No I'm not.
Your statistics, by your interpretation, say two things:
1) That at any one time, 50% of motorists are speeding.
2) That 13% of fatal accidents are attributed to speeding (or caused by someone currently speeding, I'm not sure which one you're arguing but it's largely irrelevant)
These are two pieces of discrete information. It is perfectly possible for ALL 87% of the other fatal accidents to be caused by those who speed, even if they are not speeding at the time. It's also perfectly possible (whilst maintaining the same stats) that just one person is responsible for those 13% of fatalities
You don't have the information required to draw the inferences you did in exactly the same way that I don't have the information to draw the inferences I did and that Tangler doesn't have the required information to draw the inferences he did.
However, what we can say, without any shadow of a doubt is that 13% of fatal accidents are attributed to speeding and a sizeable portion of the population speed. Moreover, the statistics really are irrelevant to the heart of the discussion; should there or should there not be speed limits?
Dave
|
|