Earl Purple wrote:
Brimstone wrote:
Earl Purple wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

Bravo, well said, apart from a minor point.

How does travelling at a slow speed cause someone to crash?

Two ways:

1. If you drive slowly you will be causing more drivers to want to
overtake you. Overtaking is a dangerous manoeuvre. Even if it's on a
motorway which has 3 lanes and you are on the inside lane, you will
be causing other drivers approaching behind you to change lanes to
overtake you. Once again a potentially dangerous manoeuvre. Safer if
you were going faster thus causing fewer overtakes.

2. If you are driving slowly your journey will take longer. The
longer your journey, the more time you have to lose concentration.
Concentrating intensely can be enduring. And it's no use saying to
just take breaks, because as your journey will take longer, it's
likely there won't be enough time for breaks.

So two reasons why driving slower can be more dangerous.

Good answer to a different question. Nothing was said about
"dangerous".

Care to try again?

The more dangerous the driving, either yours or other reacting to you,
the more chances of a crash happening. Obvious, isn't it?

You drive at 25mph on NSL single carriageway, drivers behind get
frustrated, they overtake you, one of them misjudges, crash. Wouldn't
have happened if you'd driven at a sensible speed.

Nor was anything said about other vehicles crashing. Care to try once more?

Brimstone wrote:

Nor was anything said about other vehicles crashing. Care to try once more?

anyone more of this nonsense and you'll be marked as a troll if you're
not already

Your point was this:

How does travelling at a slow speed cause someone to crash?

and I've answered that. Does the "someone" have to be the same person
that was travelling at the slow speed? I've answered that too in point
2 (saying they will be on the road longer and are therefore likely to
lose concentration).

So you drive slowly, your journey takes 3 hours instead of 2, after 3
hours your concentration has lapsed, you don't pay full attention,
crash.

Earl Purple wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

Nor was anything said about other vehicles crashing. Care to try
once more?

anyone more of this nonsense and you'll be marked as a troll if you're
not already

Your point was this:

How does travelling at a slow speed cause someone to crash?

and I've answered that. Does the "someone" have to be the same person
that was travelling at the slow speed? I've answered that too in point
2 (saying they will be on the road longer and are therefore likely to
lose concentration).

So you drive slowly, your journey takes 3 hours instead of 2, after 3
hours your concentration has lapsed, you don't pay full attention,
crash.

That depends on the indivual and whilst true for some isn't true for all.
But it's not the speed that's the cause of the crash, it's the failure to
concentrate.

We know that attempting to take a bend at too high a speed will cause the
vehicle to want to continue in a straight line and collide with the
countryside. What similar forces or action will cause a car travelling
slowly to crash?

Brimstone wrote:


That depends on the indivual and whilst true for some isn't true for all.
But it's not the speed that's the cause of the crash, it's the failure to
concentrate.

We know that attempting to take a bend at too high a speed will cause the
vehicle to want to continue in a straight line and collide with the
countryside. What similar forces or action will cause a car travelling
slowly to crash?

No, it will mean it is harder for the driver to control, so when the
driver crashes it will be because he was unable to control the path of
the car.

Of course, driving at a slower speed would make it easier to control,
but the analogy is the same.

The only time speed would directly cause a crash is if you drive into
the back of a vehicle going slower than yourself.

"Earl Purple" wrote in message
ups.com...

Brimstone wrote:


That depends on the indivual and whilst true for some isn't true for all.
But it's not the speed that's the cause of the crash, it's the failure to
concentrate.

We know that attempting to take a bend at too high a speed will cause the
vehicle to want to continue in a straight line and collide with the
countryside. What similar forces or action will cause a car travelling
slowly to crash?

No, it will mean it is harder for the driver to control, so when the
driver crashes it will be because he was unable to control the path of
the car.

Which may or may not be true but is beside the point since the end reuslt is
the same.


Of course, driving at a slower speed would make it easier to control,
but the analogy is the same.

The only time speed would directly cause a crash is if you drive into
the back of a vehicle going slower than yourself.

Right so after all that you agree that traveliing at a slow speed does not,
in itself, cause someone to crash the car they're driving.

Brimstone wrote:

Right so after all that you agree that traveliing at a slow speed does not,
in itself, cause someone to crash the car they're driving.

No, the only speed that will guarantee that you can't crash into
anything is remaining stationary.

Even at a slow speed you can hit something.

Earl Purple wrote:
Brimstone wrote:

Right so after all that you agree that traveliing at a slow speed
does not, in itself, cause someone to crash the car they're driving.

No, the only speed that will guarantee that you can't crash into
anything is remaining stationary.

Even at a slow speed you can hit something.

Quite true, but it won't be the speed that causes the collision in the same
way that excessive sped can and does will it?

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:54:51 +0100, Brimstone wrote
(in message ):

Right so after all that you agree that traveliing at a slow speed does not,
in itself, cause someone to crash the car they're driving.

Which is actually irrelevant to the discussion - that driving slowly may well
mean that YOU don't have an accident. I have personally witnessed people who
didn't have an accident themselves but (very nearly) left a trail of
devastation in their wake. Driving excessively slowly for the condition DOES
result in an increase of risk overall due to the effect on other road users.

I dare say you'll argue that this is the fault of those that get frustrated,
but this would be falling into the same trap as those that pass
laws/regulations with no regard to human nature and wonder why they don't
work.

"Simon Hobson" wrote in message
et...
On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 21:54:51 +0100, Brimstone wrote
(in message ):

Right so after all that you agree that traveliing at a slow speed does
not,
in itself, cause someone to crash the car they're driving.

Which is actually irrelevant to the discussion

The comment to which I responded was that travelling at an inappropriate
speed causes drivers to crash.

- that driving slowly may well
mean that YOU don't have an accident. I have personally witnessed people
who
didn't have an accident themselves but (very nearly) left a trail of
devastation in their wake. Driving excessively slowly for the condition
DOES
result in an increase of risk overall due to the effect on other road
users.

That's a verifiable fact.


I dare say you'll argue that this is the fault of those that get
frustrated,
but this would be falling into the same trap as those that pass
laws/regulations with no regard to human nature and wonder why they don't
work.

Everyone needs to have proper regard for everyone else. Some people need to
slow down (both metaphorically and vehicle speed) whilst others need to get
their wits about them and realise that other people need to make decent
progress..

On Wed, 25 Oct 2006 18:45:24 +0100, Brimstone wrote
(in message ):

That depends on the indivual and whilst true for some isn't true for all.
But it's not the speed that's the cause of the crash, it's the failure to
concentrate.

An interesting statement from someone arguing for rigid enforecement of
arbitrary numbers irrespective of conditions !