Speed is no doubt a factor in vehicular deaths - simple physics covers that in the form of the kinetic energy formula: KE = (1/2) * m * v^2. The faster you go, the amount of available energy increases exponentially. However I am tired of people inferring correlation/causation incorrectly.
Speed, by itself as a variable, does not kill anyone, i.e. if it is the only factor differing between two drivers on a road, it doesn't necessarily mean the faster driver is instantly doomed to death.
A few of the reasons why speed, as a variable, poses a safety issue, but why it is not necessarily a defining issue:
1) It reduces the time you have available to react / observe hazards. Therefore you need to deepen your field of vision, i.e. how far ahead you scan the road to be able to recoup the lost reaction time. If more drivers actually did this instead of myopically staring one bumper ahead of them, we'd have less pile-ups. My dad always taught me to drive to the traffic conditions, but to also watch up to 20 car lengths ahead so I can better navigate / slow down without having to even use my brakes (i.e. "ease off", a concept a lot of GTA drivers need a refresher on)
2) Speed affects your car's ability to handle, but not all cars are created/configured equally and road conditions can vary. On a clear dry summer day, even a shitty subcompact with bald all-season tires can handle a 120 kph curve like a dream. But add wet / icy surfaces, fog impairing vision, etc. and even the most rugged SUV with winter-tires and 4-wheel drive should be dropping down a notch on the speedometer to navigate safely. The problem once again is the DRIVER not recognizing the hazards the conditions pose and ADJUSTING ACCORDINGLY.
In both cases I've flagged above, the issue is not so much with what the car is doing, but the PERSON behind the wheel. Speed, by itself, doesn't kill; Speed + Exceedingly Bad Judgment ALWAYS kills. Yes you can argue that reducing speed can help mitigate the severity of accidents, but I guarantee you that a legal 100 kph collision will feel like it hurts almost as much as a 120 kph collision to the person(s) involved. I'd sooner we find a way to fix people's judgement or test that more empirically before handing out licenses like candy to people that can't handle anything but fair-weather conditions and empty roads (the amount of cars with side-panel damage from not checking blind-spots is FRIGHTENING).
Oddly enough though, I kind of do wish for a self-driving car world. Know why?:
- When we're 100% automated the speed limits will likely increase to 150 because computers will actually navigate in the proper lanes, yield properly, and not be assholes clogging up the lanes when they should be getting over / allowing others to pass.
- Plus the computer will actually know where the hell it's going and GET OVER to the correct lane well before it has to exit, as opposed to the stupid GTA bumpkins swerving 4 lanes hard right in 500m because they fucked up and don't want to take the next exit and double back because their time is more valuable than everyone else's safety.
