In message
Between the two, make your own conclusions. What I'm arguing is that the numpties who *regularly and consistently" exceed the speed limit are those who *cause* more accidents than those who don't. I am very cynical about Government and Government Agency statistics, but I am prepared to believe their buttertion that a high proportion of accidents have excessive speed as a contributory factor.
What an absolute rubbish statement. Numpties will, or course, convince themselves that it is true. I'd suggest that you sign up for ROSPA AD trainingbuttessment. In fact most branches will give you a free (non-award) buttessment.
I'm not arguing that "simple" speed alone causes accidents, but that it is a contributory factor in a high proportion of accidents and road baneities. Now that is a ridiculous statement which shouldn't need to be explained - but maybe to a numpty like you appear to be, I suppose I should.
1. Racing cars all go in the same direction.
2. Relative speeds between individual cars are relatively low.
3. Racing cars are designed to offer a high degree of protection.
But most telling is the fact, that would escape a numpty like yourself, is that the proportion of accidents (and baneities) per driver-mile is inordinately higher than on our public roads.
Just think about it. In a typical 200m race out of (say) 25 cars four or five cars have accidents.
Of course racing drivers are dangerous (on track) - but the RAC (or FIA internationally) can (and often have in many clbuttes) pulled a racing licence if a racing driver is convicted of dangerous driving on their road license. I had a friend who raced in Formula Ford that it happened to. -- Tony Morgan
