Proposal to Cut Down Traffic Accidents

[bluefete]

increase highway speed limit to 70mph

Why? We are trying to save more lives not kill more people.

The faster we drive the slower our reaction speed to hazards (including 170 km/h nitwits coming over the median at you).

[wagonrunner]

It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.[/b]

do you have a driver's permit? did you pass cash to pass regulations?
seems you don't understand why that is a discretionary measure. even though rory's example states it.

[bluefete]

It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.[/b]

do you have a driver's permit? did you pass cash to pass regulations?
seems you don't understand why that is a discretionary measure. even though rory's example states it.

We need to remove discretionary measures and make them concrete!

Yes to the first question and No to the second although the Licensing officer and I had a MAJOR disagreement during my driving test. No need to pass money though. Not that I would have either, eh.

[fiveforward]

increase highway speed limit to 70mph

Why? We are trying to save more lives not kill more people.

The faster we drive the slower our reaction speed to hazards (including 170 km/h nitwits coming over the median at you).

Actually the faster you drive the more aware you become and the faster your reaction time simply because of adrenaline. I am guessing you are one of those who cant think faster than the average human huh. Good post, full of all the vitals that qualify your opinion to be BULL SHE and IT!

[Rory Phoulorie]

Actually the faster you drive the more aware you become and the faster your reaction time simply because of adrenaline...

Please post up some scientific evidence to support your statement.

[bluefete]

increase highway speed limit to 70mph

Why? We are trying to save more lives not kill more people.

The faster we drive the slower our reaction speed to hazards (including 170 km/h nitwits coming over the median at you).

Actually the faster you drive the more aware you become and the faster your reaction time simply because of adrenaline. I am guessing you are one of those who cant think faster than the average human huh. Good post, full of all the vitals that qualify your opinion to be BULL SHE and IT!

I guess that is why all those accidents are caused by people who DRIVE WITHIN THE SPEED LIMIT.

[bluefete]

Actually the faster you drive the more aware you become and the faster your reaction time simply because of adrenaline...

Please post up some scientific evidence to support your statement.

Thank You, Rory!

[Cjruckus]

increase highway speed limit to 70mph

Why? We are trying to save more lives not kill more people.

The faster we drive the slower our reaction speed to hazards (including 170 km/h nitwits coming over the median at you).

Well if you increase the speed limit then you remove the taboo of driving fast. 70mph is a good highway speed. There shouldnt be anything cross in the highway to warrant driving any slower.

[wagonrunner]

It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.[/b]

do you have a driver's permit? did you pass cash to pass regulations?
seems you don't understand why that is a discretionary measure. even though rory's example states it.

We need to remove discretionary measures and make them concrete!

Yes to the first question and No to the second although the Licensing officer and I had a MAJOR disagreement during my driving test. No need to pass money though. Not that I would have either, eh.

a light turning amber is Digital, happens within a fraction of a second.
a vehicle travelling @ 40km/h, can it come to a stop withing the same timeframe?
that's why it's discretionary.

if you cannot stop safely (without skidding past the stopping point / without a risk of the vehicle behind doing the same into you), proceed through the amber before it turns red.

Are you capable of understanding the WHY now?

[bluefete]

increase highway speed limit to 70mph

Why? We are trying to save more lives not kill more people.

The faster we drive the slower our reaction speed to hazards (including 170 km/h nitwits coming over the median at you).

Well if you increase the speed limit then you remove the taboo of driving fast. 70mph is a good highway speed. There shouldnt be anything cross in the highway to warrant driving any slower.

70 mph is not fast? That is about 110 kph. That is a rather quick trot. If you increase the speed limit there is a greater urge to drive faster.

Should we construct a Trini autobahn? I think the PNM had a proposal along these lines.

[Cjruckus]

It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.[/b]

do you have a driver's permit? did you pass cash to pass regulations?
seems you don't understand why that is a discretionary measure. even though rory's example states it.

