• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

New Canadian Politics Thread

MindzEye said:
To Zeke's point:

iu


There has obviously been reductions that mostly come down to improvements in auto technology, and improved enforcement/compliance (Seatbelts, DUI, etc).

But there's only so much it can do when it's trying to keep squishy bags of meat alive under those types of forces.
Click to expand...
No matter what, if you are in a hurry, the car in front of you isn’t. And if you are not in a hurry, the car behind you is.
 
I really think it comes down to enforcement. Decide on the safe speed based on how many meat bags you're willing to sacrifice per year, set that as the limit, and enforce it. If that's 110 or 120, fine, giddy up. Right now our speed limits are a suggestion. 125 in a 100 isn't getting you a ticket unless the cop is short on his quota for the month. You have some folks doing 99 and some doing 140, which is likely more dangerous and definitely causes traffic jams. I know in Australia, the limit is an actual limit. If you're doing 5 over you're getting a ticket.
 
axlsalinger said:
this is your dumbest post yet. Thinking speed limits of 80, 90, or 100 in parts of the province where they are clearly and obviously too low to everybody driving on them
Click to expand...

Except they're not obviously too low as only the worst ~25% of our drivers meaningfully ignore them. Again, just admit vroom vroom makes your dick hard and that's your biggest concern on roads that kills ~400 people a year.

Just try viagra instead, at least that leaves the rest of us out of it.
 
Preston said:
Nothing worse or more dangerous than guys going 80 and others going 140 on the same highway
Click to expand...

Sure, the difference is important. But the most notable bit here is that almost no one does 80, while a meaningful percentage does 140. To someone doing 140, even other people just doing 95-100 feels dangerous. But then, the problem isn't the people doing 95-100, is it?

All we're doing here is rewarding the people who already make the highways more dangerous.
 
LeafGm said:
On the one-hand, I agree this move is Dougie just doing his typical move of going back to the populist well to distract from his hilarious corruption, mismanagement and increasing unpopularity.

On the other hand, let's be honest here. If given the choice/opportunity depending on the traffic conditions, who the fuck here actually drives at Mindz's "safe" speed of 105 Km/h or less on any of the 400-series highways? Come on now. 115-120 km/hr is the minimum.
Click to expand...

I drive them all the time between 105-110. Speed up to overtake slower traffic in passing lanes, move to the right for people who insist on going fast. It's not nearly as difficult as it's being made out to be and I can assure you, I get there at almost the exact same time as you guys do.

People make bad decisions all of the time, the government shouldn't be enabling those when the impacts are owned by others around us.

This comes down to a really, really simple data point. The closer you get to 120kmh, the risk of fatality starts to sky rocket. When you get meaningfully beyond 120kmh, fatalities become more or less guaranteed. If you know that and choose to ignore it, fine, but there should be penalties for putting everyone else at risk. We shouldn't be rewarding that behaviour by changing policy to enable it.
 
MindzEye said:
Except they're not obviously too low as only the worst ~25% of our drivers meaningfully ignore them. Again, just admit vroom vroom makes your dick hard and that's your biggest concern on roads that kills ~400 people a year.

Just try viagra instead, at least that leaves the rest of us out of it.
Click to expand...
I can't admit any of this because it's such stupid nonsense that isn't even remotely true.
 
axlsalinger said:
I can't admit any of this because it's such stupid nonsense that isn't even remotely true.
Click to expand...

But then why insist on significant speeding? Time gains are marginal at best (in real world driving, 3-4 minutes on a 1 hr highway trip), and the increased risk to you and everyone around you isn't marginal. In fact, you're spending most of your trip exposed to potential accident conditions that will almost definitely kill you and everyone in the car with you, most of whom, I assume, you like and/or love and want to see remain alive as long as possible.
 
A person driving 110 instead of 100 or 105 is not "significant speeding". I don't know why you're choosing to be so obtuse on this issue, but I've been in 80 zones where I would say they shouldn't change it to 90 because 80 is right in that particular example, and I've been in 50 zones that are ludicrously marked and should be 70. It's just that a lot of highway speeds are a little too low in my experience, and I've felt that way for many years. That's it that's all.
 
axlsalinger said:
A person driving 110 instead of 100 or 105 is not "significant speeding". I don't know why you're choosing to be so obtuse on this issue, but I've been in 80 zones where I would say they shouldn't change it to 90 because 80 is right in that particular example, and I've been in 50 zones that are ludicrously marked and should be 70. It's just that a lot of highway speeds are a little too low in my experience, and I've felt that way for many years. That's it that's all.
Click to expand...

