Road safety, car makers and laws

[Quiet]

How do we make our roads safer?

Why is that modern cars are designed to get as fast as a speed of 300ks an hour when most countries legislate speed limits around 130k/h?
It seems negligent and silly to provide a car that can go so fast and then expect people to not want to go fast.
Should newly manufactured cars be limited in top speeds - maybe a reasonable 130k/h?

Governments keep making new laws and increasing penalties for speeding but people continue to keep speeding. People get hurt, people get killed.
As a road user- a motorist, cyclist, pedestrian- you rely on everyone to follow the law and do the right thing, otherwise no one is safe.
Maybe we need to start focusing on driver behaviour and the cars themselves- why do people disobey the laws and how we can help them drive safer.

Theres an interesting system in Europe where some cars are fitted with monitoring devices that inform the driver when they are exceeding limits and driving unsafely. This information is then fed back to an insurance company that uses the data to calculate appropriate insurance costs for the driver. Apperantly this system has had some success in modifying driver behaviour.
This system has 2 major benefits- it informs and reminds the driver of errors while driving, so that the driver is aware of his actions. And this system provides a financial incentive and reward for good driving.
Should this system be more widely utilised?

There are some people that just love their cars and are passionate about driving. If they want to drive fast and risk their neck voluntarily then I think they should be allowed to do so, as long as they cant harm innocent people and property.
Maybe people that want to drive fast and drag race should have to get a special license for their vehicle, and be allowed to race in 'racing parks' where they have to become a member. They would be required to sign off that they understand the risks of racing and take the risk voluntarily.

Any thoughts?

 

[bickelz]

How do we make our roads safer?

Why is that modern cars are designed to get as fast as a speed of 300ks an hour when most countries legislate speed limits around 130k/h?
It seems negligent and silly to provide a car that can go so fast and then expect people to not want to go fast.
Should newly manufactured cars be limited in top speeds - maybe a reasonable 130k/h?

They make 'em that fast because people buy them. And is it only the speed that makes things unsafe? Is the death rate on the Autobahn that much higher than on US highways?

Governments keep making new laws and increasing penalties for speeding but people continue to keep speeding. People get hurt, people get killed.
As a road user- a motorist, cyclist, pedestrian- you rely on everyone to follow the law and do the right thing, otherwise no one is safe.
Maybe we need to start focusing on driver behavior and the cars themselves- why do people disobey the laws and how we can help them drive safer.

It's true, when you're driving a car, you're trusting that the person in the oncoming lane isn't suicidal but would legislation really stop anybody from doing something so irrational? Speed limits don't stop people from speeding.

Theres an interesting system in Europe where some cars are fitted with monitoring devices that inform the driver when they are exceeding limits and driving unsafely. This information is then fed back to an insurance company that uses the data to calculate appropriate insurance costs for the driver. Apperantly this system has had some success in modifying driver behaviour.
This system has 2 major benefits- it informs and reminds the driver of errors while driving, so that the driver is aware of his actions. And this system provides a financial incentive and reward for good driving.
Should this system be more widely utilised?

Having rising insurance rates for bad driving that have to do with tickets and crashes are enough of an incentive without Big Brother coming in to watch over our shoulder.

There are some people that just love their cars and are passionate about driving. If they want to drive fast and risk their neck voluntarily then I think they should be allowed to do so, as long as they cant harm innocent people and property.
Maybe people that want to drive fast and drag race should have to get a special license for their vehicle, and be allowed to race in 'racing parks' where they have to become a member. They would be required to sign off that they understand the risks of racing and take the risk voluntarily.

Those sort of "racing parks" already exist.

 

[Quiet]

They make 'em that fast because people buy them. And is it only the speed that makes things unsafe? Is the death rate on the Autobahn that much higher than on US highways?

Yes. But it works the other way around too. People buy them because they make them.
Ordinarily I would think that people can sell and buy whatever, but cars are different. Cars are driven by lots of people in a shared, public environement. People die in cars and from cars. It not a personal possesion that you use in the privacy of your home. It is not neceassry for cars to have such a high speed capability to function effectively.

It is the speed and the driver that can make cars unsafe. Speed is a part of the problem.

It's true, when you're driving a car, you're trusting that the person in the oncoming lane isn't suicidal but would legislation really stop anybody from doing something so irrational? Speed limits don't stop people from speeding.

