Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

Tesla Software updates - Australia

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
So you know more about this than the complete body of professional traffic accident researchers? That’s impressive. What are your qualifications, and where have you published your findings?
How about you show us their research proving that going slightly over the speed limit is the cause of the majority of crashes? Not just wavy davy arms by governments with an agenda or public bureaucrats or the public memes they come up with for TV or advertising.

I can show you a study from NHTSA showing it's closer to 5%.

70% of crashes caused by "intersections, driving onto edge of road, crossing lane lines."

The usual troll responses to the stats above are "Well, that's the USA not Australia". Fire away with that lemon!

Source: National Motor Vehicle Crash Causation Survey (NHTSA)

There's nothing else they can easily police to get the fine revenue they do (which isn't potentially subjective or would take a lot of police presence).

Watching Dash Cams Australia doesn't show cars speeding past others at 10km over getting into major accidents. It shows 1. Dickheads 2. Not giving way at intersections and roundabouts 3. Red light runners 4. Morons 5. Mobile phone users & 6. Froot Loops.
 
How about you show us their research proving that going slightly over the speed limit is the cause of the majority of crashes? Not just wavy davy arms by governments with an agenda or public bureaucrats or the public memes they come up with for TV or advertising.

I’m not your research assistant, and I’m sure you can use Google.

You are the one challenging the research consensus, not me, so it is up to you to disprove it with hard data, not “wavy davy” arms of your own biases.

There are plenty of traffic accident research bodies in Australia, many associated with Universities. Look them up, read their research papers and findings, and then disprove those findings with your science, data, and peer-reviewed publications. That’s the way it works.
 
  • Like
Reactions: STUtoday
I’m not your research assistant, and I’m sure you can use Google.

You are the one challenging the research consensus, not me, so it is up to you to disprove it with hard data, not “wavy davy” arms of your own biases.
I put the evidence above in my response. I didn't wavy davy. Hard facts.

Your response was nonsensical and a cop-out.

Expected better from you.

I'm one of those rare 1/1000 people who will be the first person to admit when I'm wrong. I'll even apologise if I've been a twat about it. Not argue and change the goalposts for the sake of it (aka trolls). Over and out.
 
  • Disagree
  • Like
Reactions: STUtoday and sjkjs
I would have thought it would be difficult to prove that (currently) speed does not kill when in an Australian regulatory framework that sends you a bill for $500+ for going just a couple of km over and loss of licence once you get 4 such bills. Further the safety of cars has developed such that accidents where speed is involved are less of an issue to occupant safety that previous years.
As you cannot design cars to prevent red light running, phone use, and other moronic events, these behaviours then become the dominant statistic. If you remove all speed related road rules, my hunch is that speed would become the dominant statistic.
Whether 5km/hr over really matters…who knows, but a line has to be drawn, and someone will always drive faster than that line. But I do know that part of the road I am on which used to have several bike/car fatal accidents has had none of significance since the limit was reduce from 50 to 40, and a rule to keep 1m from cyclists applied.
No scientific fact in any of this, just opinion.
 
So you know more about this than the complete body of professional traffic accident researchers? That’s impressive. What are your qualifications, and where have you published your findings?

GSR and EuroCap don’t cover speeding because they are driver monitoring systems, not speed limiting systems.
I am selling software to automotive OEMs and tier 1’s to monitor drowsiness. Very up on the the current legislation.
 
I put the evidence above in my response.

You put one piece of misinterpreted evidence in your response. Speeding risks are almost always made in reference to serious injuries and fatalities, not just "crashes". Since you goaded me into being your research assistant, here's some:


If you are genuinely interested in finding out more about this, you can do the rest of the research yourself. State governments and road transport authorities don't just make numbers up "wavy davy" style, they quote the findings of reputable traffic accident researchers, who know a lot more about this than random internet posters.