But a person driving 110 today is under zero risk of facing any penalty. Why are we changing policy to encourage faster average speeds when there is currently nothing wrong with policy? Increasing limits has been shown to lead to significantly higher average speeds. The people driving 110 today will drive 120 under 110km speed limits.

100-110 isn't too slow. 50 in city isn't too slow either, again based on accident data.
 
MindzEye said:
But a person driving 110 today is under zero risk of facing any penalty. Why are we changing policy to encourage faster average speeds when there is currently nothing wrong with policy? Increasing limits has been shown to lead to significantly higher average speeds. The people driving 110 today will drive 120 under 110km speed limits.

100-110 isn't too slow. 50 in city isn't too slow either, again based on accident data.
Click to expand...
yes because 120 is a perfectly normal speed for proper flow of traffic on most 400 series highways in Ontario. You shouldn't be at risk of getting a ticket because a cop needs to meet a quota. And there's always the possibility of photo radar.
 
axlsalinger said:
yes because 120 is a perfectly normal speed for proper flow of traffic on most 400 series highways in Ontario.
Click to expand...

Except for public safety reasons already stated, it's not. Why should we ignore the drastically higher fatality rates for the sake of very marginal trip speed improvements?

axlsalinger said:
You shouldn't be at risk of getting a ticket because a cop needs to meet a quota.
Click to expand...

But again, as stated pretty extensively now, it's not about quotas, it's about a very real increased risk to public safety. Why should I be exposed to significantly higher risk on the highway because you want to save 2 minutes on your commute?
 
MindzEye said:
Except for public safety reasons already stated, it's not. Why should we ignore the drastically higher fatality rates for the sake of very marginal trip speed improvements?



But again, as stated pretty extensively now, it's not about quotas, it's about a very real increased risk to public safety. Why should I be exposed to significantly higher risk on the highway because you want to save 2 minutes on your commute?
Click to expand...

Most of Ontario's four-lane highways were designed to safely handle speeds higher than 100 kilometres per hour, said Angelo DiCicco, president of the Ontario Safety League, a non-profit charity that aims to reduce preventable deaths and injuries on Ontario roads through education.

So that makes the speed limit bump from 100 to 110 km/h "quite reasonable," he said.

But DiCicco says those numbers are the maximum under ideal conditions and that it isn't always safe to drive at that speed. He says traffic will likely be travelling way below the limit during traffic hours and near urban centres.

"Safety is about behaviour, design and enforcement. It's not just a number on the sign," he said.
 
axlsalinger said:

Most of Ontario's four-lane highways were designed to safely handle speeds higher than 100 kilometres per hour, said Angelo DiCicco, president of the Ontario Safety League, a non-profit charity that aims to reduce preventable deaths and injuries on Ontario roads through education.

So that makes the speed limit bump from 100 to 110 km/h "quite reasonable," he said.

But DiCicco says those numbers are the maximum under ideal conditions and that it isn't always safe to drive at that speed. He says traffic will likely be travelling way below the limit during traffic hours and near urban centres.

"Safety is about behaviour, design and enforcement. It's not just a number on the sign," he said.
Click to expand...

Safety studies done on actual, real world speed limit increases tell a different story though mate. Every number I've posted so far is accurate.

It's not about what the roads are engineered for. It's about what human drivers are capable of, and the forces they can withstand in an accident.
 
MindzEye said:
Safety studies done on actual, real world speed limit increases tell a different story though mate. Every number I've posted so far is accurate.

It's not about what the roads are engineered for. It's about what human drivers are capable of, and the forces they can withstand in an accident.
Click to expand...
just get a bike man, if driving a car is too scary for you
 
axlsalinger said:
just get a bike man, if driving a car is too scary for you
Click to expand...

Vroom vroom bud.

I've driven them for decades mate, I'm good. I just don't want them getting more dangerous because the commercial trucking industry wants to shave a few minutes a trip off of each load and got their boy dougie to appeal to vroom vroom idiots as cover for a hand out to the trucking industry.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top