An important ongoing debate continues as to whether or not lowering the speed limit reduces the risk of car accidents. In actuality, the question should more precisely be whether or not lowering the speed limit reduces the risk of personal injury and not car accidents per say.
Part of an accurate appraisal as to the above question is further asking the question: “Are we speaking of oranges or of apples?” Unfortunately, in a mad dash to correlate both scenarios, researchers have not only failed to come up with accurate appraisals, but more importantly, they have also failed to come up with viable solutions to the original question as well.
One Case In Point:
While states have basic speed regulations that limit drivers to operate their autos at speeds that are prudent under existing conditions, the ultimate responsibility of safe driving rests on the shoulders of the drivers themselves–not on the traffic, roadway infrastructure, weather conditions and other extenuating circumstances.
In reality, the individual laws of the states don’t do much to restrict a driver’s neglect in assuming responsibility. Further complicating matters, is the fact that research studies have varied widely from each other–depending on the agency that conducts the studies and in what state the studies take place.
After the 1995 Congressional National Highway Designation Act that removed all federal speed limit control, states were allowed to raise or lower their own limits as individual state officials so determined.
Consequently, a 2009 follow-up study undertaken by the American Journal of Public Health, analyzed the findings of the 1995 legislation. Here were the findings: from 1995 to 2005, a 3.2 percent increase in road fatalities were reported on roadways and streets.
On rural interstates, there was a 9.1 percent jump in fatalities. As a result, an estimated 12,545 deaths were directly attributed to the increases in speed limits during that period.
Within recent years, New York City lowered default speed limitations from 30 mph down to 25 mph. Some may ask, “What’s the difference in 5 mph?” Well, apparently there is some logic to this action taken by New York City.
The Speed Traveled Determines The Extent Of Injuries
As far as saving lives go, any car that is going even a little more slower, will result in a less severe impact–either against another auto or a human being.
When it comes to pedestrian survival rates after a crash occurs, even a slight reduction in speed of 5 mph can either make it or break it for a human sustaining a traumatic impact against, let’s say, his/her head or other vital organ.
The speed a car is traveling can easily be a determining factor in lifting up of a pedestrian into mid-air and off the ground.
Brian Tefft, a researcher with the AAA Foundation for Traffic Safety, estimates that people are about 74 percent more likely to sustain fatal injuries from an auto traveling at 30 mph than at 25 mph.
In one study, 549 vehicle-pedestrian accidents occurring between 1994 and 1998 were analyzed. The risk of serious injury for pedestrians struck at 23 mph was about 25 percent. When the speed was 39 mph, serious injury stats jumped to 75 percent.
That being said, there is no doubt that not all auto accidents result in fatalities. Many, however, do end in serious, life-long incapacities for the victims involved in an accident–be it auto-to-auto or auto-to-pedestrian.
At any rate, stats indicating whether reducing speed limits actually impact auto accidents one way or another, have up to now proven inconclusive. However, once an accident occurs that results in injury or even death, a qualified, personal injury attorney is one’s best advisor at such times.