Current legislation is not effective in the prevention of speeding. We can come up with better legislation and address the roots of the problem- which are the cars themselves and the attitude of the driver. Drivers need greater incentive to drive safer and harsher penalties for doing the wrong thing.

Having rising insurance rates for bad driving that have to do with tickets and crashes are enough of an incentive without Big Brother coming in to watch over our shoulder.

Rising insurance rates, tickets and crashes have not been enough of an incentive to stop people from speeding. People still speed all the time and crashes are frequent.

Those sort of "racing parks" already exist.

Im suggesting that racing parks as the only option for drivers who want to go fast and drive extremely high speed cars.

 

[Lerxst]

Do you realize the history behind the double sided key for cars? Many manufacturers and their customers made them because it made it easier to place the key in the ignition while they were drunk. Remember, that was per-Prohibition in the US, before many drinking laws were even considered. You can look that one up, it's a true story!

Cars back then were also death traps. A solid piece of metal traveling at 35 mph, hits a brick wall and transfers all of that impact directly to its passengers. Luckily we now have seat belts, crumple zones, air bags, etc. Overall, I'd say we're much safer these days than we have been in the past.

 

[Peppermint]

Theres an interesting system in Europe where some cars are fitted with monitoring devices that inform the driver when they are exceeding limits and driving unsafely. This information is then fed back to an insurance company that uses the data to calculate appropriate insurance costs for the driver. Apperantly this system has had some success in modifying driver behaviour.
This system has 2 major benefits- it informs and reminds the driver of errors while driving, so that the driver is aware of his actions. And this system provides a financial incentive and reward for good driving.
Should this system be more widely utilised?

http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=1270

 

[Nixie]

Screw Big Brother.

Your logic is scary. Keep your fingers out of my life. I prefer to make people responsible for their own actions. Sidewalks could make people trip and fall if they walk too fast and don't look where they are going--everyone should be forced to wear headgear that makes them look down and ankle restraints so they don't walk fast. Why are you responsible for "fixing" "everyone" else? Worry about your own sh*t first and be active in your legislative process to effect rational change if you are so concerned.

 

[Quiet]

http://www.zdziarski.com/blog/?p=1270

Thanks for the link, Peppermint, that was extremely informative and helpful. Terms and conditions for just about eveything that we utilise these days are so intrusive and dangerous to our privacy. I recently had to uninstall several security and gps features from my phone as I realised that I had downloaded some undesirable and intrusive changes to the programs when I updated.

I dont think that this driver monitor technology is inherently bad in itself, but the way it is currenlty being used is certainly liable to abuse and invasive of privacy. I dont see how or why a private company should be able to collect, store, use, share, and sell said data in any way they choose. I think that such a program could be useful if consumers had freedom in how they choose to use it- enabling and disabling features and the program it self, as well as safe guards to protect them from the possible use, theft and abuse of their information without their consent. I think we need much better privacy laws in general. There is so much personal information freely or easily available on public databases and the internet that identity theft and framing is probably going to become a huge problem in this digital age.

There is much I still need to learn about this program. I have thus far only read 3 articles on it, and Ive never seen it in use as the technology isnt readily available in my country. I think whether we like it or not, its best to learn all we can about it in order to understand the strength, weakness and possibilites it has to offer. If it does become implemeted on a large scale I would like to be able to make an informed decision when evaulating the legislation and ensuring that the system has sufficient integrity and is transparent.

Most importantly, I havent seen sufficient evidence to know that this sytem is actually effective in the first place. So that means more homework on my part.

Screw Big Brother.

Your logic is scary. Keep your fingers out of my life. I prefer to make people responsible for their own actions. Sidewalks could make people trip and fall if they walk too fast and don't look where they are going--everyone should be forced to wear headgear that makes them look down and ankle restraints so they don't walk fast. Why are you responsible for "fixing" "everyone" else? Worry about your own sh*t first and be active in your legislative process to effect rational change if you are so concerned.

Stormy1- What in particular did you find so offensive? Was it the car manufacturers limiting speed, the driver monitor software or the driving parks? Or all 3? I'd like to know more because I am interested in learning more about this stuff and others perceptions about this issue.

I dont think sidewalks are an appropriate comparison to driving on public/shared roads. People don't normally kill each other by walking into each other on sidewalks. We dont need speed limits and rules to ensure the safe passage of traffic on a sidewalk.

