The case for higher speed limits on Hwy. 401
04-Jan-2007, 02:10 PM
#1
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: scarborough
Posts: 6,394
The case for higher speed limits on Hwy. 401
http://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/678348/posts
-------------
The Case For Higher Speed Limits on Hwy. 401 (Trans-Canada Hwy)
Local News - Gord Thompson may be the only man in Ontario ever charged under the Highway Traffic Act for obeying the letter of the law. The teacher from Campbellford and another motorist caused a four-kilometre traffic jam on Highway 401 seven years ago by driving side by side at the posted 100 km/h speed limit. They were charged with obstructing traffic and had their licences temporarily suspended.
Weeks earlier, Thompson had been ticketed for going 117 km/h on the same road and staged his slow-motion protest after a judge told him he was breaking the law by going even a kilometre over the posted limit.
“It still kind of gets my blood going,” Thompson said this week. “The number on the [speed limit] sign isn’t the number you’re expected to drive at and no one will tell you what the tolerance actually is.” Thompson’s situation may be the most ludicrous application of Ontario’s speeding laws but it puts into focus what motorists prove with their right feet – that 100 km/h is often too slow for the province’s 400-series highways. A recent study by University of Toronto researcher Baher Abdulhai found every single driver exceeding the speed limit on some stretches of highway that he and graduate student Jaime Abraham studied. His study recommended that the speed limit be raised to a more realistic 130 km/h.
That finding mirrors dozens of similar studies done on expressways in North America and Europe. Studies indicate that 85 per cent of motorists drive at speeds between 110 km/h and 130 km/h on the 401. According to most traffic experts, such a widespread variance from the posted speed means the limit should be raised. And a survey of almost 300 motorists in Belleville several years ago found the majority of drivers wanted the speed limit increased by at least 10 km/h.
The provincial government, however, has dismissed the latest study, saying it has no intention of raising speed limits. “Our own research suggests that raising the speed limits would in fact lead to an increase in traffic injuries and fatalities,” said Transportation Ministry spokesman Anser Ahmed. The response to his study has disappointed Abdulhai. “I have not seen any counter-arguments based on fact,” he said this week. “It’s all been, ‘You’re going to kill people,’ [or] ‘There would be blood all over the roads.’” He was particularly upset by some media reports on his findings.
“What surprised me was the reaction from the public [in TV reports],” he said.“In one report, they showed a 50-50 split among people about the higher limit, but in some locations measured in the report, 100 per cent of people were driving over the limit. “If 100 per cent of the people are violating [the law] when they drive, where’s the 50 per cent that opposes higher limits?” The 100 km/h limit was set in the 1970s as a conservation measure during the oil crisis. Before that, the limit was 115 km/h, even though cars had few of the safety features that today’s drivers enjoy.
Scrapped limit
The United States scrapped its gas-saving 55 mph limit several years ago and left it to the states to set speed limits. Most opted for a 65 or even 75 mph (105 to 120 km/h) limit on major highways. Since then, people on both sides of the issue have been producing studies. Critics of higher speed limits point to an increased number of deaths on some highways with higher limits. Supporters say raising speed limits actually makes highways safer. They argue higher speeds encourage motorists to use the road more. With increased traffic, the number of fatalities per 100 million miles driven – one of the basic measures of road safety – actually falls. “It’s one of those cases where you use statistics any way you want to,” said David Leonhardt of the Canadian Automobile Association, which supported Abdulhai’s conclusions if combined with a program of increased speed limit enforcement.
Michael Cain, director of research for the B.C. group Safety by Education Not Speed Enforcement (SENSE), said the group’s efforts to raise speed limits drew the same fears of carnage on the roads. “They said ‘The faster you go, the harder you hit,’ but that totally ignores the human interaction of driving,” he said. “The whole argument ignores the fact that if you don’t have an accident, you don’t get hurt.”
Abdulhai himself says higher speeds are not dangerous and that speed differentials cause accidents. A higher speed limit, he argues, will not cause people to drive faster; it merely reflects what they are already doing. “It’s really basic stuff,” Abdulhai said. “It’s not rocket science.”
‘Reasonable’
Jim Baxter, president of the National Motorists Association, a U.S. consumers group that supports higher speed limits, said he was familiar with Abdulhai’s study. “What your professor is saying is set the speed limit at the speed at which traffic is moving, which I think is a reasonable and prudent thing to do,” he said. “People don’t have a death wish. You’re not out to hurt yourself or to drive faster than is safe for the road.” Most of the resistance to higher limits comes from police and the insurance companies, which both profit from speeding tickets, he said.
