SPEED LIMITERS?
“Fitting speed-limiting devices in cars could prevent up to 29% of injury accidents on the roads, a report by a Government advisory body has said.”
This statement is based on flawed and incomplete research and a number of faulty premises.
The simplicity of the statement gives it an obvious appeal but I consider it to be at best misguided and most likely wrong.
If 2 cars collide head on and each one has been travelling at 30mph, within the speed limit, the joint collision speed of 60mph will lead to the occupants of the cars being injured seriously. If the limit is 60mph the collision speed will be 120mph, serious injury and death are likely results. If the speed limit is 50mph the joint speed is 100mph or 70mph, joint speed 140mph. So how is a speed limiter that keeps a vehicle to the speed limit going to help?
Additionally, a burst of acceleration can often get a driver out of trouble when braking would result in collision or some other injurious result. If the speed of the car was limited this option would not be available to a driver and collision and or injury might result. So, how does the advisory body know that the correct use of speed has not decreased the number of injury accidents?
The flaw in the research is that though there may be ways to measure causes of injury accidents, there is no way to measure the reason injury accidents did not happen. Without such knowledge any simplistic solution, such as “Fitting speed-limiting devices in cars could prevent up to 29% of injury accidents on the roads” could cause more injury accidents than it prevents.
Tony Morris
