Life for Death by Dangerous Driving?

[Munroast]

Are you aware that accidents in 20mph zones have increased 150% in the last 3 years. It seems the more 20mph zones are rolled out, the more they are ignored. There are certain cities and towns that have blanket 20mph zones and it doesn't make any difference to casualty reduction. Speeding fines are up though.

since 20mph zones have increased well in excess of a 1000% then only a 150% rise in accidents is very encouraging.

A momentary lapse of concentration . . . BANG . . . Rest of your life in jail.

I doubt a momentarily lapse in concentration will see you behind bars, but choose to drive at 60 in a 20 mph zone, Drink Drive, use a mobile phone whilst driving and kill someone else, then a very long time in prison seems appropriate to me.

 

[Odds]

All things considered driving is far safer in this country than many places abroad. I remember the trip Top Gear took to India a few years ago and their two hour drive on an unlit road to a hotel was one of the scariest rides i ever saw. I think Clarkson said about 3,000 were killed on UK roads where in India about 160,000 died each year. Total disregard for anyone's safety. Vietnam was just as crazy.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

Are you aware that accidents in 20mph zones have increased 150% in the last 3 years. It seems the more 20mph zones are rolled out, the more they are ignored. There are certain cities and towns that have blanket 20mph zones and it doesn't make any difference to casualty reduction. Speeding fines are up though.

If accidents in 20mph zones are 150% up, then that could be overall a positive effect, because there many once 30 mph zones have been changed in to 20 zones - so the 20 zones are bound to have more. You can only fairly compare the accidents in exactly the same areas.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

I think Clarkson said about 3,000 were killed on UK roads where in India about 160,000 died each year.

It's not fair to compare a well developed country (UK) to a very populous third world country which doesn't value lives quite so much.

 

[Dork Lard]

All things considered driving is far safer in this country than many places abroad. I remember the trip Top Gear took to India a few years ago and their two hour drive on an unlit road to a hotel was one of the scariest rides i ever saw. I think Clarkson said about 3,000 were killed on UK roads where in India about 160,000 died each year. Total disregard for anyone's safety. Vietnam was just as crazy.

I spent time in India & refused to drive myself anywhere.

It really is unbelievable until you see it with your own eyes. The 12ton lorry feeding our factory furnace with rice husks had its back axle held on by rope, the driver would regularly drive for 15hrs+ per day. They have all the laws & all the standards but nothing is enforced. The whole system runs on bribes.

 

[noseall]

Are you aware that accidents in 20mph zones have increased 150% in the last 3 years.

If like to see the report/figures please.
It's probably because there are a lot more of these zones now.

 

[motorbiking]

Given the Regression to the mean effect, even if the 20 zone made no difference - accident rates should have fallen.

Let Me Google That

For all those people that find it more convenient to bother you with their question than to google it for themselves.

letmegooglethat.com

Its probably because they are being placed on roads where it makes no sense and are being ignored or lulling people in to a false sense of safety. If you look at some of those articles, it seems to be a long running issue. But because campaign groups demand more 20 zones, despite the evidence suggesting they don't really work, governments and council continue to roll them out.

 

[Dork Lard]

I doubt a momentarily lapse in concentration will see you behind bars, but choose to drive at 60 in a 20 mph zone, Drink Drive, use a mobile phone whilst driving and kill someone else, then a very long time in prison seems appropriate to me.

That's not how the law works & I think you know it.

They gather the evidence & present it to the CPS. If the CPS decide the evidence qualifies you for dangerous driving then that is what they'll go with.

A momentary lapse of concentration by a driver with an impeccable record, outstanding driving abilities & the morals of a saint, could see ANY driver facing a life behind bars.

Like the 20+yr HGV driver once said at a friend of ours inquest "my whole driving career defined by a split second of inattention".

 

[motorbiking]

since 20mph zones have increased well in excess of a 1000% then only a 150% rise in accidents is very encouraging.

How do you reconcile that? Even if the treatment made no improvement, the numbers should fall, due to regression to the mean. The fact they have increased says there is a negative effect. The statistic is not total accidents in 20mph zones. Its accidents vs previous years.

 

[IT Minion]

How do you reconcile that? Even if the treatment made no improvement, the numbers should fall, due to regression to the mean. The fact they have increased says there is a negative effect. The statistic is not total accidents in 20mph zones. Its accidents vs previous years.

That depends on the exact details of the theoretical statistic.

If it were the number of accidents in 20 zones then Munroast is probably right (let's face it this can get complicated). If it is the number of accidents in the areas that are now 20 zones, but were previously higher limits then no.

 

[motorbiking]

No guess work required - Its all here:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/757307/20mph-headline-report.pdf

and tries desperately hard to show "success". The key data is before and after.

e.g. London Road, XYZ town. accidents increased or did not change since it was made a 20pmh zones. They are not counting total accidents per 20 zone which would be silly.

The facts according to the above:
- they don't appear to slow people down - probably because they are no longer being implemented on self enforcing roads.
- they seem to buck the general trend with 30mph and 40mph, zones (less accidents).
- even when looking at per BVKM they still don't reduce accidents or casualties, despite the distribution effect.
- even when you look at roads that have been made 20mph as a response to casualty increases (RTTM should reduce them anyway)

I'm not an advocate of driving fast in built areas, but blanket 20 zones fall in the "something must be done" category and campaigner, who promote them tend not to understand their isn't such a strong correlation with impact speed and free travel speed.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

The facts according to the above:
- they don't appear to slow people down - probably because they are no longer being implemented on self enforcing roads.

20mph past the end of my drive, plus on almost all roads in the village and my impression is - not much has changed. Those who ignored the 30 now simply continue to ignore the 20, those who drove at a more sensible speed continue to drive at sensible speeds. The only thing will make a difference, is speed traps.

 

[Deleted member 18243]

The current law allows up to 14 years.

Laws are rarely enforced, and when they are they are rarely used to their maximum effect.

 

[motorbiking]

20mph past the end of my drive, plus on almost all roads in the village and my impression is - not much has changed. Those who ignored the 30 now simply continue to ignore the 20, those who drove at a more sensible speed continue to drive at sensible speeds. The only thing will make a difference, is speed traps.

speed traps = more resentment. The road needs to be self enforcing.

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

speed traps = more resentment. The road needs to be self enforcing.

Self enforcing, how? Speed bumps, chicanes, simply other drivers driving at sensible speeds holding the speed of everyone below the limit?