Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The number one cause of crashes(no such thing as an accident, it's always somebody's fault) is tailgating, period.
Here is proof, travel on the interstate at 40 and a soon a somebody gets on your tail, tap on the brakes and they will hit you because they were tailgating.
Now travel on the interstate and if there is not much traffic you can drive all day long at 75-80 mph without incident but just as soon as somebody tailgates that's when a crash will most likely occur.
I am not advocating speeding, just anti tailgating.
I could not agree more!
Quote:
Originally Posted by wilson1010
Could you cite some authority for this surprising assertion? There are almost no accidents on open spans of limited access highways where tailgating is likely to occur. I mean the accident rate for areas between exits and entrance ramps is almost zero.
I'd be interested in seeing this tailgating data. There are a lot of rear end collisions, but, in my experience, most of these would have occurred regardless of distance between the vehicles. They result from inattention or weather conditions.
There is NO reason why a car should rear end another car. If the weather is poor increase your follow distance. If you are being distracted increase your following distance.
You're blaming the victim here. It's not the law abiding driver's job to make sure he or she doesn't anger the speeder who can't stand to drive the speed limit. And measuring "strength" by how aggressively one drives is ridiculous. Rather strength of character is measured by not recklessly endangering others in the pursuit of your own wants.
Yea, I am blaming the victim. There used to be an expression of "accident prone." Its not politically correct today perhaps, but a still sorry fact. Loser people plod along like ducks in a line without the first independent thought about their driving and end up either causing or being involved in accidents. If you think that accident victims are "random" and its just bad luck as to who is involved in an accident, you are sorely mistaken.
You will find that the most skilled, engaged drivers have the least accidents. The ducks in a line, bored and disengaged but keeping that speedometer at the 55 mark are the victims. And, yes I blame them. Every driver I have known who plod along like ducks are horrible drivers. Safer on the couch than behind the wheel.
The argument with raising the limit to the speed that "most people" drive is that there is no such uniform speed. The aggressive drivers like to think that if people driving the speed limit or below would just stay in the right lane there would be a uniform and consistent flow of faster traffic in the left lane. Not so. Unless you have a death wish there's always going to be somebody that wants to drive faster then you. So (assuming a 65 mph speed limit) the 75 mph driver who was the fast driver in the left lane becomes the slow driver when the 80 mph driver pulls up behind him. If he moves to the right lane he breaks up the continuity in that lane by becoming a driver who is trying to go faster then the 65 mph drivers. In any case, on your normal congested freeway, he likely won't be able to get over right away which means you've got a uniformity of speed issue in the left lane. Since most people who drive 10 or more MPH above the speed limit on a crowded freeway are not particularly courteous or concerned with safety all of the above is likely to be accompanied by a lot of tailgating and unsafe lane changing. And of course the 80 mph driver will eventually be in the way of an 85 mph driver, etc.
with a higher speed limit, the right lane then moves at 70-75 mph, which means the 75 mph driver can now travel in the right lane and run into fewer slow drivers, as well as a smaller speed differential between the right and left lanes.
You're blaming the victim here. It's not the law abiding driver's job to make sure he or she doesn't anger the speeder who can't stand to drive the speed limit. And measuring "strength" by how aggressively one drives is ridiculous. Rather strength of character is measured by not recklessly endangering others in the pursuit of your own wants.
to me it sounded just like an observation (one that I share) that the ones plodding along at the speed limit or slower are the ones who are careless, inattentive, and unaware of their surroudings.
Yea, I am blaming the victim. There used to be an expression of "accident prone." Its not politically correct today perhaps, but a still sorry fact. Loser people plod along like ducks in a line without the first independent thought about their driving and end up either causing or being involved in accidents. If you think that accident victims are "random" and its just bad luck as to who is involved in an accident, you are sorely mistaken.
You will find that the most skilled, engaged drivers have the least accidents. The ducks in a line, bored and disengaged but keeping that speedometer at the 55 mark are the victims. And, yes I blame them. Every driver I have known who plod along like ducks are horrible drivers. Safer on the couch than behind the wheel.
