Quote:
Originally Posted by JacobAziza
assuming the wall or oak tree had an enormous mass and was completely immoveable...
If you prefer, change what I said to "a head-on collision with each car going 50 is equivalent to rear-ending or T-boning the same car when it is at a stop and you are going 100mph"
Yes, a rear-end could cause a roll-over sometimes. So can side impacts. So can head-on impacts.
Statistically head-on impacts are more fatal than rear-end.
And statistically increases in speed increase fatal accidents.
If you have any actual data or statistics that says you are less likely to be in a fatal accident by driving 10 over because most other cars around you are, please share it.
|
Yes, big oak trees are pretty damn immovable. I will go with the rear ending a stationary car 100 mph comparison.
My point remains that while any accident does become potentially worse with speed, not having an accident at 60 mph beats the hell out of having one at 50 or 40 or 10, for that matter. And driving below the limit can, in certain situations increase the risk of these accidents happening.
A good example is driving on a busy two lane below the limit. Such activity increases the likelyhood of someone attempting a dangerous pass. This is not defending such unsafe behavior. It is simply recognizing that it exists.