Victoria records lowest annual road toll in 89 years

[Grennan]

actually in SA, this is listed as the biggest killer. ~40% from memory

Story is about Victoria. Good on SA for telling drivers theyre ****. I wish Victoria did it more.

Perhaps you need to be my age to recognise the improvements that have been brought about, and I admit I can only speak for NSW. However, over the forty odd years since 1970, there have been incredible improvements in major and secondary roads that I can recall. The Hume Highway bears little resemblance to what existed when I started driving. Other major highways are improving in large sections each year and there are now freeways where none existed at all back then, so it's fair to say that roads have improved. They just haven't improved enough.

Fair enough, things like new Freeways and the Hume for example have been greatly improved. The new freeway here - Eastlink - I think is a wonderfully safe road.

I can think of a few road projects that have been done here recently, such as the resurfacing of the Monash - I dont think that has had any effect on the road toll, Its just allowed VicRoads to enforce a speed limit of 80 ever since the freeway reopened from Burke Rd onwards and theyve now chucked speed cameras on there and have Highway Patrol hiding along the emergency stopping lanes.

I think most road projects on our arterials have been to add an extra lane to reduce congestion rather than because they were terribly outdated and dangerous.

 

[Eevo]

Story is about Victoria. Good on SA for telling drivers theyre ****. I wish Victoria did it more.

yes i realise its about vic. i read the title. telling drivers their **** doesnt improve their skills.

driver education is the way forward.

 

[Reaper]

There can be no doubt that driving must be a lot safer today than it was even forty years ago, because the road toll is so much smaller, despite huge increases in the population and the number of cars on the road. I started driving in 1970 and for that year, the road toll for NSW was the worst it has ever been (about 1100). The national population was only around 11 million. The road toll for NSW last year was around 400 (CBF looking it up) and the national population has doubled to over 22 million. The car population has almost quadrupled in that time. The reductions in the toll are similar in magnitude across the nation.

Polies will tell you it's tougher laws, speed cameras, their outstanding work upgrading our roads (though never admitting it is taking far too long to do so), ADR's, yadda yadda.

Manufacturers will tell you its the safer designs of vehicles.

They're all right to some extent, but the poor ol' driver never seems to get any credit. So, are the tougher laws, better roads and safer cars the only reasons the toll drops, or does the driver have a part in all this as well?

Opinions?

Airbags and ABS/ESC is the single biggest advance that I can think of. TBH - it's never been harder to get things wrong short of falling asleep at the wheel. No doubt roads are a **** tone better too. I can remember the old days on the Newell with 2 wheels in the gravel on the shoulder every time a truck went past the other way. This was the major highway that would barely pass as a 3rd tier back road anywhere these days. I've done more local + interstate long distance driving than I care to remember and even compared to 20 years ago when I got my license - things are far far better these days than you could ever imagine.

i strongly disagree with this. i think the media hyped it up to be more that what it really is. id like to see the stats of fatalities that were 0.6 and those that were 0.9... in the UK (when i was there, may have changed since) the limit was 0.8 and drink driving was far far less of a "problem". their alcohol-induced fatalities were no worse than ours (per capita of motorists) but it wasnt an huge deal cos' 0.5 drivers were not counted on their statistics of "drunk drivers"

its easy to say "we have a drink driver problem" when your limits are so low and make everyone freak out so tougher laws can be put in place.

and just another note, the .05 laws have been in place since i can remember (late 70's) and it didnt do diddly-squat till just now? what 0.5 laws exactly have they changed in the last 3-5 years to make it drop?

I have no doubt they have contributed to some degree. Not so much over the last 3-5 years but certainly in the 80's and 90's as enforcement ramped up and up.

 

[SavVYute]

Seat belts.

 

[Husky]

The results are quite inaccurate though. A few years ago, anyone that died within 365 days of a car accidents from factors attributed to the crash was counted, but now they only count if you die within 28 days. So for example if you are seriously injured and spend 5 weeks in ICU before dying, you no longer count as a road death. another point that annoys me is that a large portion of crashes I have dealt with (Both as a paramedical Student and now as an Emergency nurse in a department that see a decent amount of this stuff) I reckon very few crashes are due to over speed, and these are usually single car/single occupant accidents. a large amount of crashes are due to people being under speed (Merging at 70, changing lanes while braking, etc.) and EXCESSIVE amounts of alcohol (I've actually never seen anyone crash between 0.00 and 0.07, they always seem to be sober or 5-6 times the limit) and drugs.