“Police like the low limit because it gives them a reason to stop anyone they want,” he said. “The insurance industry has always supported lower limits.” The other knock at the higher limits is that cars use more fuel at higher speeds. Baxter shrugs off that point. “Modern vehicles don’t have nearly the differential in fuel consumption that they used to,” he said. “It’s an argument that might have held sway in ’75 … [But] the individual should be allowed to decide if the saving of time is worth it.”
Baxter said he is familiar with environmental arguments but that highway policy shouldn’t be based on ideology. “There are side elements out there who don’t like people having the right to go anywhere they want however fast they want to go,” he said. “There are environmentalists who would like to see us walk everywhere.”
Leonhardt of the CAA said a higher limit on the 401 would allow police to concentrate on the very fast and the very slow drivers, who present the most danger in traffic. Those who drive over the limit should receive “zero tolerance,” he said. “And for people who want to drive 80, maybe a 400-series highway is not where they ought to be.” Baxter noted that realistic speed limits would be welcomed by motorists in Kingston, for it would dramatically cut down on travel times to Toronto or Ottawa.
Higher speeds are not only safer, but economically beneficial, argued SENSE’s Cain. “What we need to look at in this issue is where will society benefit?” he said. “[Higher speed limits] can reduce the number of crashes and provide benefits to the economy.” Leeds-Grenville MPP Bob Runciman, who has had a 600-km round-trip commute for 21 years, has publicly supported a higher speed limit on the 401, as did former transportation minister Al Palladini, but the issue has never caught fire at Queen’s Park. The last push to raise the limit dissolved after a rash of accidents involving wheels flying off heavy trucks.
As for Thompson, he has not had a speeding ticket since he and his companion set out on their legal Sunday drive, but he’d love to go back in front of a judge. “You know, when we did the protest at 100, we did not overtake one single vehicle,” he recalled. “If I get a ticket for going 120 on the 401 now, I’d go before the judge and say ‘I can’t go at 100, another judge told me I can’t drive 100 on the 401.’” Leonhardt said that incongruity needs to be addressed. “That’s the predicament that people are in right now, and people shouldn’t be in that predicament.”
-------------
The Case For Higher Speed Limits on Hwy. 401 (Trans-Canada Hwy)
Local News - Gord Thompson may be the only man in Ontario ever charged under the Highway Traffic Act for obeying the letter of the law. The teacher from Campbellford and another motorist caused a four-kilometre traffic jam on Highway 401 seven years ago by driving side by side at the posted 100 km/h speed limit. They were charged with obstructing traffic and had their licences temporarily suspended.
Weeks earlier, Thompson had been ticketed for going 117 km/h on the same road and staged his slow-motion protest after a judge told him he was breaking the law by going even a kilometre over the posted limit.
“It still kind of gets my blood going,” Thompson said this week. “The number on the [speed limit] sign isn’t the number you’re expected to drive at and no one will tell you what the tolerance actually is.” Thompson’s situation may be the most ludicrous application of Ontario’s speeding laws but it puts into focus what motorists prove with their right feet – that 100 km/h is often too slow for the province’s 400-series highways. A recent study by University of Toronto researcher Baher Abdulhai found every single driver exceeding the speed limit on some stretches of highway that he and graduate student Jaime Abraham studied. His study recommended that the speed limit be raised to a more realistic 130 km/h.
That finding mirrors dozens of similar studies done on expressways in North America and Europe. Studies indicate that 85 per cent of motorists drive at speeds between 110 km/h and 130 km/h on the 401. According to most traffic experts, such a widespread variance from the posted speed means the limit should be raised. And a survey of almost 300 motorists in Belleville several years ago found the majority of drivers wanted the speed limit increased by at least 10 km/h.
The provincial government, however, has dismissed the latest study, saying it has no intention of raising speed limits. “Our own research suggests that raising the speed limits would in fact lead to an increase in traffic injuries and fatalities,” said Transportation Ministry spokesman Anser Ahmed. The response to his study has disappointed Abdulhai. “I have not seen any counter-arguments based on fact,” he said this week. “It’s all been, ‘You’re going to kill people,’ [or] ‘There would be blood all over the roads.’” He was particularly upset by some media reports on his findings.
