Jump to content

Anti Speeding - What would you consider to be "Success"?


Darryn
 Share

  

38 members have voted

  1. 1. Under what conditions would you consider the campaign successful?

    • The number of people caught goes up
      12
    • The number of people caught goes down
      6
    • The number of accidents goes down
      20


Recommended Posts

If the police were to run a highly visible, and well publicised "anti speeding campaign" that saw much more stringent enforcement, more cameras on the road, lesser allowance for over the limit, and more mobile patrols, what would you consider the best measure of success of the campaign?

↡ Advertisement
Link to post
Share on other sites

You sound like you are doing an advertisement for them...lol

Not blardy likely ....

 

I hate it when I get a speeding ticket

Link to post
Share on other sites

the most successful indicator is when avg speed/accident on that stretch of road goes up.......haha......surely its my definition and not the definition of the TP.

Link to post
Share on other sites

the most successful indicator is when avg speed/accident on that stretch of road goes up.......haha......surely its my definition and not the definition of the TP.

Hmmm...

 

am I parsing you correctly...you seem to be saying,

 

a) Prior to campaign average speed = 60, accidents = 4

b) After campaign, average speed = 90, accidents = 5

 

That would be a success?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm...

 

am I parsing you correctly...you seem to be saying,

 

a) Prior to campaign average speed = 60, accidents = 4

b) After campaign, average speed = 90, accidents = 5

 

That would be a success?

haa......yes.......but don't flame me.....

 

I am just thinking it is too easy to claim success of a campaign by quoting absolute numbers.it is not rocket science to be able to prove that by reducing speed limit, the number of accidents go down. the flip side of reducing speed limit indefinitely always cause traffic jams and productivity loss.

 

since you started the rolling about allow us to define success of such campaigns, I just offer a more unusual proposal so that we can think out of the box. [;)]

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Bring the bangkok jam here, then no space to speed at all. A complete success on Anti-Speeding. Can i join the scholar team also? :)

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

haa......yes.......but don't flame me.....

 

I am just thinking it is too easy to claim success of a campaign by quoting absolute numbers.it is not rocket science to be able to prove that by reducing speed limit, the number of accidents go down. the flip side of reducing speed limit indefinitely always cause traffic jams and productivity loss.

 

since you started the rolling about allow us to define success of such campaigns, I just offer a more unusual proposal so that we can think out of the box. [;)]

Thanks - you've kinda nailed the purpose of the thread.

 

I also don't think that statistics alone (whether it be number of tickets, number of accidents) are the definition of success...

 

You need to be taking a fairly holistic look -

 

And also, you have to be careful of your attribution. (eg: more tickets, lower accidents - were the lower accidents because of more tickets or another reason?)

Bring the bangkok jam here, then no space to speed at all. A complete success on Anti-Speeding. Can i join the scholar team also? :)

NO!!!!!

[drivingcar][grin][sunny]

Link to post
Share on other sites

actually in an uncontrolled environment (scientist and researchers would know what I mean), attribution of outcome from one factor may not be possible, if there are no way to ensure other factors are kept constant and therefore don't skew the trend.

 

example issue more tickets and less accidents observed. but say If amongst the 2 periods of comparison, one period has more rainfall, thereby affecting driving conditions and drivers' mentality, renders the results incomparable actually.

 

another example is say there is new infrastructure and amenities near the road thereby affecting number of drivers, before and after the campaign to nab more speedsters.

 

Thanks - you've kinda nailed the purpose of the thread.

 

I also don't think that statistics alone (whether it be number of tickets, number of accidents) are the definition of success...

 

You need to be taking a fairly holistic look -

 

And also, you have to be careful of your attribution. (eg: more tickets, lower accidents - were the lower accidents because of more tickets or another reason?)


NO!!!!!

[drivingcar][grin][sunny]

 

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

actually in an uncontrolled environment (scientist and researchers would know what I mean), attribution of outcome from one factor may not be possible, if there are no way to ensure other factors are kept constant and therefore don't skew the trend.

 

example issue more tickets and less accidents observed. but say If amongst the 2 periods of comparison, one period has more rainfall, thereby affecting driving conditions and drivers' mentality, renders the results incomparable actually.

 

another example is say there is new infrastructure and amenities near the road thereby affecting number of drivers, before and after the campaign to nab more speedsters.

 

 

Not to mention other factors - such as drink driving, visibility, traffic composition, statistical anomalies....

 

eg - the police might do everything right, from "safer speeds" to better driving, but there may still be an increase in accidents...

Link to post
Share on other sites

actually they are quite lenient on speeding alrdy.

 

they could have used GPS to track speed and every speeding can be caught.

 

totally viable in current technology.

 

so not say too much as times we want to close an eye. [lipsrsealed]

 

eg. to save a life.

  • Praise 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you right now:

 

The public will say Option 2

The Govt will publicly say Option 3

When actually, the Govt will want Option 1

 

All they want is money. More money = success.

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I can tell you right now:

 

The public will say Option 2

The Govt will publicly say Option 3

When actually, the Govt will want Option 1

 

All they want is money. More money = success.

More money = more GST vouchers, more for Pioneer Generation = GOOD!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the police were to run a highly visible, and well publicised "anti speeding campaign" that saw much more stringent enforcement, more cameras on the road, lesser allowance for over the limit, and more mobile patrols, what would you consider the best measure of success of the campaign?

 

I say increase the speed limits to 200km/h. That way, no one will be speeding, everyone below the speed limits. [idea][drivingcar]

  • Praise 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

actually they are quite lenient on speeding alrdy.

 

they could have used GPS to track speed and every speeding can be caught.

 

totally viable in current technology.

 

so not say too much as times we want to close an eye. [lipsrsealed]

 

eg. to save a life.

 

Like what is being done in Dubai and Saudi? All the fast cars, but 0 opportunities to run the true speed. Theoretically speaking.

 

I for one do not agree that speeding = increased number of accidents. But reckless driving can. The opportunities for speeding can only arise when road conditions are suitable for speeding (i.e. clear roads, long stretches of straights without speed traps etc.)

 

If the opportunities are not present, then it's only reckless driving. I hardly see cars driving at 140, 160 on the expressways long enough before they have to slow down to speed limits or way below speed limits.

 

So, what is the correct unit of measurement to express a successful "anti-speeding" campaign?

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The accident rate actually will go up.

Recently got a Toa Payoh Cop On Top incident.

the driver in front slowed down causing a ripple effect and a biker couldn't stop on time.

 

In normal driving, we focus on the traffic condition and look out for hazards.

When we approach a hot spot, our eyes will be concentrated looking on the bridge for Cop On Top & looking at the speedo rather then road hazard.

Even when traveling at speed limits, drivers will slow down further as a safety precaution.

 

One just have to travel with a non-so-experience driver in KPE and see how the driver react to driving.

Many feels stress when traveling along this expressway as one couldn't concentrate, process & react accordingly to situation.

  • Praise 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...