Driving and cars are more complicated than that. People can drive a vehicle however they choose on their private property. It is up to them personally to be responsible for any possible injury. As much as I care about people not being hurt, Im not really fussed on forcing people to wear seatbelts. If they take the risk and are prepared to deal with the consequences, whatever, as long as their actions dont impact an innocent person.

I understand that I am not responsible for 'fixing' everyone else and it is not my wish to be invasive or controlling over others behaviour. I do worry about my own shit. I make sure I'm always responsible for my own driving behaviour and I follow the laws and drive as courteously as I can. I lost one of closest friends to a speeding related accident. Im not saying that so anyone will feel sympathy, only to explain why Im so interested. I certainly dont hate the guy that hit her, but I am interested in considering ways in which we can collectively reduce the death toll. I think discussion is important in finding solutions and yes I would like to be active in the legislative process once I become much better informed and undertand the dynamics of driving behaviour better.

 

[Kanamori]

Are we talking about 10-20% over speeding?

Usually, I don't think that speed within reason is the main factor in accidents. Obviously, one should not be speeding much in pedestrian and other really busy areas. I think that the main factors are probably not paying attention closely, and not having situational awareness. For example, in California, speeding is definitely the norm, but people are also a lot better at driving, and almost as a rule, know exactly what's going on around them. The accident rate, even with the really busy highways and interstates, is lower than average.

Another example is the Autobahn.

http://www.gettingaroundgermany.info/autobahn.shtml

Accident rates
Despite the prevailing high speeds, the accident, injury and death rates on the Autobahn are remarkably low. The Autobahn carries about a third of all Germany's traffic, but injury accidents on the Autobahn account for only 6% of such accidents nationwide and less than 12% of all traffic fatalities were the result of Autobahn crashes (2009). In fact, the annual fatality rate (2.7 per billion km in 2009) is consistently lower than that of most other superhighway systems, including the US Interstates (4.5 in 2009). Furthermore, a 2005 study by the German government found that Autobahn sections without speed limits had the same accident rate as those with speed limits.

Courtesies and communicating with other drivers is probably also another important factor, things like:

Motorists at the rear of a traffic jam usually switch on their hazard blinkers to warn approaching traffic of the slowdown
.

Driving too fast in poor conditions is another one, and in poor conditions going the speed limit is probably too fast. At high speeds like on highways, driving slightly slower isn't going to make an accident any less dangerous.

Basically, I think tracking people is overly broad, and will not achieve that many -- if any -- results.

 

[Nixie]

I dislike the whole mentality of protecting people from their own stupidity. I understand that the intent is to "protect" but rather than make people more accountable you spin your wheels and try and think of ways of making sure that people do what you want. It is like a chute to me. It forces iron bars around everyone rather than letting us roam free. I mean, cars are dangerous. Driving, even under the best conditions can be fatal. People are human and will make stupid choices and/or mistakes. We shouldn't think the answer to protecting ourselves is to be afraid of living free. I dislike any technology that tracks me. Sure you can trust the government, ask an Indian.

 

[technics]

Any thoughts?

You are thinking with the confines of car culture. The answer to your problem is public transport. Car culture is so 20th century.

 

[Quiet]

Are we talking about 10-20% over speeding?

Usually, I don't think that speed within reason is the main factor in accidents. Obviously, one should not be speeding much in pedestrian and other really busy areas. I think that the main factors are probably not paying attention closely, and not having situational awareness. For example, in California, speeding is definitely the norm, but people are also a lot better at driving, and almost as a rule, know exactly what's going on around them. The accident rate, even with the really busy highways and interstates, is lower than average.

Another example is the Autobahn.

http://www.gettingaroundgermany.info/autobahn.shtml

What do you think might be the reason that Californian roads dont have that many accidents despite higher speeds? Are they perhaps better drivers because they are more experienced in driving in busier conditions, perhaps more alert?

The Autobahn is definately a good example of how people can be safe despite driving at high speeds. The high speeds also seem quite reasonable for the type of road as well. The road is very well maintained, with efficient traffic regulations and a good couteous and communicative driving culture.

Courtesies and communicating with other drivers is probably also another important factor, things like:

Driving too fast in poor conditions is another one, and in poor conditions going the speed limit is probably too fast. At high speeds like on highways, driving slightly slower isn't going to make an accident any less dangerous.

