Stop the radar reduces accidents

[dedeleco]

Radars are not enough, but we are thinking, and have changed the behavior of motorists for the better, becoming more careful and respectful, not just on speed.
The basic problem is that a certain number of motorists are not aware of these risks of accidents with these possible non-visible unforeseeable and cumulative circumstances, which force a much more careful driving than it seems, for a risk. 1/1000 or less.
Speed ​​is not the only risk factor.
I have trouble making this clear to my wife, who is going slower than me, but too fast in certain critical places !!

Even at very low speed, we can go too fast, like leaving near my home, a very narrow, abrupt outline, where even at 3km per hour, we go too fast, with visibility of 1m !!
Even when stationary, if I stay there, my car will be stamped, by someone passing by at 20Km / h !!
Yesterday someone who was running there on foot, looking behind his children who almost got into my stopped car, out of caution !!

The main thing is to integrate all the risks of accidents, in particular the unpredictable !!

For example when I am on a bike, I see that we do not respect enough bikes, overtaking them on a narrow road even with a car in reverse or no visibility in a turn, grazing them without thinking that a bike can confuse a little !!
I even widened my bike with a car retractor to encourage thinking, with few results.
I no longer count the number of times when on a bike I was grazed, and I caught the car a little further and rubbed my flexible retractor against its body, to remind him of my fear !!!
However there is progress over 10 to 20 years, as the decrease in the number of deaths, motorists have become more patient.
Progress is possible, apart from radars, like 2 seconds between cars almost never respected, more attention in town by not accelerating hard for 50 meters, by brushing against pedestrians, for example.

[oli 80]

Good evening, something new with the radars http://www.liguedesconducteurs.org/rada ... rques.html
the video of the link is very explanatory, I see nothing to add

[phil53]

The solution has already been given
The best system is to regulate the speed thanks to the GPS and according to the dangers.
It's entirely possible
Why isn't it even mentioned?
We prefer to show us automatic driving systems that are much more complex to implement from a legal point of view.
We prefer to fall asleep.
Even the breathalyzer could free us from checks and accidents thanks to existing technology!

[sen-no-sen]

The solution has already been given
The best system is to regulate the speed thanks to the GPS and according to the dangers.
It's entirely possible
Why isn't it even mentioned?

I see a parallel between road accidentology and the environment: there is always a question of technology to limit accidents while the simplest solution is to reduce the number of vehicles in circulation, in 2012 there were almost 38 million vehicles, figure in growth constant, it's complete nonsense!
Rather than invoking technologies, (which certainly have their uses), should work to reduce the fleet, a little reminder:
http://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parc_automobile_fran%C3%A7ais

As of January 1, 2012, the fleet of vehicles in circulation in France was estimated by the CCFA (Committee of French Automobile Manufacturers) at 38 vehicles.

It is divided into:

32 million private vehicles;
6 million commercial vehicles.

[phil53]

sen-no-sen you are certainly right but you still have to face the facts, in 90% of cases you lose less time if you use your car.
Regardless of the environment for sure but who cares if it is his lifestyle that is at stake?
10% at most!
Even financially public transport is more expensive for us.
In many cities there is parking at the entrance but in addition to the bus or tram ticket, you have to pay for parking.
Assessment it is better to use the car.
Even carpooling is restrictive in terms of responsiveness. On the other hand, economically, it's all a winner.

[sen-no-sen]

sen-no-sen you are certainly right but you still have to face the facts, in 90% of cases you lose less time if you use your car.

I am not of this opinion, the automobile finds justification only in the rural zones, or it in fact initially its place.
As a reminder, almost 70% of French people live in urban or peri-urban areas, which are widely served by public transport.
Being often in Paris for professional reasons, I can assure you that taking public transport or cycling is much faster than using the automobile.
14% of the household budget goes to the automobile, economic to the car?
Air pollution is almost 10000 deaths / year at least.
Road accidents nearly 4000 deaths / year ...
We spend almost 70 billion / year on the purchase of oil from doubtful countries ...
If we reduced the number of vehicles in France by 50%, we could save enough energy to do without nuclear power through a thermal power plant (well, that's not necessarily a good idea, far from it! But that makes think!).
It is estimated that there will be nearly 4 billion motor vehicles in the world in 2050 !!!
It can't go on like this.

[Ahmed]

It is estimated that there will be nearly 4 billion motor vehicles in the world in 2050 !!! It can't go on like this.

Live or drive, you have to choose!

The simple extrapolation of our relationship to the car at a global level immediately highlights the absurdity of this possibility!

It also shows what what this relationship implies in terms of our extraordinarily selfish and extractivist perception.

[BobFuck]

The simple extrapolation of our relationship to the car at a global level immediately highlights the absurdity of this possibility!

The car is, I think, an excellent metaphor for modern society.

It's great, so everyone has one, so everything is blocked, so we're going slower than before, but with an extra credit.

Okay, the car is still great progress and extremely practical. It is its inappropriate use that poses the problem.

[sen-no-sen]

Okay, the car is still great progress and extremely practical. It is its inappropriate use that poses the problem.

Of course there is no question of removing the cars, it would just be a question of reducing the number of vehicles, and especially the number of km traveled by the park.
A reduction of 50% would be quite achievable.
If to that the manufacturers put on sale cars consuming half the fuel, we would be "not bad".

[bamboo]

The line at 110km / h froze instantly for no foreseeable reason: I was happy to have my safety distance. One guy braked in front of the radar, but I didn't understand until after.

I think the one who chose this site should be in prison for life threatening.

While the one who was obviously driving too fast (since he braked in front of the radar), has the right to continue to do so.

You remind me of those who complained about speed limits.
It was said to be more accident-causing to drive slower ...

And yet, today, there are fewer accidents / km traveled ...