
But that could mean anything, I could hit a concrete barrier at 150km/h in an XC falcon with just a glancing blow that would perhaps pop off a door handle that I could walk away from.

http://www.fordforums.com.au/showpos...&postcount=114

Here you fight to the last breath claiming basically Newton’s 3rd laws of motion is wrong and that crumple zones stop the ke of the larger vehicle being transferred to the occupants.

While your misconception is not a hanging offence you were of the opinion that your years on the roads as an ambo somehow qualified your opinions on these matters and that from that you have a good understanding of crash and vehicle dynamics. That is why Im not particularly impressed on anyone quoting you as an expert in that area.

Im sure you are a good ambo and it sounds like you'd be the one we'd want turning up to our accident scence if/when it happened.

Sudzy, I think you're going a bit too far...I can see all sides of an argument, but in all honesty, you just seem to be trying to stir the pot. Your knowledge seems well rounded, but your idealism for speeding is a little over the top. Please don't start an argument such as this with these guys, unless you're prepared to elaborate on your experience and how you've gained it, I didn't necessarily agree with why it was relevant to begin with, but as you've started this little speel, I think you probably should.

[sudszy]

Originally Posted by Auslandau

Could you tell me how a speed limiter works around town? Just curious .....

no idea, Ive just got a speed alert thingo.

[Auslandau]

Well that abouts sums things up ..... closing it as there is nothing else to add as it all has been said and it is just becoming just a soap box for one