[HN Gopher] The case for speed limits [on German autobahn]
___________________________________________________________________
The case for speed limits [on German autobahn]
Author : mtmail
Score : 22 points
Date : 2022-12-09 21:27 UTC (1 hours ago)
(HTM) web link (blog.datawrapper.de)
(TXT) w3m dump (blog.datawrapper.de)
| WirelessGigabit wrote:
| Myth #1: is a non-reason to ban it. Non-usage of something is not
| a reason to get rid of something
|
| Myth #2: I've never met someone who is like: oh if I cannot drive
| 200kmph I'll be late to my meeting. That's not why people drive
| fast. They do because it's fun!
|
| Myth #3: Emissions are taxed. Car consumes more, so you pay more
| taxes.
|
| Myth #4: You cannot push everybody to electric cars and then
| yell: oh but the electricity isn't clean...
|
| Myth #5: This is the worst actually, it's missing a significant
| piece of information... which part of the fatalities happened >
| 130kmph?
| KarlKemp wrote:
| On #1 you seem to be acce-ting the "myth"?
|
| As to #2, "fun" is possibly the real reason people want it, it
| that's just not a very convincing argument. There are also many
| people who want a speed limit because they experience a
| different emotion, namely _fear_.
|
| As to #3, I don't know what your argument is? People might pay
| for gas, but the cost is nowhere near enough to cover the
| externalities.
|
| #5: that data just isn't available, I guess?
| KindAndFriendly wrote:
| Just like the gun debate in the US, the speed limit debate in
| Germany has at its core nothing to do with rational arguments. It
| is about perceived restriction, limiting personal freedom, and
| potentially taking away a right people are used to.
| aksss wrote:
| Those sound like rational concerns to me.
| ManuelKiessling wrote:
| More rational or less rational than the pro-limit concerns?
| mqus wrote:
| maybe rational, but purely subjective. "Restricting freedom"
| - the "freedom" to reach your destination in an arbitrary
| speed? what kind of freedom is this? esp if we talk about a
| difference of what, 10 minutes over 2 hours of driving time?
| "potentially potentially taking away a right people are used
| to" it wasn't really a right (=set in law), it just was not
| forbidden, just like a lot of other things that get
| restricted all the time. the argument "but this was allowed
| before" is not really a good objective argument.
| Ylpertnodi wrote:
| Regarding the article, nothing I was going to say involved
| "perceived restriction, limiting personal freedom, and
| potentially taking away a right people are used to."
|
| I guess you know best, "just like the gun debate".
| DiggyJohnson wrote:
| How is
|
| > limiting personal freedom, and potentially potentially taking
| away a right people are used to
|
| not a rational concern? Sure you might personally be of a
| different opinion, but to claim these things can't be the
| subject of a rational argument is absurd.
| luckylion wrote:
| Emissions per km completely leaves time out of the equation.
| Fatalities per year in motorway traffic per 1000km of motorway
| ignores how many people drive on those 1000km in a year, an empty
| motorway is obviously safest but also pretty useless. Strange
| that they'd choose these, given that they're a statistics company
| and should know better.
|
| I believe a speed limit would be useful. Maybe add more
| Nurburgring-style race tracks where people can drive their cars
| as fast as they want to.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| I wonder how long before they come for the Nordschleife.
| "Because it's an outlier on the pollution map and why would
| anyone want to drive so fast anyway. Let's ban it."
| ttyyzz wrote:
| I come from Germany / Bavaria. I've been driving on the A8
| autobahn between Stuttgart and Munich for many years.
|
| About 2.5 years ago, the maximum speed of 120 was introduced in a
| 10 km long section near Augsburg, from 6 a.m. to 8 p.m.
|
| There are some many exits in quick succession. It is generally
| very dangerous when people traveling at very high speeds (i.e.
| people who are just driving there) meet people who are traveling
| at very low speeds (i.e. people who are trying to get onto the
| motorway in slow cars or trucks).
|
| There have been many accidents in the past. Since the speed was
| set at 120, there have been far fewer accidents on this section,
| and therefore fewer seriously injured / killed.
|
| I generally observe a harmonization of traffic flow. And I'm less
| stuck in traffic!