Yes courtesy and communicating is paramount- maybe more of a cultural and individual personality thing where people are more disposed to be that way?
And driving to suit the road conditions- I dont know if some people can judge road conditions very well. Perhaps this to can be taught. Some of it is common sense but experience plays a huge role as well.
In my experience Ive noticed that people in different suburbs and states drive quite differently. Ironically people are more courteous in sardine packed traffic in the inner city with its labyrinth of one ways streets than they are driving in the outer suburbs. Im wondering if this has to do with letting your guard down more in what one might percieve as a lower risk area.

My friend was killed on a highway where the speed limit was 80 in that section and the other person was going 105. It is very possible that even if he had hit her at 80 the accident would still have been fatal. Perhaps he may have had more time to react and change his course but that is impossible to know in hindsight. The guy was distraught by what had happened and he said that he hadnt realised he was going so fast at the time.

Basically, I think tracking people is overly broad, and will not achieve that many -- if any -- results.

What about car manufacturers limiting car speed? Any thoughts on that?

 

[Quiet]

You are thinking with the confines of car culture. The answer to your problem is public transport. Car culture is so 20th century.

Car culture is totally 20th century! Agreed. Public transport is definately integral to the solution, and other means of private transport that are more green and efficient. Im am very sure that they way we commute and travel will be transformed within the next 50 years but I also think that a lot of people will fight it tooth and nail because they will want to hang on to their petrol guzzling monstrosities and not consider other options.

What transformations do you imagine?

 

[technics]

Im am very sure that they way we commute and travel will be transformed within the next 50 years but I also think that a lot of people will fight it tooth and nail because they will want to hang on to their petrol guzzling monstrosities and not consider other options. What transformations do you imagine?

I was recently talking to a friend of mine about this because he's a researcher in quantum teleportation. So if you want the insane answer, it's teleportation

 

[Quiet]

I was recently talking to a friend of mine about this because he's a researcher in quantum teleportation. So if you want the insane answer, it's teleportation

 

[technics]

I dont think that teleportation is impossible, just not likely for a while.

I was asking him a lot of questions such as when will we be able to "beam" little objects such as a dice or perhaps just a few molecules. And he said that will take a long time because you'll need to store a lot of data. And what about the exponential rise of available storage at lower prices? He said that won't make it.

My close ENTP friend is obssessed with bringing blimp travel back. He actually has some great ideas and some viable methods for it to work safely and practically. Imagine travelling interstate on a blimp, having dinner and drinks and enjoying the view? Maybe not very fast, but certainly scenic, enjoyable and a lot greener than some other options.

That would be nice. I always wanted to travel on a blimp. But the only viable place for such a business plan would probably be tourism, over national parks, Egyptian pyramids, mountain ridges etc.

 

[bickelz]

Yes. But it works the other way around too. People buy them because they make them.
Ordinarily I would think that people can sell and buy whatever, but cars are different. Cars are driven by lots of people in a shared, public environement. People die in cars and from cars. It not a personal possesion that you use in the privacy of your home. It is not neceassry for cars to have such a high speed capability to function effectively.

It is the speed and the driver that can make cars unsafe. Speed is a part of the problem.

People demand fast cars, which is why they were made in the first place. Going fast is cool and fun and nobody is going to stop because it's a sort of fascination. Speed is only a problem when people overestimate their driving skills or underestimate conditions. Crashes aren't caused just by speed and car danger isn't just about speed. You can kill somebody with a car even if it's stationary.

Current legislation is not effective in the prevention of speeding. We can come up with better legislation and address the roots of the problem- which are the cars themselves and the attitude of the driver. Drivers need greater incentive to drive safer and harsher penalties for doing the wrong thing.

Why is it wrong to speed? Is there something immoral about Formula 1? And what is it with people trying to micromanage every part of daily life? Speeding laws don't stop people from speeding just the way the drug war doesn't stop people from doing drugs. My dad gets about 3 tickets a year yet the asshole still drives like a maniac. There's a guy that lives where I grew up that used to have a ferrari and now owns a lamborghini. He gets tickets all the time but hired a lawyer to fight all of them. The cops don't even try to pull him over for speeding anymore because he gets out of the tickets all the time. Higher ticket penalties will only increase revenue because nobody is going to stop. A $3,000 DUI isn't a deterrent for some people so why would a ticket deter speeding?

Rising insurance rates, tickets and crashes have not been enough of an incentive to stop people from speeding. People still speed all the time and crashes are frequent.