We need to remove discretionary measures and make them concrete!

Yes to the first question and No to the second although the Licensing officer and I had a MAJOR disagreement during my driving test. No need to pass money though. Not that I would have either, eh.

a light turning amber is Digital, happens within a fraction of a second.
a vehicle travelling @ 40km/h, can it come to a stop withing the same timeframe?
that's why it's discretionary.

if you cannot stop safely (without skidding past the stopping point / without a risk of the vehicle behind doing the same into you), proceed through the amber before it turns red.

Are you capable of understanding the WHY now?

I think hes still lost.

[bluefete]

It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.[/b]

do you have a driver's permit? did you pass cash to pass regulations?
seems you don't understand why that is a discretionary measure. even though rory's example states it.

We need to remove discretionary measures and make them concrete!

Yes to the first question and No to the second although the Licensing officer and I had a MAJOR disagreement during my driving test. No need to pass money though. Not that I would have either, eh.

a light turning amber is Digital, happens within a fraction of a second.
a vehicle travelling @ 40km/h, can it come to a stop withing the same timeframe?
that's why it's discretionary.

if you cannot stop safely (without skidding past the stopping point / without a risk of the vehicle behind doing the same into you), proceed through the amber before it turns red.

Are you capable of understanding the WHY now?

I think hes still lost.

Let me make the point I did not state earlier.

Going through an amber light is not breaking a red light.

Understand now?

[wagonrunner]

Let me make the point I did not state earlier.

Going through an amber light is not breaking a red light.

Understand now?

The law must be amended to remove any doubt. It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.

so...................... what yuh really was saying here then?

[bluefete]

Let me make the point I did not state earlier.

Going through an amber light is not breaking a red light.

Understand now?

The law must be amended to remove any doubt. It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.

so...................... what yuh really was saying here then?

As it stands now ...

But instead how it should be because we would be in a hurry to break the amber light too.

[fiveforward]

i would explain and provide; but, you and roy are probably too illiterate to understand the information to begin with. But since i'm nice guy -

"The term "fight or flight" is often used to characterize the circumstances under which adrenaline is released into the body. It is an early evolutionary adaptation to allow better coping with dangerous and unexpected situations. With dilated blood vessels and air passages, the body is able to pass more blood to the muscles and get more oxygen into the lungs in a timely manner, increasing physical performance for short bursts of time."

[pugboy]

increasing speed limit is a good idea only if there are proper exits, filter lanes etc to avoid disrupting the flow which is the main problem
eg the bad road on the left lane from caroni to chaguanas is a major limiting factor

[wagonrunner]

Let me make the point I did not state earlier.

Going through an amber light is not breaking a red light.

Understand now?

The law must be amended to remove any doubt. It is either you stop on the amber or go through. One or the other. Not both.

so...................... what yuh really was saying here then?

As it stands now ...

But instead how it should be because we would be in a hurry to break the amber light too.

Isn't that what my all questions pertained to?

I'm done,
Duane gave his opinion on your thought process, and ability to comprehend in the other thread. He's right. It is pointless continuing with you.

[bluefete]

i would explain and provide but you and roy are probably too illiterate to understand the information. But since i'm nice go to your form 3 biology book - see what adrenaline does and then come talk to me better yet go talk to a doctor ( I did)

"The term "fight or flight" is often used to characterize the circumstances under which adrenaline is released into the body. It is an early evolutionary adaptation to allow better coping with dangerous and unexpected situations. With dilated blood vessels and air passages, the body is able to pass more blood to the muscles and get more oxygen into the lungs in a timely manner, increasing physical performance for short bursts of time."

This is all well and good. However, why are the majority of the accidents caused by people driving within the speed limit? Is it that their adrenaline is not running at top speed because they are not speeding?

So are you saying your doctor told you that it is okay to drive at top speed because you will be in full control of your car in the event that you lose control?

