| The war on the motorist on 14:36 - May 31 with 1889 views | Juzzie |
Speeding really doesn't get you where you're going that much quicker. I do the A316/A4 route every day and there's always some dickhead on a scooter that just has to ride like a complete pillock, barge his way to the front, go way over the speed limit (because, of course, we all know scooters are exempt from the law). Quite often, they're no more than about 20-30 seconds ahead of me by the time we get to South Kensington (near the museums). All that frantic, stupid riding for a mere 30 seconds.
One of the TV motoring programs did a test many years ago. Two professional drivers going from Birmingham to Cornwall. Driver A told to drive very hastily, change lanes as often as possible even to get just a few car lengths ahead etc etc. Driver B told to be more relaxed and go with the flow. The result over a 5 hour journey is that Driver A saved all of 15 minutes yet was more knackered, more on edge and if pushed his driving over the legal requirements more likely to cause an accident. Driver B more relaxed and very little chance of an accident.
On the whole, a lot of people are simply w@nkers. |  | |  |
| The war on the motorist on 14:36 - May 31 with 1889 views | WrightUp5hit___ |
The motorways are our safest roads
Although motorways carry around 21 per cent of traffic, they only account for 5.4 per cent of fatalities and 4.7 per cent of injured casualties.
Failed to look properly was the most frequently reported contributory factor and was reported in 44 per cent of all accidents reported to the police in 2014. For fatal accidents the most frequently reported contributory factor was loss of control, which was involved in 32 per cent of fatal accidents
Exceeding the speed limit was reported as a factor in 5 per cent of all accidents, but these accidents involved 17 per cent of fatalities. At least one of exceeding the speed limit and travelling too fast for the conditions was reported in 10 per cent of all accidents and these accidents accounted for 25 per cent of all fatalities [Post edited 31 May 2016 14:43]
|  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 15:50 - May 31 with 1838 views | izlingtonhoop |
| The war on the motorist on 14:36 - May 31 by Juzzie |
Speeding really doesn't get you where you're going that much quicker. I do the A316/A4 route every day and there's always some dickhead on a scooter that just has to ride like a complete pillock, barge his way to the front, go way over the speed limit (because, of course, we all know scooters are exempt from the law). Quite often, they're no more than about 20-30 seconds ahead of me by the time we get to South Kensington (near the museums). All that frantic, stupid riding for a mere 30 seconds.
One of the TV motoring programs did a test many years ago. Two professional drivers going from Birmingham to Cornwall. Driver A told to drive very hastily, change lanes as often as possible even to get just a few car lengths ahead etc etc. Driver B told to be more relaxed and go with the flow. The result over a 5 hour journey is that Driver A saved all of 15 minutes yet was more knackered, more on edge and if pushed his driving over the legal requirements more likely to cause an accident. Driver B more relaxed and very little chance of an accident.
On the whole, a lot of people are simply w@nkers. |
As a cyclist it always amuses me that some impatient twonk gives you grief to let them past because they want to stop at the next junction that much quicker. Once there you invariably catch them up and go three or four cars ahead of them and off, upon your way - there's a particular junction in Highbury I'm thinking of where this tends to happen.
I don't purposefully ride in people's way, but sometimes you find yourself having to claim road for a few moments. Just chill man behind me. It's only a vauxhall corsa anyway.
I despise driving, and abhor so many people's reliance on the awful machine - particularly in town.
I've driven to Sheffield and back twice since the end of September with son No.1 being at university there. Awful, awful way to travel...
I don't have a solution but one idea I'd suggest is for people to stop wanting to be somewhere else. Move to a place you like. And stay there. When you do need to go another place take the tube or the train if it's further than you can cycle.
Now I'm gonna walk down to the bank. [Post edited 31 May 2016 15:53]
|  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 18:31 - May 31 with 1770 views | jonno |
| The war on the motorist on 13:26 - May 31 by Hunterhoop |
I wouldn't have a problem with average speed cameras if the speed limit was higher.
They haven't been increased for decades, if ever, in some cases. Yet cars are much easier to handle, far quicker to break to a halt, and far safer in terms of withstanding impact.