Listen, shit happens and accidents are accidents. I've been driving for 4.5 years now and I've never been pulled over. In fact I was a driver for a painting company over the summer so I drove around the Seattle area for 30+ hours a week with an extra 10 doing office work and other stuff. I was constantly 10 over. Nothing happened.

Im suggesting that racing parks as the only option for drivers who want to go fast and drive extremely high speed cars.

How are you going to stop people from speeding? You just can't.

Actually, there is a way but it's really extreme and kind of ridiculous. Socialism. No, it's true. There was this Top Gear episode where thy tried to see if socialism ever made a decent car and they had a drag race between a socialist car and a dog and the dog won. The downside is that the build was crap and the breaks didn't work so you'd kill somebody by not being able to stop a 4 ton car made of steel.

The whole reason that fast cars are made is because it's cool. It's a way to push engineering boundaries. Why else would Volkswagen make the Bugatti Veyron SS? Because they wanted to make something that was a technical achievement because they can. Why would you ever need 1100 BHP in a road car? Never, but it's cool to have that along with 4 turbos. Rumors are that it costs about

 

[Quiet]

Thanks for your response, but I think you are taking some of things Ive posted out of context. I have no problem with speeding per se. Even little old geeky me has enjoyed speeding on a deserted highway just for the thrill of it. Im looking at speed as a factor in relation to public road safety, as well as driver behaviour.

People demand fast cars, which is why they were made in the first place. Going fast is cool and fun and nobody is going to stop because it's a sort of fascination. Speed is only a problem when people overestimate their driving skills or underestimate conditions. Crashes aren't caused just by speed and car danger isn't just about speed. You can kill somebody with a car even if it's stationary.

We agree that car danger isnt just about speed. It has more to do with the individual driving. I would like to address the root of the problem- which is why people drive irresponsibly in the first place and the actual cars that they are driving. Also- maybe the way that roads are designed and the driving culture of the country. Ive been looking into the Autobahns a bit and it seems that these highways are so effective because the roads are well maintained, appropriate traffic regulations and great driver courtesy and communication.
I dont think that because something is 'cool and fun' for some is a reason to compromise the safety of everyone. Maybe speed isnt the heart of the problem at all, just an outcome of a deeper issue.

Why is it wrong to speed? Is there something immoral about Formula 1? And what is it with people trying to micromanage every part of daily life? Speeding laws don't stop people from speeding just the way the drug war doesn't stop people from doing drugs. My dad gets about 3 tickets a year yet the asshole still drives like a maniac. There's a guy that lives where I grew up that used to have a ferrari and now owns a lamborghini. He gets tickets all the time but hired a lawyer to fight all of them. The cops don't even try to pull him over for speeding anymore because he gets out of the tickets all the time. Higher ticket penalties will only increase revenue because nobody is going to stop. A $3,000 DUI isn't a deterrent for some people so why would a ticket deter speeding?

I dont think driving fast is a bad thing at all if its done in an evironment where no innocent people can get hurt. I find Forumla 1 boring but its definately a legitmate sport and probably a lot of fun for the actual drivers.
Analysing driving laws and behaviour is not micromanaging every part of daily life.
We have established that the current speeding legislation is ineffective. People are not responding to speeding cameras, traffic fines etc. That is the purpose of this discussion. Our system is flawed, corrupt, ineffective, not transperant and suspectible to abuse, as exemplified in your story about the guy that just hired lawyers to get out his tickets. I agree that higher ticket penalties will probably be ineffective. The point is there must be another way to look at the situation and find better ways of educating drivers, reinforcing and rewarding good behaviour, and finding effective ways to punish repeat offenders.

Listen, shit happens and accidents are accidents. I've been driving for 4.5 years now and I've never been pulled over. In fact I was a driver for a painting company over the summer so I drove around the Seattle area for 30+ hours a week with an extra 10 doing office work and other stuff. I was constantly 10 over. Nothing happened.

It sounds like you are a good driver. Ofcourse shit happens and accidents are accidents but there are also the cases of willful negligence and poorly experienced drivers making bad judgements. People are killed often on the road. I dont think its possible to stop all accidents occuring but I do think there are ways of making death and permanent disability less likely as a result of accidents. I dont think we just have to accept that accidents and death on the road are unavoidable and therefore nothing should be done to prevent them happening. There are always ways of doing things if we can be creative enough.

How are you going to stop people from speeding? You just can't.