I think if we want to drop the road toll further we need to start really teaching learners how to merge and change lanes. Merging or driving well below the limit without good reason (heavy traffic) should be fine-able for dangerous driving just like speeding. more crack downs on drink and drug driving. and having compulsory lessons and retesting on anyone that loses their license.

 

[Reaper]

The results are quite inaccurate though. A few years ago, anyone that died within 365 days of a car accidents from factors attributed to the crash was counted, but now they only count if you die within 28 days. So for example if you are seriously injured and spend 5 weeks in ICU before dying, you no longer count as a road death.

It was some years ago and TBH I'd think we are talking about a handful of people at most that fall into that category.

another point that annoys me is that a large portion of crashes I have dealt with (Both as a paramedical Student and now as an Emergency nurse in a department that see a decent amount of this stuff) I reckon very few crashes are due to over speed, and these are usually single car/single occupant accidents. a large amount of crashes are due to people being under speed (Merging at 70, changing lanes while braking, etc.) and EXCESSIVE amounts of alcohol (I've actually never seen anyone crash between 0.00 and 0.07, they always seem to be sober or 5-6 times the limit) and drugs.

I'd rate inattention/distraction as possibly the single biggest contributor.

I think if we want to drop the road toll further we need to start really teaching learners how to merge and change lanes. Merging or driving well below the limit without good reason (heavy traffic) should be fine-able for dangerous driving just like speeding. more crack downs on drink and drug driving. and having compulsory lessons and retesting on anyone that loses their license.

Whole heartedly agree on that point

 

[Calaber]

Whilst they don't form a significant issue so far as fatalities are concerned, I notice that elderly drivers losing control of vehicles when parking or turning, and colliding with buildings, seems to be increasing. One older driver this week, when attempting to park, actually drove into a building, knocking people over, and almost driving completely through the opposite wall of the building. How did he manage to do that?

IMO, if an older driver loses control of a vehicle under such simple circumstances, they should automatically be suspended from driving until their fitness to drive, including physical fitness, is re-assessed. I mention older drivers because this sort of stupidity seems to be their domain. Younger, less experienced drivers, crash into buildings because they are driving stupidly, but when an oldie can't even drive safely at parking speeds, it's time for their fitness to continue driving to be questioned.

 

[Grennan]

This was in the papers this morning:

No Cookies | Herald Sun

“It was decided the most effective way to deliver another record low road toll in 2014 was through a combination of enhanced enforcement and education, aimed at raising awareness of everyone’s road safety responsibilities.”

Excuse me while I call bullshit. Theyve funded an extra 1000 hours of cameras, including cameras at night time where you cant see them and only get the fine 5 months later as well as unmarked cars.

But its about education.

 

[Reaper]

Whilst they don't form a significant issue so far as fatalities are concerned, I notice that elderly drivers losing control of vehicles when parking or turning, and colliding with buildings, seems to be increasing. One older driver this week, when attempting to park, actually drove into a building, knocking people over, and almost driving completely through the opposite wall of the building. How did he manage to do that?

IMO, if an older driver loses control of a vehicle under such simple circumstances, they should automatically be suspended from driving until their fitness to drive, including physical fitness, is re-assessed. I mention older drivers because this sort of stupidity seems to be their domain. Younger, less experienced drivers, crash into buildings because they are driving stupidly, but when an oldie can't even drive safely at parking speeds, it's time for their fitness to continue driving to be questioned.

Expect more of it too as the mean age of our population increases. As for the license thing - I'm pretty sure that happens in Vic already. No testing here for older drivers till there is an incident though which is kinda like shutting the gate after the horse I'd suspect.

 

[XUV]

This was in the papers this morning:

Excuse me while I call bullshit. Theyve funded an extra 1000 hours of cameras, including cameras at night time where you cant see them and only get the fine 5 months later as well as unmarked cars.

But its about education.

of course, coz fines 5 months after the fact, have stopped you speeding on said day .........