70mph on the motorway is ridiculous given the advances in car safety. Yes, traffic flows better when everyone isn't accelerating and breaking all the time (common sense), but there is little to no logic setting that pace at 70mph. It should be 85mph. We have 3 lane motorways, and often dual carriageway A roads. Surely you could have traffic travelling at 85mph in the outside line, 80mph in the middle lane and 70-75mph in the inside lane.
Why do we want everyone driving at the same pace as 40 years ago, when car technology has advanced so much?
Finally, the key overall point, already made by some, is that speed does not kill, bad driving kills. Driving whilst, tailgating, texting or doing your make up (or stoned or drunk) is far more dangerous than driving at 90mph in a 70 zone or 60 in a 50. |
A lot of people say this, but the statistics don't bear it out. Where speed/traffic cameras have been installed on roads, and it is usually in areas where there have been fatalities in the past, the number of fatalities and injuries are invariably massively reduced. That is why they continue to be installed. |  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 21:03 - May 31 with 1707 views | Hunterhoop |
| The war on the motorist on 18:31 - May 31 by jonno |
A lot of people say this, but the statistics don't bear it out. Where speed/traffic cameras have been installed on roads, and it is usually in areas where there have been fatalities in the past, the number of fatalities and injuries are invariably massively reduced. That is why they continue to be installed. |
Hold on...you're merging cause and effect there.
Just because after a speed camera was installed and fatalities went down does not mean speed was the cause for the original fatalities. Bad driving can involve driving too fast for the conditions, your ability and the vehicle. But, as you no doubt agree, what's a safe speed is subjective and different for different people, cars and conditions.
A mini travelling at 70 ( or any speed) will cause less damage than a Range Rover. It doesn't mean we have a different speed limit for range rovers.
Equally, accident hotspots could well be because the speed limit is too high to begin with (for the conditions, road, etc) or because the road layout/signs are poor.
It is a huge leap to see "speed kills". Bad driving kills. This can sometimes, often, include driving too quickly and above the limit on that road at the time.
But, I refuse to accept driving above some illogical speed limits (70mph on motorways) is the cause of death.
Ultimately, people fail to accept bad driving can involve going way above the speed limit but that thousands also safely break the speed limit (on motorways especially). Ergo, "speed doesn't kill", bad driving does.
Being obtuse, Taking your argument to its nihilistic conclusion, if we just shut the road, we'd spot all fatalities on that road. But that would be silly.
Driving/Speeding is one of the few areas of society we pander to the most inept. Knives can kill, but we don't restrict their sale to adults. Alcohol...On motorways cars today could easily travel 10mph further will no impact. And if you don't / can't drive safely at that speed, no one is forcing you. The limit is meant to be just that.
I'm not saying all roads everywhere should have the speed limits raised, quite the contrary. As I said incident hotspots may indicate, albeit there could be other causes, that the speed limit is too high.
But on motorways, does driving above 70mph kill?! No. I'll take common sense over go crazy stats funded by the speed kills lobby every day of the week. |  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 22:42 - May 31 with 1665 views | DeepcutHoop |
I'm all for proper research into the pros and cons of upping the speed limit on the motorway. What the speed limit is is not really my concern, although tbh I'd be against it being raised for the reasons I gave earlier, if it isn't making the road safer, it really shouldn't be raised.
I'd like people to stick to the speed limits, whatever they may be, on whatever road ather than just making their own minds up if they think it applies to them. If we all played by the same rules on the road they'd be a lot safer. I don't think that can be argued, can it?
And yes, the same goes for phone use, red-light jumping, tailgating etc. If people could stop being utter idiots on the road that would really be appreciated. [Post edited 31 May 2016 22:42]
|  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 23:43 - May 31 with 1639 views | BlackCrowe |
| The war on the motorist on 09:07 - May 31 by Konk |
What’s the issue with average speed cameras? If you comply with the law, where’s the problem? |
I don't comply with the law, so it's a nuisance for me. |  |
| |
| The war on the motorist on 08:10 - Jun 1 with 1584 views | loftboy |
| The war on the motorist on 15:50 - May 31 by izlingtonhoop |
As a cyclist it always amuses me that some impatient twonk gives you grief to let them past because they want to stop at the next junction that much quicker. Once there you invariably catch them up and go three or four cars ahead of them and off, upon your way - there's a particular junction in Highbury I'm thinking of where this tends to happen.
