Calls for reforms of the National speed limit in the transport sector have been a debatable issue for many years. Whilst the government attempts to determine the required limits on the roads, citizens have also given their views on the same. Despite the full devolution signed in 1995, whether or not national laws should regulate speed limits is still a predicament. On October 29, 2008, The New York Times published an article dubbed “An Old Refrain: Slow Down” Written by Jeffrey J. Selingo, the article finds basis on the speeding problems along American highways and the ideologies motorists have regarding the same. For instance, a poll reported by Rasmussen Reports in 2009 found “34 percent of voters supported a return to the 55-m.p.h. Speed limit, while 59 percent opposed it” (Selingo). If the research is any indicator with which America can be gauged, then there are more years of debate in America’s near future. This research paper seeks to identify the advantages of lower speed limits and its outcomes about road safety.
All research calling for reduced speed among drivers found a relationship between speeding and the probability of a crash, and in turn, the severity of the same. Archer, Fotheringham, Symmons, and Corben argue that the speed of a car has the most “powerful effect on road accident fatalities than any other known risk factor” (7). Given, other factors such as “darkness or slippery road surface” (Archer et al. 7). At a high speed, one cannot control his or her vehicle thus putting said person and other road users in danger. For instance, if a cow steps into the middle of the road, and in the path of a speeding vehicle, an accident is bound to happen. The first option will be for the driver to step on the brakes, a futile attempt as depending on the type of car, the brakes will not have an immediate effect. There is also a risk in the sudden stop of a car, as multiple road safety measures such as the fastening of the seat belt, has to be in place to prevent the severe injuring of the driver. Finally, a crash could be unavoidable thus leading to the imminent death of the aforementioned cow and severe injuries for the driver. In a busy city, drivers encounter people instead of cows. Archer and colleagues report “even at relatively low speeds there is a high risk for serious injury or fatality for pedestrians” (7). Therefore, a speeding driver is a danger to the public to his or her being.
Contrary to popular belief, driving at low speeds lowers the amount of needed fuel and keeps the car in good shape. On the latter, it is safe to argue that with less chances of an accident, a car remains in its proper form as the owner prevents unnecessary strain on the same. Selingo concurs with the ideology of burning less fuel in slow driving as he quotes experts in the transport sector. According to Tim Castleman, “a driver would save only 10 minutes going 80 m.p.h. Instead of 55 m.p.h. on a 30-mile trip in an average car, but would spend $3.20 more for gas” (Selingo). In addition, aside from the high fuel prices, “there are a number of other operating costs such as tyre wear and mechanical wear that tend to increase with speed” (Archer et al. 32). Consequently, many drivers tend to incur more costs while attempting to cut down the amount of time it takes to reach a certain destination. On that note, it is safe to assume that high speed does not necessarily mean a person will reach his or her desired destination faster. The required maneuvering on the road while a car is on high speed requires a lot of concentration and can be time-consuming. A good example is a driver forced out off the road and into a ditch to avoid colliding with another car. Keeping in mind the time it will take to call a tow truck and the dealing with the police, a lot of time would have been wasted.
Driving is enjoyable if one maintains a low speed. In other words, high-speed limits will require more than the usual concentration needed on the road and can prove to be stressful to the driver. Researchers of “The Impact of Lowered Speed Limits in Urban and Metropolitan Areas” argue that the “further environmental effect of higher speed is noise” (Archer et al. 37). Noise pollution can be bothersome to people outside the cars. However, they are better placed, because said cars are noisy when in motion. Since they are on high speed, the noise disappears fast as the car gets out of earshot. Drivers, on the other hand, are not very lucky. The noise is carried with the moving car and its driver. At the same time, due to the aforementioned increment in fuel consumption, there are carbon dioxide emissions which are “as much as four times than that of non aggressive drivers” (Archer et al. XIII). With the noise and polluted air, it is hard for drivers to enjoy driving leave alone concentrate on the road and other cars.
Conclusively, lower speed limits have more advantages when compared to the higher limits. The presented arguments refute any possible arguments those on the opposing side might present. For instance, when some might argue that a high-speed limit cuts down the total amount of time needed to reach a destination, two points can be used to counteract said arguments. First, the maneuvering needed on the road can be time costing, and the burning of extra fuel will lead to more fuel costs. Therefore, countries will benefit more from low-speed limits, especially in terms of protecting their citizens. A decrease in road accidents spells victory for the governments and the locals.
Works Cited
Archer, J., Fotheringham, N., Symmons, M., and Corben, B. The Impact of Lowered Speed Limits in Urban and Metropolitan Areas. Institutional Research. Melbourne: Monash University Accident and Research Center, 2008. Print.
Selingo, Jeffrey J. "An Old Refrain: Slow Down." The New York Times 29 October 2008. Print.