Actually, there is a way but it's really extreme and kind of ridiculous. Socialism. No, it's true. There was this Top Gear episode where thy tried to see if socialism ever made a decent car and they had a drag race between a socialist car and a dog and the dog won. The downside is that the build was crap and the breaks didn't work so you'd kill somebody by not being able to stop a 4 ton car made of steel.

The whole reason that fast cars are made is because it's cool. It's a way to push engineering boundaries. Why else would Volkswagen make the Bugatti Veyron SS? Because they wanted to make something that was a technical achievement because they can. Why would you ever need 1100 BHP in a road car? Never, but it's cool to have that along with 4 turbos. Rumors are that it costs about

 

[InvisibleJim]

In my viewpoint speeding doesnt cause accidents, peoPle not keeping pace with the flow of traffic causes accidents.

 

[bickelz]

[MENTION=4956]Asarya[/MENTION]

I think the only way you could get people to be better drivers is to have more rigorous testing for obtaining your license. "Punishing" isn't a way to get people to stop doing things. People drank more during the prohibition, the war on drugs isn't stopping anybody, the electric chair hasn't stopped murders and prostitution is never going to end. So when I talk about micromanaging, I talk about regulating in general. From what I hear you saying, more regulation would make you feel better but in reality, it's not going to change the underlying problem (assuming there is one subject to one's stance on the issue). Some people are just bad drivers and have bad reaction time, and don't know how to deal with certain driving situations.

I think in the UK, if you get a certain number of points, your license gets revoked. That seems pretty harsh to me.

My dad, who I mentioned earlier, is an avid speeder and I have witnessed his road rage first had yet the guy has only been in one little 5 mph fender-bender (that I know of) and it wasn't even his fault. Yet, my 17 year old sister doesn't drive 1 foot/hr over the speed limit and I truly believe that she will bring all hell to anyone around her when she gets on the freeway. To be honest with you, driving takes a little bit of talent and as long as it's this easy to get your license, people will be incompetent on the roads.

When I mentioned Finnish drivers, they go through like 3 years of training before they're allowed on the road. I mean, they actually have to be able to power-slide under control. Driving around tracks that don't just go in circles is like a thing there and it totally shows.

 

[Quiet]

[MENTION=4956]Asarya[/MENTION]

I think the only way you could get people to be better drivers is to have more rigorous testing for obtaining your license. "Punishing" isn't a way to get people to stop doing things. People drank more during the prohibition, the war on drugs isn't stopping anybody, the electric chair hasn't stopped murders and prostitution is never going to end. So when I talk about micromanaging, I talk about regulating in general. From what I hear you saying, more regulation would make you feel better but in reality, it's not going to change the underlying problem (assuming there is one subject to one's stance on the issue). Some people are just bad drivers and have bad reaction time, and don't know how to deal with certain driving situations.

I think in the UK, if you get a certain number of points, your license gets revoked. That seems pretty harsh to me.

My dad, who I mentioned earlier, is an avid speeder and I have witnessed his road rage first had yet the guy has only been in one little 5 mph fender-bender (that I know of) and it wasn't even his fault. Yet, my 17 year old sister doesn't drive 1 foot/hr over the speed limit and I truly believe that she will bring all hell to anyone around her when she gets on the freeway. To be honest with you, driving takes a little bit of talent and as long as it's this easy to get your license, people will be incompetent on the roads.

When I mentioned Finnish drivers, they go through like 3 years of training before they're allowed on the road. I mean, they actually have to be able to power-slide under control. Driving around tracks that don't just go in circles is like a thing there and it totally shows.

Thanks
Totally agree that punishment isnt an effective means to modify behaviour. In my opinion, punishment is still an important component because people need to be held accountable for their behaviour and deal with the consequences for their actions. But punishment alone is not educational, and sometimes just arbitary.

I had a look at driving in Finland and it seems they have quite a comprehensive approach:

As you said, driver education is lengthy, very comprehensive in practical and theory, stringent, and the legal age of driving is 18 (which I think might be a bit high)
Also
- highest speed limit is 120km/h on motorways, many of them limited at 100km/h
- the blood alcohol content limit is .05
- traffic fines are calculated on a sliding scale based on net income
- traffic laws are stricty enforced.

Finland has dangerous roads in winter because of weather conditions which probably necessitates such a strong approach.
The death toll is low (5 deaths per 100 000), which is great considering the roads, and its relatively on par with other Western European nations.
Netherlands has the the lowest death toll, so I will have a look at them next.