[Rory Phoulorie]

i would explain and provide but you and roy are probably too illiterate to understand the information...

Yes, you are correct, I am illiterate. Please explain the following excerpt to me since I am unable to comprehend the text. Thank you kind sir.

Defensive Driving Rule #4: Don't Speed!
by
Bob Schaller

Driving at a higher than reasonable speed increases your risk in two ways: it cuts your reaction time and results in more "stored" energy (that must be dissipated in any collision). You should consider if the risks are worth the gain.Speed Limit

This is the science of math and physics—you cannot bend these rules. Each incremental increase in speed reduces your ability to react in time to hazards, because you may be covering distance in less time than it takes to react. Normal reaction time is between .75 second and 1.5 seconds, on average. Average reaction time distance at 50 mph would be approximately 83 feet. At 70 mph, it is over 115 feet (over 7 modern car lengths). These numbers do not include braking distance, just reaction time. The average difference in reaction-time distance from 50 mph to 70 mph is about 32 feet. If you were relying solely on braking, any hazard you encounter within the reaction distance is already a problem; you can't react quickly enough to miss it. This is particularly important at night, when darkness restricts your visibility. Do you know at what distance your headlights will illuminate a hazard? How is your night vision these days? When headlights finally light up a road hazard, it is often too late to avoid it. Many experts would tell you that even 50 mph is too fast for conditions at night, on any dark roadway...

Illiterates R' Us

[fiveforward]

Oh Lord. Bluefete i will assume that you are on of the many underage children here on this site so imma say it as simple as possible.

Most of the accidents are cause by improperly trained drivers making poor decisions when it come to driving. Driving 80km/h does not mean you have increased your chances of getting into an accident as versus 60 since without proper education 60 may be too fast for some people. At the end of the day the driver is supposed to be in control of the car AT ALL time; the day you stopped being in control is the day that you stopped driving.

Most people just cannot drive but think they can - it's that simple

[bluefete]

i would explain and provide but you and roy are probably too illiterate to understand the information...

Yes, you are correct, I am illiterate. Please explain the following excerpt to me since I am unable to comprehend the text. Thank you kind sir.

Defensive Driving Rule #4: Don't Speed!
by
Bob Schaller

Driving at a higher than reasonable speed increases your risk in two ways: it cuts your reaction time and results in more "stored" energy (that must be dissipated in any collision). You should consider if the risks are worth the gain.Speed Limit

This is the science of math and physics—you cannot bend these rules. Each incremental increase in speed reduces your ability to react in time to hazards, because you may be covering distance in less time than it takes to react. Normal reaction time is between .75 second and 1.5 seconds, on average. Average reaction time distance at 50 mph would be approximately 83 feet. At 70 mph, it is over 115 feet (over 7 modern car lengths). These numbers do not include braking distance, just reaction time. The average difference in reaction-time distance from 50 mph to 70 mph is about 32 feet. If you were relying solely on braking, any hazard you encounter within the reaction distance is already a problem; you can't react quickly enough to miss it. This is particularly important at night, when darkness restricts your visibility. Do you know at what distance your headlights will illuminate a hazard? How is your night vision these days? When headlights finally light up a road hazard, it is often too late to avoid it. Many experts would tell you that even 50 mph is too fast for conditions at night, on any dark roadway...

Illiterates R' Us

He does not understand that adrenaline has nothing to do with control.

[bluefete]

Oh Lord. Bluefete i will assume that you are on of the many underage children here on this site so imma say it as simple as possible.

Most of the accidents are cause by improperly trained drivers making poor decisions when it come to driving. Driving 80km/h does not mean you have increased your chances of getting into an accident as versus 60 since without proper education 60 may be too fast for some people. At the end of the day the driver is supposed to be in control of the car AT ALL time; the day you stopped being in control is the day that you stopped driving.

