Photo: AutoBlog
If there is one driving regulation we constantly break without actually feeling remorse, it has to be the maximum speed limit. We know we can drive faster without jeopardizing anybody, and so we do it.
The thing is, statistics regarding on-road incidents are showing that speeding is one of the major factors. In fact, it accounts for a third of total casualties on US roads, a number which is constantly rising.
According to two major safety organizations, the number of traffic-related fatalities in the US is on the rise this year and could reach an increase as high as 9 or 14 percent by the end of December. That would make 2015 the year with the most drastic increase in nearly seven decades.
So where's all that effort put into making safer cars going to if more and more people die in car accidents? Well, you have to take into account that while the cars do get safer and the infrastructure is better, we also have more powerful engines and more cars on the streets.
And since speeding is singled out as the main culprit, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) thinks the problem can be amended with a broader use of speed cameras.
Based on a study conducted in Montgomery County, VA, the IIHS found that the presence of speed cameras reduced the probability of a fatal or incapacitating accident occurring by 19.4 percent. Applying the same number at a nation-wide level, that would result in nearly 21,000 less severe or fatal injuries this year.
There is some common ground, though. If the cameras are placed in plain sight and in areas known to be accident-prone, then everybody can see the benefit and will go with the decision. However, if they're hidden away and placed on a long, straight strip of asphalt, then it's clear they're there just to raise revenues.
The Montgomery County project proved that. The cameras there were very clearly announced with "speed camera corridor" signs, so 96% of the motorists interviewed by IIHS said they were aware of their presence. Also, 62% of them said they were in favor of the cameras, a percentage a lot higher than what happened in other situations, where voters rejected the idea virtually unanimously.
When enforced properly, speed cameras can indeed have a beneficial effect on driving safety and a direct impact over the occurrence of accidents. When enforced properly, they are also more easily accepted by motorists who otherwise feel they are being tricked, preyed upon and ultimately ripped off.
It's a matter of miscommunication, then. With well-implemented programs like the one in Montgomery County, people's perception of the speed camera scarecrow can change, and it would bring clear benefits on overall road safety.
But that will take time, and during that time more people will die.
According to two major safety organizations, the number of traffic-related fatalities in the US is on the rise this year and could reach an increase as high as 9 or 14 percent by the end of December. That would make 2015 the year with the most drastic increase in nearly seven decades.
So where's all that effort put into making safer cars going to if more and more people die in car accidents? Well, you have to take into account that while the cars do get safer and the infrastructure is better, we also have more powerful engines and more cars on the streets.
And since speeding is singled out as the main culprit, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) thinks the problem can be amended with a broader use of speed cameras.
Based on a study conducted in Montgomery County, VA, the IIHS found that the presence of speed cameras reduced the probability of a fatal or incapacitating accident occurring by 19.4 percent. Applying the same number at a nation-wide level, that would result in nearly 21,000 less severe or fatal injuries this year.
Not everybody's on board
There are, of course, detractors of this study and the idea in principle. The National Motorists Association says speed cameras increase artificially low speed limits. Also, there have been accusations of profiteering and other studies that doubt the effectiveness of automated speed-limit enforcement.There is some common ground, though. If the cameras are placed in plain sight and in areas known to be accident-prone, then everybody can see the benefit and will go with the decision. However, if they're hidden away and placed on a long, straight strip of asphalt, then it's clear they're there just to raise revenues.
The Montgomery County project proved that. The cameras there were very clearly announced with "speed camera corridor" signs, so 96% of the motorists interviewed by IIHS said they were aware of their presence. Also, 62% of them said they were in favor of the cameras, a percentage a lot higher than what happened in other situations, where voters rejected the idea virtually unanimously.
When enforced properly, speed cameras can indeed have a beneficial effect on driving safety and a direct impact over the occurrence of accidents. When enforced properly, they are also more easily accepted by motorists who otherwise feel they are being tricked, preyed upon and ultimately ripped off.
It's a matter of miscommunication, then. With well-implemented programs like the one in Montgomery County, people's perception of the speed camera scarecrow can change, and it would bring clear benefits on overall road safety.
But that will take time, and during that time more people will die.
Google News