I don't purposefully ride in people's way, but sometimes you find yourself having to claim road for a few moments. Just chill man behind me. It's only a vauxhall corsa anyway.
I despise driving, and abhor so many people's reliance on the awful machine - particularly in town.
I've driven to Sheffield and back twice since the end of September with son No.1 being at university there. Awful, awful way to travel...
I don't have a solution but one idea I'd suggest is for people to stop wanting to be somewhere else. Move to a place you like. And stay there. When you do need to go another place take the tube or the train if it's further than you can cycle.
Now I'm gonna walk down to the bank. [Post edited 31 May 2016 15:53]
|
That's basically what I do, I became carless when my marriage broke up,moved back to my home town, I drive a van for work but to get to work I ride,infact I ride everywhere,when I go to see my girlfriend at weekends I train and tube it, I still dont spend what I would have on petrol,insurance etc, its keeping me fit and I don't miss my car at all. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The war on the motorist on 08:15 - Jun 1 with 1579 views | ElHoop |
Some early symptoms of DDS (Duffer Driver Syndrome) on display in this thread. If the speed limit is 40 then there's a growing band of drivers who won't ever go beyond 35mph. So either you go 45 to overtake them or you're stuck.
And what's with the way some people drive around small 'going nowhere' roundabouts these days? You can be following someone and you get to a little roundabout and suddenly they've disappeared off the radar completely. Gone. Nowhere to be seen. Then, suddenly, out of nowhere, they're back in front of you. Where do they go? |  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 08:34 - Jun 1 with 1566 views | blacky200 |
| The war on the motorist on 22:42 - May 31 by DeepcutHoop |
I'm all for proper research into the pros and cons of upping the speed limit on the motorway. What the speed limit is is not really my concern, although tbh I'd be against it being raised for the reasons I gave earlier, if it isn't making the road safer, it really shouldn't be raised.
I'd like people to stick to the speed limits, whatever they may be, on whatever road ather than just making their own minds up if they think it applies to them. If we all played by the same rules on the road they'd be a lot safer. I don't think that can be argued, can it?
And yes, the same goes for phone use, red-light jumping, tailgating etc. If people could stop being utter idiots on the road that would really be appreciated. [Post edited 31 May 2016 22:42]
|
With regards to your second point I think it can be easily argued that just because you are driving at or below the speed limit doesn't mean you are driving safely. If we want to get a message across saying "Speed Kills" is a poor way to do it. Our motorways are some of the safest roads in the world. We need to remind drivers about the broad picture of driving and the importance of concentrating at all times on what we are doing!
Personally I think the "Speed Kills" campaign is one of the worst safety slogans this country has used in terms of road safety. If motorists don't buy into the slogan it is pointless.
The thing that amazes me is that at 18 years old I can pass a test and it covers me until I am 65. If I was operating dangerous machinery at work I would have to take yearly refresher courses on safety. If the government is serious about improving road safety every driver should have to renew their license every 5-10 years where updates on the highway code, an eye test and practical driving with an instructor before a license is renewed takes place. The standard of driving in this country compared to others is appalling. |  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 08:42 - Jun 1 with 1566 views | PunteR |
I usually drive a ford Transit around and sticking to the speed limit isn't a problem but I find when I drive the wife's car a 2.2 turbo diesel sports model Toyota its so easy to go over the speed limit. I don't deliberately drive faster its just the whole performance of the car is better. |  |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| The war on the motorist on 10:04 - Jun 1 with 1533 views | izlingtonhoop |
| The war on the motorist on 08:10 - Jun 1 by loftboy |
That's basically what I do, I became carless when my marriage broke up,moved back to my home town, I drive a van for work but to get to work I ride,infact I ride everywhere,when I go to see my girlfriend at weekends I train and tube it, I still dont spend what I would have on petrol,insurance etc, its keeping me fit and I don't miss my car at all. |
The expense of car ownership seems terrific to me!
