judith wrote:
On Tue, 8 May 2007 13:19:02 +0100, Andy Hall
wrote:

On 2007-05-08 12:45:05 +0100, "dennis@home"
said:

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
dennis@home wrote:
"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...

If people were prosecuted not for speeding, but for HAVING ACCIDENTS.
the roads would be a far safer place.
Or *both*.
Not really. There is no direct correlation between vehicle speed (within
broad limits), and accidents.

Really?
You aren't going to get many accidents unless one or more parties are moving
and if they do collide one or more of them was going too fast.
Umm no.

One could be traveling along a major road within the speed limit.

The other could pull out from a junction and simply not spot the driver
on the main road (e.g. blind spot, distracted by an animal, etc.~)

Neither was traveling too fast, but there can still be an accident - in
this case a mistake by the driver pulling out.


Just because you are driving within the speed limit does not mean that
you cannot be driving *too* fast.
If as you say there was a blind spot, then obviously you should reduce
your speed accordingly and if you hit something around the blind spot
then you would most likely be driving too fast for the
road/conditions.

One of the definitions of a blind spot is that you don't know its there
and can't see it.