On 2007-05-08 14:28:19 +0100, Dave Fawthrop
said:

On Tue, 08 May 2007 12:42:03 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

|!Dave Fawthrop wrote:
|! On Tue, 08 May 2007 10:04:25 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
|!
|!
|! |!If people were prosecuted not for speeding, but for HAVING ACCIDENTS.
|! |!the roads would be a far safer place.
|!
|! In reality *both* happen.
|! Small fine and a few points for speeding which *may* cause an accident.
|! Bigger fine and more points if you *do* cause an accident by speeding.
|!
|!Nobody ever caused an accident by speeding on its own.

Some years ago I was driving at under the speed limit of 30mph and two six
year old boys, seated on a skateboard, appeared from an absolutely blind
1in7 side road, doing one hell of a speed, directly in front of me. Had I
been speeding they would have both have been dead, as it was they were only
kept in hospital overnight.

How do you stop "boys being boys" and getting killed except by sticking to
speed limits.

Had you been closer, they would also have been dead.

The speed is not the cause, but only a factor in the outcome as this
example clearly demonstrates.

The speed limit is an arbitrary 50km/h. If it were made 60km/h there
would be statistically more deaths and if it were made 40km/h there
would be less.

So it's a matter of trade off between location, use and risk. But in
none of these cases is speed the *cause* of the accident, only a factor.

In your example, the *cause* of the accident was the boys using the
skateboard inappropriately, or perhaps their parents for letting them
do it.