Do you also blame the domestic violence victim because she shouldn't have made her mate so mad? I don't want to interfere with your diatribe but do you have any source for these assertions? I just suffered through 3 hours of work-mandated driver's training and found out that excessive speed is the number one cause of highway accidents in this country (followed by tailgating). There's no reason to assume that because somebody is driving the speed limit they are not as engaged as the speeder. And an engaged 65 MPH driver is far less likely to cause an accident then somebody who insists on driving 10 or more mph over the speed limit because the latter is taking more risks. Why not just admit the inherent selfishness of your attitude rather then trying to make up a theory to justify bad driving?
You will find that the most skilled, engaged drivers have the least accidents.
Well, waddaya know!
Well, then here's the answer. Make sure that every driver on the road is at least as good, or better, than you are. That will eliminate all accidents, except the ones you cause, because now you will be the least skilled driver on the road.
Have you ever noticed that no matter how skilled and engaged Nascar drivers are, there are still accidents on the track every Sunday. That is because skill has a lot less to do with it than attitude. If your attitude on the freeway is to arrive somewhere before anybody else does, or before it is prudently reasonable to expect to arrive, and you have a macho imperative to do so, you have nobody to blame but yourself if you are in an accident.
No matter what the speed, accidents occur on the Nascar track and on the freeway because somebody is driving beyond their skill level.
Defensive driving means leaving enough space in front and to either side, at all times. If you can't accomplish that, then you either find another lane or you slow down. It doesn't mean guarding your real estate like some precious commodity.
Do you also blame the domestic violence victim because she shouldn't have made her mate so mad? I don't want to interfere with your diatribe but do you have any source for these assertions?
I do blame the domestic violence victim, not in the legal sense, but to properly attribute responsibility. Women who are victims of domestic violence are attracted to men who abuse them and are violent people. They get into a relationship with a person with those propensities and for the most part do not end the relationship when the violence starts or even when it escalates. I think everyone knows this to be true. Can they do otherwise? Maybe yes, maybe no.
Can a poor, bored disengaged driver do otherwise? You tell me. It sounds like you are one of those folks. Could you be more alert and attentive driving faster and more skillfully? Or, do you just slump back into the passive duck in a line driving style?
Quote:
Originally Posted by xeric
I just suffered through 3 hours of work-mandated driver's training and found out that excessive speed is the number one cause of highway accidents in this country (followed by tailgating). There's no reason to assume that because somebody is driving the speed limit they are not as engaged as the speeder. And an engaged 65 MPH driver is far less likely to cause an accident then somebody who insists on driving 10 or more mph over the speed limit because the latter is taking more risks. Why not just admit the inherent selfishness of your attitude rather then trying to make up a theory to justify bad driving?
Your citation for the authority of this is what exactly?
Well, then here's the answer. Make sure that every driver on the road is at least as good, or better, than you are. That will eliminate all accidents, except the ones you cause, because now you will be the least skilled driver on the road.
Have you ever noticed that no matter how skilled and engaged Nascar drivers are, there are still accidents on the track every Sunday. That is because skill has a lot less to do with it than attitude. If your attitude on the freeway is to arrive somewhere before anybody else does, or before it is prudently reasonable to expect to arrive, and you have a macho imperative to do so, you have nobody to blame but yourself if you are in an accident.
No matter what the speed, accidents occur on the Nascar track and on the freeway because somebody is driving beyond their skill level.
I have wondered that myself. Very often, I will be passed by some fool who gets in front of me and proceeds to go approximately the same speed that I am going. There are days, I swear when I could be going 90 and people would still be passing me. Not because I am going slow, but because they have some sick need to "prove" they are better, faster, smarter, *whatever* by passing me. It just makes no sense. I wonder how many accidents are caused by this weird behavior pattern.
20rysinBranson
I live in VA and deal with this non sense all the time. In other states too. Some people are just aggressive when driving and that's all there is to it. Even on surface streets, if I change lanes in front of someone several car lengths behind me, I'll sometimes notice that even though they were going slower than me they will abruptly change lanes and speed up just so I won't be in front of them. Completely juvenile. I wonder if aggressive driving has increased exponentially with the advent of the popularity of Nascar??? Just wondering.
On the VA speed limit change, I firmly believe that it's a ploy to pad the wallets of the badly in debt state government. They just need a legetimate sounding excuse to do so. It's pretty much guaranteed that you are given a 5-9 mph over forgiveness. But with the limit upped to 70, I think they will be strictly enforcing that and hoping people will assume they will be forgiven that 5-9 mph. Big surprise when they won't be.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