“What surprised me was the reaction from the public [in TV reports],” he said.“In one report, they showed a 50-50 split among people about the higher limit, but in some locations measured in the report, 100 per cent of people were driving over the limit. “If 100 per cent of the people are violating [the law] when they drive, where’s the 50 per cent that opposes higher limits?” The 100 km/h limit was set in the 1970s as a conservation measure during the oil crisis. Before that, the limit was 115 km/h, even though cars had few of the safety features that today’s drivers enjoy.
Scrapped limit
The United States scrapped its gas-saving 55 mph limit several years ago and left it to the states to set speed limits. Most opted for a 65 or even 75 mph (105 to 120 km/h) limit on major highways. Since then, people on both sides of the issue have been producing studies. Critics of higher speed limits point to an increased number of deaths on some highways with higher limits. Supporters say raising speed limits actually makes highways safer. They argue higher speeds encourage motorists to use the road more. With increased traffic, the number of fatalities per 100 million miles driven – one of the basic measures of road safety – actually falls. “It’s one of those cases where you use statistics any way you want to,” said David Leonhardt of the Canadian Automobile Association, which supported Abdulhai’s conclusions if combined with a program of increased speed limit enforcement.
Michael Cain, director of research for the B.C. group Safety by Education Not Speed Enforcement (SENSE), said the group’s efforts to raise speed limits drew the same fears of carnage on the roads. “They said ‘The faster you go, the harder you hit,’ but that totally ignores the human interaction of driving,” he said. “The whole argument ignores the fact that if you don’t have an accident, you don’t get hurt.”
Abdulhai himself says higher speeds are not dangerous and that speed differentials cause accidents. A higher speed limit, he argues, will not cause people to drive faster; it merely reflects what they are already doing. “It’s really basic stuff,” Abdulhai said. “It’s not rocket science.”
‘Reasonable’
Jim Baxter, president of the National Motorists Association, a U.S. consumers group that supports higher speed limits, said he was familiar with Abdulhai’s study. “What your professor is saying is set the speed limit at the speed at which traffic is moving, which I think is a reasonable and prudent thing to do,” he said. “People don’t have a death wish. You’re not out to hurt yourself or to drive faster than is safe for the road.” Most of the resistance to higher limits comes from police and the insurance companies, which both profit from speeding tickets, he said.
“Police like the low limit because it gives them a reason to stop anyone they want,” he said. “The insurance industry has always supported lower limits.” The other knock at the higher limits is that cars use more fuel at higher speeds. Baxter shrugs off that point. “Modern vehicles don’t have nearly the differential in fuel consumption that they used to,” he said. “It’s an argument that might have held sway in ’75 … [But] the individual should be allowed to decide if the saving of time is worth it.”
Baxter said he is familiar with environmental arguments but that highway policy shouldn’t be based on ideology. “There are side elements out there who don’t like people having the right to go anywhere they want however fast they want to go,” he said. “There are environmentalists who would like to see us walk everywhere.”
Leonhardt of the CAA said a higher limit on the 401 would allow police to concentrate on the very fast and the very slow drivers, who present the most danger in traffic. Those who drive over the limit should receive “zero tolerance,” he said. “And for people who want to drive 80, maybe a 400-series highway is not where they ought to be.” Baxter noted that realistic speed limits would be welcomed by motorists in Kingston, for it would dramatically cut down on travel times to Toronto or Ottawa.
Higher speeds are not only safer, but economically beneficial, argued SENSE’s Cain. “What we need to look at in this issue is where will society benefit?” he said. “[Higher speed limits] can reduce the number of crashes and provide benefits to the economy.” Leeds-Grenville MPP Bob Runciman, who has had a 600-km round-trip commute for 21 years, has publicly supported a higher speed limit on the 401, as did former transportation minister Al Palladini, but the issue has never caught fire at Queen’s Park. The last push to raise the limit dissolved after a rash of accidents involving wheels flying off heavy trucks.
As for Thompson, he has not had a speeding ticket since he and his companion set out on their legal Sunday drive, but he’d love to go back in front of a judge. “You know, when we did the protest at 100, we did not overtake one single vehicle,” he recalled. “If I get a ticket for going 120 on the 401 now, I’d go before the judge and say ‘I can’t go at 100, another judge told me I can’t drive 100 on the 401.’” Leonhardt said that incongruity needs to be addressed. “That’s the predicament that people are in right now, and people shouldn’t be in that predicament.”
04-Jan-2007, 02:31 PM
#2
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Pickering
Posts: 3,984
Friday & Saturday Nights are the craziest.. God help anyone doing 100km/hr or less on those days.. Especially if they are not in the right lane.
