Quote:
Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz
Alright, let's take two drivers of exact driving skill and put them both on a road.
One is doing the speed limit and the other is doing 20 over in the left lane. The road is not overly croweded so both drivers are free to carry on at their prefered speed. Now two deer dart from the woods and stop in each lane 100meters in front of the two drivers. Driver 1 takes 99m to stop and the deer prances off to the bushes safely.
Driver 2, due to his higher speed, takes 120 meters to stop, hits the deer, swirves off the road and into a ravine. The Deer is remarkable unhurt but driver 2 is dead.
In this case the only factor was speed. The fact of the matter is that the faster you are going, the greater risk you are at.
When you're going faster, your reaction time shrinks, and the potential damage you can sustain in a crash is increased dramatically. Yes, you can be unsafe at any speed, but all things being equal greater speed = greater risk.
|
Ok, well, what if the same 2 drivers meet each other at point A. They each have to drive another 20 kms. The fast driver is off the road a couple minutes before the slow driver is, so he is exposed to the potential danger of deer on the road for a shorter amount of time, now who's safer? On a 10 minute drive, if you increase your speed by 10% you spend 10% less time at the mercy of the other "asshats" on the road. This is a bad argument, but so is the one posted above.