Interesting article about court appearances. Opinions?

User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Unread post by Radar Identified »

Here's a link to the Saskatchewan study if you want it:

http://www.tac-atc.ca/english/pdf/conf2004/p-hunt.pdf


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Unread post by hwybear »

Interesting study...but they have a one liner in their summary:

"Further studies need to be conducted to analyze the overall effects of speed limit changes on accidents"

Has that further study happened yet? Maybe you can dig that out from where you got the above. Said it would take about 3yrs, study was in 2004.
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Squishy
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 709
Joined:
Location: Orillia
Contact:

Unread post by Squishy »

IIHS! Okay, I'll have to erase that study from my memory banks.
Overall, raising the posted speed limit has had a lesser effect on driver speeds than anticipated.
I like the sound of that. Has Ontario done any similar studies or pilot projects?
         Image


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Unread post by hwybear »

Squishy wrote:IIHS! Okay, I'll have to erase that study from my memory banks.
Overall, raising the posted speed limit has had a lesser effect on driver speeds than anticipated.
I like the sound of that. Has Ontario done any similar studies or pilot projects?
Sounds good.....until they throw in that collision stats were not considered
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
Squishy
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 709
Joined:
Location: Orillia
Contact:

Unread post by Squishy »

If the average vehicle speed increases by very little, then shouldn't the collision stats be affected by an equally small amount?

It sounds as if going to a 110 km/h had little effect on driving speeds; it just brought more drivers into compliance with the law.
         Image


User avatar
Reflections
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1490
Joined:
Location: somewhere in traffic

Unread post by Reflections »

hwybear wrote:Sounds good.....until they throw in that collision stats were not considered
We were talking average speeds only..........Brainwashed ticket tosser :D
_____________________________________/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
_____________________________________I bet that gets erased.....!


Radar Identified wrote:In West Virginia, they raised the limit to 70 MPH and their 85th percentile speed is now 70.2 MPH, whereas before it was just under 68 MPH with a 55 MPH limit. Shocked
Those damn engineering numbers keep getting in the way of some good ole' fashioned ticket tossing......YooooHooooo, Fantino, McGuinty....yep you 2 over here now, I wanna talk to you. :!:
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


User avatar
Radar Identified
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2881
Joined:
Location: Toronto

Unread post by Radar Identified »

hwybear wrote:Has that further study happened yet? Maybe you can dig that out from where you got the above.
Not to my knowledge, BUT here's a report showing the collision trends in Saskatchewan, including the period before and after they raised the limits to 110.

http://www.sgicanada.com/sgi_pub/road_s ... on%201.pdf

The key one to look at is figure 1.3 on page 4. Around 2000, before they raised the limits, it seems as though there was a steep upward trend in fatal collisions on Saskatchewan's provincial and rural roads. The limit was raised in 2003. It was trending upwards both before and after the limit was raised. The "rural roads" did not have any speed limit change, so if the speed limit change had an effect, it should've showed the provincial highways with either a spike or a drop versus "rural roads." So I would say that, looking at the trend graph, the speed limit change on the provincial highways did not have any marked effect on fatalities, because there was no change in the year-over-year trend. That's just my opinion though... Overall collisions in Saskatchewan appear to be rising, partly due to the fact that there is an influx of population to the province, and also Saskatchewan has the highest rate of drunk driving in Canada.
Squishy wrote:I like the sound of that. Has Ontario done any similar studies or pilot projects?
None that I'm aware of. I wish they would, though. Many US states that raised their Interstate speed limits saw a reduction in statewide fatalities, a few stayed the same, some saw an increase (North and South Dakota).


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Unread post by hwybear »

Radar Identified wrote: Overall collisions in Saskatchewan appear to be rising, partly due to the fact that there is an influx of population to the province,
Influx from GTA drivers moving there :lol:
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


tdrive2
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 346
Joined:

Unread post by tdrive2 »

Why are some so worried about raising the limit.

Lots of other countries drive 120-130 on old shitty roads.

Infact the MTO can go put the limit to 180 if they want to.

I wont drive that fast though.

Ill keep it under 140.

So even if they raise the limit to 120 and the flow of traffic in the left lane is 120-130.

Well same again ill just pull over to the right if it doesn't work.
They pay for their gas just like we do.

I wonder if they put the limit to 140 or removed it how fast people would actually drive.

Anyways our low speed limit is making lane discipline hell.

If you crash at 110 or 130 your not anymore or less dead.

The speed isnt the big issue its the large difference's in the speed and the lane discipline.


User avatar
ticketcombat
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 486
Joined:
Location: Toronto
Contact:

Unread post by ticketcombat »

hwybear wrote:
Radar Identified wrote: Overall collisions in Saskatchewan appear to be rising, partly due to the fact that there is an influx of population to the province,
Influx from GTA drivers moving there :lol:
GTA drivers don't move to Saskatchewan. They just visit for many years!
Fight Your Ticket!