I think limits should be increased to 120km/hr. However I doubt it'll happen. As mentioned in the post above, police would loose out bigtime in speed infractions and the greatest lobbyist for speed reductions are insurance companies.
I think another reason for pushback is because some might think that if the limit increases people will also increase their speeding margin. IE - 100km/hr = 140km/hr normally. 120km/hr will be 160km/hr or higher?....
I think limits should be increased to 120km/hr. However I doubt it'll happen. As mentioned in the post above, police would loose out bigtime in speed infractions and the greatest lobbyist for speed reductions are insurance companies.
I think another reason for pushback is because some might think that if the limit increases people will also increase their speeding margin. IE - 100km/hr = 140km/hr normally. 120km/hr will be 160km/hr or higher?....
04-Jan-2007, 02:44 PM
#3
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: kitchener
Posts: 213
increasing the limits to 120 would be sweet and setting min/max limits for each lane..so u dont have ppl like we do today in the far left lane doing 80 holding up traffic.... STAY TO THE F__K_N RIGHT..
As much as they may think that ppl would increase their overall speed if the max was increased..i dont think would happen or wont happen till we start driving cars that can fly....driving at like 140 is comfortable and most car these days are all setup for sport driving so it feel like a perfect speed...100 is like driving miss daisy..
just my 2cents
As much as they may think that ppl would increase their overall speed if the max was increased..i dont think would happen or wont happen till we start driving cars that can fly....driving at like 140 is comfortable and most car these days are all setup for sport driving so it feel like a perfect speed...100 is like driving miss daisy..
just my 2cents
04-Jan-2007, 04:05 PM
#4
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Ontario
Posts: 18,367
Modern cars are built with quieter interior and faster accelerations that makes 140 the norm - you just can't feel it.
Set all speed limiter to 100km and leave it like that. You tinker with ECU you are screwed. :P
Driver's training and good driving habbit will go a long way than speed limit.
Set all speed limiter to 100km and leave it like that. You tinker with ECU you are screwed. :P
Driver's training and good driving habbit will go a long way than speed limit.
04-Jan-2007, 08:51 PM
#7
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Toronto
Posts: 29
I second what Trev said. I beleive all right lanes should have a separate speed limit from the left lane. The left lane should be ONLY used for passing or driving at higher then traffic speeds. But with all this traffic, people tend to forget about that and it all breaks down. Also I feel that more people need to be reminded that the left lane is for passing. No matter what! At any time on the 400 seriers you will always find those drivers which will stick to the left lane and just stay there. Doing 110kms/h and wont move. Even if all right lanes are clear. THEY JUST WONT MOVE!! Ughh!! Then they have the nerve to give me "the look" as I pass them (on their right) as if I did something wrong. 
04-Jan-2007, 09:16 PM
#9
Senior Member
Join Date: Dec 2003
Posts: 23,881
120kmh, set cruise control and relax...if the speedlimit was raised to 130kmh then people would think its "fine" to drive 150kmh...if they did raise the speed limit I would like to see fines go through the roof too...go over the speed limit and 1000buck fine or something like that
all of you kids goin fast must have money to burn cuz thats what you're doin at anything over 120kmh
all of you kids goin fast must have money to burn cuz thats what you're doin at anything over 120kmh
05-Jan-2007, 09:32 AM
#10
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Where ever my car is...
Posts: 1,393
I'm all for raising the limit 110%
It's retarded to go 100kph....I'm falling asleep at 100kph.
Todays cars are way safer and handle the higher speeds much better than ever before.
Like the report said, majority drives between 110-130kph on 400 series haighways....so why the heck not?!
In busy areas like the downtown core...sure keep it at 100. Thats what they do in the states and it works...
But everywhere else....bump it up to at least 120.
My $0.02.
It's retarded to go 100kph....I'm falling asleep at 100kph.
Todays cars are way safer and handle the higher speeds much better than ever before.
Like the report said, majority drives between 110-130kph on 400 series haighways....so why the heck not?!
In busy areas like the downtown core...sure keep it at 100. Thats what they do in the states and it works...
But everywhere else....bump it up to at least 120.
My $0.02.