I do appreciate that with the way society and facilities are set up, in some areas, some people are forced to 'need a car', but many of us could be better off and fitter by ridding our minds of that notion of necessity.
I belong to a car club and when I do need one it's there for £60 a year, then the hire charge - which is generally cheaper than hiring from any well known hire firm, including fuel, and much more convenient - go on line, book, tap, take - join the madness...
We use it about 6 or 8 times a year if anyone wants to know.
And then there's the harm fosil fuel burning is doing to our environment!
21st Century Angst of a middle aged man! | | | |
| The war on the motorist on 10:50 - Jun 1 with 1511 views | Juzzie |
| The war on the motorist on 10:18 - May 31 by DWQPR |
It's not so much the speed cameras that get my goat, after all the A40 now seems to flow better with the average speed camera system and a speed limit is there for a purpose. What annoyed me recently was a £65 fine I got for doing a three point turn. I wanted to turn right to head eastbound on the Talgarth Road recently from North End Road and there is a no right turn sign at the traffic lights, so I went across, travelled up from the junction around 100 yards, waited to the road was clear both sides and then began the manoeuvre safely and turned around without inconveniencing any other motorists. The lines in the middle of the road are broken white lines and not solid ones, yet I was caught on camera and told to pay £65. Yes I could have appealed but have you ever tried an appeal? You are guaranteed to lose, and the fine doubles. I will go back down that section of road soon and check the various road signs to see what I have missed, but certainly that camera has been put there for one thing, and that is to make money, nothing whatsoever to do with road safety. |
"I wanted to turn right to head eastbound on the Talgarth Road recently from North End Road and there is a no right turn sign at the traffic lights, so I went across, travelled up from the junction around 100 yards, waited to the road was clear both sides and then began the manoeuvre safely ......."
I go up that road quite often and this morning as I turned left from the Cromwell Road and up along the North End Road towards Olympia, I could not see any "No U turn" signs.
I think the road lines are long with short gaps. According to the gov.uk website;
"Rule 127
A broken white line. This marks the centre of the road. When this line lengthens and the gaps shorten, it means that there is a hazard ahead. Do not cross it unless you can see the road is clear and wish to overtake or turn off."
Maybe this is what the offence is for? The road does curve to the right and then the left so maybe they think doing a three-point turn/u-turn is a hazard? However, it does say 'unless you can see the road is clear ....' and if you can prove you could see sufficiently ahead from the place you did the turn, may be a case for appeal?
[Post edited 1 Jun 2016 10:52]
| | | |
| The war on the motorist on 12:02 - Jun 1 with 1475 views | DeepcutHoop |
| The war on the motorist on 08:34 - Jun 1 by blacky200 |
With regards to your second point I think it can be easily argued that just because you are driving at or below the speed limit doesn't mean you are driving safely. If we want to get a message across saying "Speed Kills" is a poor way to do it. Our motorways are some of the safest roads in the world. We need to remind drivers about the broad picture of driving and the importance of concentrating at all times on what we are doing!
Personally I think the "Speed Kills" campaign is one of the worst safety slogans this country has used in terms of road safety. If motorists don't buy into the slogan it is pointless.
The thing that amazes me is that at 18 years old I can pass a test and it covers me until I am 65. If I was operating dangerous machinery at work I would have to take yearly refresher courses on safety. If the government is serious about improving road safety every driver should have to renew their license every 5-10 years where updates on the highway code, an eye test and practical driving with an instructor before a license is renewed takes place. The standard of driving in this country compared to others is appalling. |
My point on everyone adhering to a speed limit is not about the actual speed involved, but more about making road journeys more predictable for all concerned.