User avatar
Reflections
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 1490
Joined:
Location: somewhere in traffic

Unread post by Reflections »

You can take the driver out of the GTA, but you can't take the GTA out of the driver.
http://www.OHTA.ca OR http://www.OntarioTrafficAct.com


User avatar
Squishy
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 709
Joined:
Location: Orillia
Contact:

Unread post by Squishy »

tdrive2 wrote:Anyways our low speed limit is making lane discipline hell.
Lane discipline has little to do with our speed limit - it's the lack of laws and lack of enforcement, along with a general selfish driving attitude from major urban areas like Toronto, Mississauga, Brampton, etc., that is spreading like a cancer. When I first learned to drive (admittedly earlier than 16 :wink: ), changing lanes without signalling was an insult meant to tell the driver behind you that they are doing something wrong. Now it's just lazyness. Back then, when you saw a driver after sundown with no taillights on, you flash your highbeams at them and they understood what that meant! Now they slam on the brakes and give you a "How dare you!" look as you pass them. I once followed a Matrix across Toronto (from Greenwood all the way to Islington on Bloor-Danforth) at 4 am, flashing my lights at him at every red light. At least he gave me a wave of apology after it took him driving across an entire city to realise that he had no lights on (and no, he wasn't flipping me off :lol: ). Bookm is absolutely right - we don't need more laws, we need to change people's attitudes and their education. If people don't want the government to nanny the heck out of us, stop being douchebags.
tdrive2 wrote:If you crash at 110 or 130 your not anymore or less dead.

The speed isnt the big issue its the large difference's in the speed and the lane discipline.
The key word is 'if'. As you drive faster, the distance you travel while you react increases, and the rate of information you need to process increases. You make it sound as if there are no disadvantages to an increased speed limit; however, there are both benefits and disadvantages, and that is why a study specific to Ontario is needed.
         Image


User avatar
FiReSTaRT
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 371
Joined:
Location: GTA

Unread post by FiReSTaRT »

It's not about a lack of enforcement. It's more about the wrong focus on enforcement. Speeding is easy to prove, "speed kills" brainwashing campaigns have been successful and the revenue generation has been solid. Even big municipalities can make some cash after all the expenses and most of it is from speeding tickets. That's why unsafe drivers these days justify everything with "i'm not a speeding street-racer."
A little bit o/t but have you guys noticed that fewer people turn on their headlights now that just about every car has drl's?
What kind of a man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.


User avatar
hwybear
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 2933
Joined:
Location: In YOUR rearview mirror!

Unread post by hwybear »

FiReSTaRT wrote: A little bit o/t but have you guys noticed that fewer people turn on their headlights now that just about every car has drl's?
You would be shocked, maybe not, how many people I stop for not having their headlights on, but parking lights and DRL at the same time. Begin to wonder how these people get their licence when they do not know how to turn on their lights.

Classic example: stop vehicle with daytime running lights. (DRL)
DR - see they are on, point to road in front of car
ME - using flashlight, see my little flashlight on the road which is brighter than your headlights
DR - my lights are not that good
ME - no your lights are not on
DR - no, see, I turn the switch and my brights come on :roll:
**walk around to driver side**
ME - ok, turn your lights on
DR - ok, they are on
ME - this symbol here, it is "parking lights"
DR - well if I turn it to here (light symbol), these are my highbeam, see the blue light
ME - yes, now just put your low beams on (they turn the switch back to parking.... :x ), OK, turn the switch back to the lights
DR - but that's my highbeams
ME - ok watch this (as I move the signal indicator and the highbeams turn off and now with low beams)
DR - how did you do that :shock: :shock: :shock:
Above is merely a suggestion/thought and in no way constitutes legal advice or views of my employer. www.OHTA.ca


User avatar
FiReSTaRT
Sr. Member
Sr. Member
Posts: 371
Joined:
Location: GTA

Unread post by FiReSTaRT »

I don't find that shocking.. All sorts of "interesting" people are on the roads.. Here are a few examples from my life experience..
1) Old lady, just short of being legally blind, afraid of her own shadow. When she detects a car heading in her direction, she pulls over to the right, waits for the car to pass, merges back onto the road and keeps going at half the speed limit.
2) A "lady" doesn't look while shooting across 2 lanes and side-swipes me badly. Her response was: "How can it be my fault? I signalled!"
3) Ask any random 10 people about what they should do when it starts raining or gets foggy and 7 of them won't mention anything about lighting.
Of course, all of these people will tell you that speed kills.
What kind of a man would put a known criminal in charge of a major branch of government? Apart from, say, the average voter.


Post Reply

Return to “Courts and Procedure”