05-Jan-2007, 09:40 AM
#11
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: kitchener
Posts: 213
Originally posted by Cynikal.Mindset
120kmh, set cruise control and relax...if the speedlimit was raised to 130kmh then people would think its "fine" to drive 150kmh...if they did raise the speed limit I would like to see fines go through the roof too...go over the speed limit and 1000buck fine or something like that
all of you kids goin fast must have money to burn cuz thats what you're doin at anything over 120kmh
120kmh, set cruise control and relax...if the speedlimit was raised to 130kmh then people would think its "fine" to drive 150kmh...if they did raise the speed limit I would like to see fines go through the roof too...go over the speed limit and 1000buck fine or something like that
all of you kids goin fast must have money to burn cuz thats what you're doin at anything over 120kmh
adjusting the speed limit to 120km/130km and making the penalty more if you go over that cause we all know most ppl out there cant even drive properly at 20km so they shouldnt be driving anything more then 100km and staying the right..
05-Jan-2007, 09:46 AM
#12
Registered User
Thread Starter
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: scarborough
Posts: 6,394
if you raise the limit by 110% you're at 210km/h... that's pretty damn fast.
i don't tihnk people will start speeding that much more... think of how often you get pulled over compared to how often you speed.. the chances of you getting pulled over are less than 1%... much less.....
roughly, I've been driving for ten years.. I've been pulled over maybe 4 times for speeding. Say I drove and sped 3 times a week....
4 / (3*52*10) = 0.0025641...
the data is limited and rough... but it does clarify my point... you have a 0.256% chance of getting pulled over.. those in my opinion are odds worth risking.
marijuana is also illegal... but you don't see people not smoking that... among other things.
i don't tihnk people will start speeding that much more... think of how often you get pulled over compared to how often you speed.. the chances of you getting pulled over are less than 1%... much less.....
roughly, I've been driving for ten years.. I've been pulled over maybe 4 times for speeding. Say I drove and sped 3 times a week....
4 / (3*52*10) = 0.0025641...
the data is limited and rough... but it does clarify my point... you have a 0.256% chance of getting pulled over.. those in my opinion are odds worth risking.
marijuana is also illegal... but you don't see people not smoking that... among other things.
05-Jan-2007, 10:12 AM
#13
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: kitchener
Posts: 213
well i guess we really can talk this subject to the ground..but in the end..nothin will change..its just like the gas prices ..changing like i change my underwear.. and just to let u know i change them everyday 
for the ones that like to be smart like me
for the ones that like to be smart like me
05-Jan-2007, 12:29 PM
#15
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Where ever my car is...
Posts: 1,393
Originally posted by kmodee
adjusting the speed limit to 120km/130km and making the penalty more if you go over that cause we all know most ppl out there cant even drive properly at 20km so they shouldnt be driving anything more then 100km and staying the right..
adjusting the speed limit to 120km/130km and making the penalty more if you go over that cause we all know most ppl out there cant even drive properly at 20km so they shouldnt be driving anything more then 100km and staying the right..
If they raise the limit to 120-130 I'd still only drive 120-130 and thus I'd have a much less chance of getting pulled over.
And yeah the Cops should hammer down on those going 10-20+ over the 130kph limit.
I think that would work.
Needless to say, we'll still get those bone-heads doing 80kph in the middle or fast lane, whom should be ticketed or fined.
05-Jan-2007, 01:32 PM
#17
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: kitchener
Posts: 213
100km would probably be fine if people knew how to drive and followed the rules of the road... to many people love to sit in the left lane doing 80 or less...or just love to just hit the breaks for no reason... the far right lane moves fast then the left lane these days...and this shouldnt be...
i ride a bike(R6) as well...and its retarded what ppl do on these roads...
i ride a bike(R6) as well...and its retarded what ppl do on these roads...
05-Jan-2007, 08:49 PM
#18
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 3,266
Just because modern cars are built to go fast and handle better wouldnt stop the people driving the older cars going faster as well. I agree that 120 should be the limit, but everyone is driving at least 120 anyways so what difference does it make what it says on the sign?
06-Jan-2007, 12:58 AM
#19
Registered User
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Somewhere out there...
Posts: 4,606
the average person is a ****ing moron and clearly can't drive at 100 (look at all the accidents that happen and stupidity on the highway), increase it to 120, people push the limit farther, and you have stupidity at higher speeds...
untill the average person stops acting like an *** I think we should keep it at a 100 and hand out more tickets...
life isn't wikipedia, we should change laws because everybody breaks it...
untill the average person stops acting like an *** I think we should keep it at a 100 and hand out more tickets...
life isn't wikipedia, we should change laws because everybody breaks it...