| aksss wrote:
| I'm happy I've been able to drive at high speed on the autobahn,
| but don't imagine it will last. It's excessively wasteful of
| energy for one thing. It's remarkable how much more efficiently
| your car can operate at just 55mph vs 75mph. Driving at 150mph?
| Quite the gas/electricity guzzler. I could see this killing the
| autobahn as we know (knew?) it before the safety concerns do it
| in. The one thing German society has going for it that the US
| never will is pretty strict social adherence to 'rules of the
| road', such as leaving the left lane open, using turn signals,
| etc. If/when that social trust breaks down, culturally, I imagine
| it would be hard for a highly-populated, high-speed highway to
| exist.
| [deleted]
| [deleted]
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| Eco arguments are what they are. Regarding accidents, making
| speeders drive slower will not make general population improve
| their driving. I wonder how many accidents happened because the
| driver of the slower car didn't even bother to check their
| mirrors when changing the lane.
| devit wrote:
| The problem with the Autobahn are the 120 km/h speed limits that
| are there on a sizeable portion of it for no reason.
|
| They should remove all the speed limits, not add more.
| rad_gruchalski wrote:
| Most of those limits are for noise levels and surface
| conditions.
| devit wrote:
| For noise, they should either build a barrier or buy out the
| properties nearby, certainly not limit the speed.
|
| And for surface conditions, repave the road.
| barbazoo wrote:
| Or for stretches that had high accident rates in the past [0]
|
| > According to official statistics from 2018, unlimited
| highways in Germany claimed about 71% of fatalities on
| highways.[86] However, autobahns without speed limits also
| account for 70% of the entire autobahn network, which puts
| the high proportion of collision fatalities on stretches
| without speed limits into perspective.[86] However, the often
| resulting thinking that speed limits would not make roads
| significantly safer is a fallacy, since it is precisely those
| roads that have a high volume of traffic and thus a high risk
| of collisions that are given speed limits.
|
| [0] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autobahn#Safety
| tensorturtle wrote:
| Proponents of unlimited speed Autobahn could argue: 1. The
| tourism value: I anecdotally know people visit Germany just for
| the Autobahn. (See Nurburgring, which is technically an Autobahn)
| 2. Sale of performance cars: The high actual minimum speed (from
| my experience you need to drive at around 150km/h in the middle
| lane, and 180-200km/h to pass on the left lane). Almost anywhere
| else in the world, the top speed of cars is irrelevant. In
| Germany, however, high performance cars (inevitably, German brand
| ones) can be desired for their better handling at speeds at or
| above 200km/h. 3. Germans collectively have excellent driving
| mannerisms and skills which were a result of unlimited speed. It
| is probably true that enforcing a speed limit today would
| decrease deaths, but the next generation would then regress to
| the mean. I would be interested to see someone quantify the above
| points and compare them with the economic costs discussed in the
| OP article.
| MandieD wrote:
| Despite having occasionally enjoyed letting 'er rip at 160-180
| (about 100-110mph), I lean towards a 130 general limit - having a
| kid changes a lot of one's priorities, it turns out.
|
| The author should have listed the fatalities by 100 million km
| driven - _of course_ practically-empty Finland is going to have
| far fewer fatalities per 1000km of road than much denser Germany!
| WirelessGigabit wrote:
| Having done 250kmph / 155mph on the German Autobahn I do wonder
| what why you feel like you should take the pleasure away from
| other people because you had a kid?
|
| No-one forces you to drive faster (1) and when driving you can
| stick to the right lane (2) and check your mirrors when you
| need to pass (3).
| barbazoo wrote:
| The relative speed difference of 130km/h means you're closing
| in on the traffic in front of you at 36m/s. That doesn't
| sound like much but if you consider how long it takes from
| checking the mirror to changing lanes, that's often just not
| enough time. Numerous times I've had the situation where I
| checked the mirror and by the time I've changed lanes, some
| car almost rear ended me. Relative speed differences like
| that are just a recipe for disaster and the only way to fix
| that is to make the fast car go slower.
___________________________________________________________________
(page generated 2022-12-09 23:00 UTC)