The roads are made for everyone, which includes those who *are** in control driving 180 on the Red Hill. Why are the drivers who are capable of driving at 180, or 150, or anything above the speed limit even by 1 km/h being discriminated, legally? They are not allowed to use their experience, skill, and good judgement, yet they have to share the road with people who drive way below the speed that road conditions call for? It is a form of systemic discrimination, it is really no different than thinking gay, or lesbian, or trans people are different than the *normal people.
If I have to share the road with someone who routinely drives 70 km/h on the highway and does not move over to allow people to merge or speed up or slow down, or continues to text while driving, or rolls through stop signs, or takes other peoples turn at 4 way stops, or runs through the left turn when the light turns red, why do those people not have to share the road with me when I am able to travel at 150 or 180 km/h?
Yah, sorry, I'm not buying it. Someone driving too fast and endangering themselves and the people around them is not at all the same refugees or muslims.
But there are people that "drive too fast" and do not ever endanger themselves or the people around them, what is the difference between someone who drives 90 km/h and 150 km/h? There isn't much, they are just moving at different speeds. Accidents at 90 km/h can be just as deadly as accidents at 150 km/h. Yes, there is a higher risk for driving 150 km/h, but that doesn't mean that 90 km/h is the perfect speed limit when people routinely drive 120, or 130, and in this case, 180 km/h on the same road. People will drive the speed they feel is comfortable, speed limits do not force people to slow down to exactly 90 km/h, the engineering of the roads itself force people to slow down. The roads we build though are built for much faster speeds, yet, we limit them, but that is not an actual "limit" mathematically. Speed limits are just set, so the Police can make money off of tickets. If the speed limits were increased, and the majority of people do drive over 90 km/h, then ticket revenues would drop. But the roads would become more safer because people have to pay more attention to the cars around them, you wouldn't feel safe to text and drive, instead you'd be engaged. Lots of studies have been done on this and these are the results they garnered. So why are we not making speed limits actual limits? The only probable answer is the loss of revenues for Police services and the Government, not that people would die more or be injured more. The data actually shows people would be injured less and die less.
Hey /u/loftwyr, here's just one big comment since I don't want to wait 30 minutes to send 3.
Alright, so, first off, I am not a white male, I am actually a visible minority. (I wonder for how long though...) Also, I do not want people to think I'm better than them, I have no reason to want that. I am just shedding some light on how people have been misconstrued when it comes to insurance for young men. I am not 100% correct, since data changes every second, but the main idea is, it is not exactly "statistical" to use gender which is biased to calculate insurance and prejudge all young men for the mistakes of a few, and not prejudge all young women, or young trans, or young lesbians, or young gays, for the mistakes of a few. (I took a lot of Philosophy and Politics classes, thinking of minoring in the two) so that's why I am asking these questions.
So you asked if the elderly or women were charged for stunt driving, and yes, here's an article for an 85 year old woman who was charged for it: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/toronto/ontario-woman-85-charged-with-stunt-driving-in-fatal-crash/article13528949/
She was driving 50 over, and hit and killed a 28 year old pedestrian and the pedestrians dog. Her husband was also charged for failing to wear a seat belt.
You also asked about accidents as a whole, the percentage increased to 27% max/min, but that number should be lower now because this was done on data that was not completely current, (3-7 years old).