Most people just cannot drive but think they can - it's that simple

Many drivers "feel" they are in control of their vehicles until something happens.

You have a valid point. Maybe if so many of us stop paying bribes for our dp's and do the right thing the hard way, we would have found one way to cut down on accidents.

[buzz]

fiveforward

without a doubt, your arguments are worse than UML, bluefete and megadoc




































combined

i make no apologies

[fiveforward]

@ Rory

Pallo on paper maths and physics in quite interesting and all what you said is actually quite correct (as i did both) but you need to understand that whilst in math most things are assumed constants i.e knowns - in life it a bit more dynamic and a lot more different.

Everybody's reaction time varies - EVERYBODY.


This is the science of math and physics—you cannot bend these rules. Each incremental increase in speed reduces your ability to react in time to hazards, because you may be covering distance in less time than it takes to react. This is true BUT you realized that your friend use the "may" word - meaning it isn't absolute. There are a pleh of variables to take into account that have a very tangible effect on reaction time and these variables vary from person to person and circumstance to individual circumstance.

Normal reaction time is between .75 second and 1.5 seconds, on average. "On average" means the statement isn't absolute which means a persons reaction time may actually be faster OR slower. Are you normal; did they come test your reaction time. Unless this guy is Jesus and can say under what condition these things came about he's making an educated assumption.


Average reaction time distance at 50 mph would be approximately 83 feet. At 70 mph, it is over 115 feet (over 7 modern car lengths). These numbers do not include braking distance, just reaction time. The average difference in reaction-time distance from 50 mph to 70 mph is about 32 feet. "Approximately" is the same as might, maybe, but, average, just in case.....As another variable he saying that the distance MAY actually be shorter OR longer depending on the circumstance to which you know nothing about unless you're Nostradamus. He can predict the future, so what he says are more/ less assumptions with applied scientific values.

This is particularly important at night, when darkness restricts your visibility. Do you know at what distance your headlights will illuminate a hazard? True but doesn't apply to everybody. What's the age of the people tested for this statement - do they wear glasses, for how long, what are they exposed that may affect vision. Are the headlights standard bulbs, HID's, are the HID focused properly, rather than normal bulbs is it sylvania silverstars, housing design of head lamps - all these thing and more affect illumination.

Like i said you lack holistic understanding i.e illiteracy. Don't worry it's not you fault, Trinidad's education system just never taught you to think!

[bluefete]

@ Rory

Pallo on paper maths and physics in quite interesting and all what you said is actually quite correct (as i did both) but you need to understand that whilst in math most things are assumed constants i.e knowns - in life it a bit more dynamic and a lot more different.

Everybody's reaction time varies - EVERYBODY.


This is the science of math and physics—you cannot bend these rules. Each incremental increase in speed reduces your ability to react in time to hazards, because you may be covering distance in less time than it takes to react. This is true BUT you realized that your friend use the "may" word - meaning it isn't absolute. There are a pleh of variables to take into account that have a very tangible effect on reaction time and these variables vary from person to person and circumstance to individual circumstance.

Normal reaction time is between .75 second and 1.5 seconds, on average. "On average" means the statement isn't absolute which means a persons reaction time may actually be faster OR slower. Are you normal; did they come test your reaction time. Unless this guy is Jesus and can say under what condition these things came about he's making an educated assumption.


Average reaction time distance at 50 mph would be approximately 83 feet. At 70 mph, it is over 115 feet (over 7 modern car lengths). These numbers do not include braking distance, just reaction time. The average difference in reaction-time distance from 50 mph to 70 mph is about 32 feet. "Approximately" is the same as might, maybe, but, average, just in case.....As another variable he saying that the distance MAY actually be shorter OR longer depending on the circumstance to which you know nothing about unless you're Nostradamus. He can predict the future, so what he says are more/ less assumptions with applied scientific values.

This is particularly important at night, when darkness restricts your visibility. Do you know at what distance your headlights will illuminate a hazard? True but doesn't apply to everybody. What's the age of the people tested for this statement - do they wear glasses, for how long, what are they exposed that may affect vision. Are the headlights standard bulbs, HID's, are the HID focused properly, rather than normal bulbs is it sylvania silverstars, housing design of head lamps - all these thing and more affect illumination.

Like i said you lack holistic understanding i.e illiteracy. Don't worry it's not you fault, Trinidad's education system just never taught you to think!

And I guess the education system never taught us that driving at high speeds is dangerous to the health of others.

[Cjruckus]

[fiveforward]

@ BUZZ

Why thank you and there's no need to apologize for moron-ity. It's expected.

[buzz]

@ Rory

Pallo on paper maths and physics in quite interesting and all what you said is actually quite correct (as i did both) but you need to understand that whilst in math most things are assumed constants i.e knowns - in life it a bit more dynamic and a lot more different.

Everybody's reaction time varies - EVERYBODY.


This is the science of math and physics—you cannot bend these rules. Each incremental increase in speed reduces your ability to react in time to hazards, because you may be covering distance in less time than it takes to react. This is true BUT you realized that your friend use the "may" word - meaning it isn't absolute. There are a pleh of variables to take into account that have a very tangible effect on reaction time and these variables vary from person to person and circumstance to individual circumstance.

Normal reaction time is between .75 second and 1.5 seconds, on average. "On average" means the statement isn't absolute which means a persons reaction time may actually be faster OR slower. Are you normal; did they come test your reaction time. Unless this guy is Jesus and can say under what condition these things came about he's making an educated assumption.


Average reaction time distance at 50 mph would be approximately 83 feet. At 70 mph, it is over 115 feet (over 7 modern car lengths). These numbers do not include braking distance, just reaction time. The average difference in reaction-time distance from 50 mph to 70 mph is about 32 feet. "Approximately" is the same as might, maybe, but, average, just in case.....As another variable he saying that the distance MAY actually be shorter OR longer depending on the circumstance to which you know nothing about unless you're Nostradamus. He can predict the future, so what he says are more/ less assumptions with applied scientific values.

This is particularly important at night, when darkness restricts your visibility. Do you know at what distance your headlights will illuminate a hazard? True but doesn't apply to everybody. What's the age of the people tested for this statement - do they wear glasses, for how long, what are they exposed that may affect vision. Are the headlights standard bulbs, HID's, are the HID focused properly, rather than normal bulbs is it sylvania silverstars, housing design of head lamps - all these thing and more affect illumination.

Like i said you lack holistic understanding i.e illiteracy. Don't worry it's not you fault, Trinidad's education system just never taught you to think!

And I guess the education system never taught us that driving at high speeds is dangerous to the health of others.

since mr fiveforward hyar is a robot, and his reaction time is spot on, all the time, every time, measured by an atomic clocking system and the fact that mechanical components never fail and operate at a constant in any and every condition, (insert chaos theory here) we can deduct that it is safe for everyone else using the road way as long as he drives at god mode in ken block's car...

[buzz]

Most of the accidents are cause by improperly trained drivers making poor decisions when it come to driving.

yup, with driving under the influence coming in third

Driving 80km/h does not mean you have increased your chances of getting into an accident as versus

nope but potentially increases the severity of one should it occur (unless conditions are constant again chaos theory applies here)

At the end of the day the driver is supposed to be in control of the car AT ALL time; the day you stopped being in control is the day that you stopped driving.

"control" is subjective to definition

Most people just cannot drive but think they can - it's that simple

again subjective to definition, is driving getting from point A to point B safely and legally ? or who can reach 160 kph + and brag about it later

trinis yes

[M_2NR]

You can put a million dollar fines but unless you change the attitude of the people AND ensure proper policing of the laws we have, nothing will be accomplished.

common sense is not allowed here

you should ban yourself forthwith

D'oh... i forgotz...