For most of the other rules of the road, the vast majority will adhere to, traffic lights, junctions, roundabouts etc
It seems that far more people decide that the speed limits aren't for them and drive at a speed they prefer, and worse get frustrated and angry if people in front are stopping them from doing that. | | | |
| The war on the motorist on 13:31 - Jun 1 with 1442 views | W14Hoop |
| The war on the motorist on 10:18 - May 31 by DWQPR |
It's not so much the speed cameras that get my goat, after all the A40 now seems to flow better with the average speed camera system and a speed limit is there for a purpose. What annoyed me recently was a £65 fine I got for doing a three point turn. I wanted to turn right to head eastbound on the Talgarth Road recently from North End Road and there is a no right turn sign at the traffic lights, so I went across, travelled up from the junction around 100 yards, waited to the road was clear both sides and then began the manoeuvre safely and turned around without inconveniencing any other motorists. The lines in the middle of the road are broken white lines and not solid ones, yet I was caught on camera and told to pay £65. Yes I could have appealed but have you ever tried an appeal? You are guaranteed to lose, and the fine doubles. I will go back down that section of road soon and check the various road signs to see what I have missed, but certainly that camera has been put there for one thing, and that is to make money, nothing whatsoever to do with road safety. |
I’m a cyclist now but used to drive round there often.
I do know they enforce no U-turns on Gliddon Road by the college which is the junction before North End Rd going Eastbound but I didn’t know it exists on the North End Road heading up to Olympia itself.
H&F traffic dept have always been crafty, there might just be signs warning cameras are there but unless specifically signed for preventing U-turns as for Gliddon Road I would challenge it.
Another junction to be careful of is "MoneyBox Junction" on the New Kings Road just by Eel Brook Common, 2 sets of lights close together combined with box junctions results in this being one of the most lucrative “earners” for the council.
http://www.fulhamsw6.com/shared/hftrafficfines001.htm |  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 13:52 - Jun 1 with 1241 views | QPR_Jim |
| The war on the motorist on 12:02 - Jun 1 by DeepcutHoop |
My point on everyone adhering to a speed limit is not about the actual speed involved, but more about making road journeys more predictable for all concerned.
For most of the other rules of the road, the vast majority will adhere to, traffic lights, junctions, roundabouts etc
It seems that far more people decide that the speed limits aren't for them and drive at a speed they prefer, and worse get frustrated and angry if people in front are stopping them from doing that. |
I don't think I've ever undertaken a motorway journey without exceeding 70mph, it's not a case of thinking speed limits "aren't for them (me)", I just base my speed on risk so if it's clear and the weather is good I will more than likely be driving at over 70mph. As you can see, many different posters on this thread have considered the speed, the risks of certain circumstances and come to a sensible conclusion that sometimes the speed limit can safely be exceeded. Even the AA and RAC have previously backed plans to increase the speed limit on motorways to 80mph.
In contrast I believe that residential areas should probably be 20mph, once you're in narrow roads with houses either side and lined with cars for children to step out from behind I would welcome a 20mph limit and often stick to that when driving on narrow residential roads. |  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 14:30 - Jun 1 with 1204 views | DeepcutHoop |
| The war on the motorist on 13:52 - Jun 1 by QPR_Jim |
I don't think I've ever undertaken a motorway journey without exceeding 70mph, it's not a case of thinking speed limits "aren't for them (me)", I just base my speed on risk so if it's clear and the weather is good I will more than likely be driving at over 70mph. As you can see, many different posters on this thread have considered the speed, the risks of certain circumstances and come to a sensible conclusion that sometimes the speed limit can safely be exceeded. Even the AA and RAC have previously backed plans to increase the speed limit on motorways to 80mph.
In contrast I believe that residential areas should probably be 20mph, once you're in narrow roads with houses either side and lined with cars for children to step out from behind I would welcome a 20mph limit and often stick to that when driving on narrow residential roads. |
That's exactly what I'm saying. You've decided what's a safe speed and ignored the speed limits. Do you do the same at traffic lights, or about your seat belt?
Yet again, I don't really care what the speed limit is, if it's proven to be safer to have a faster speed limit (I don't see how that would be possible, but would bow to evidence) then the speed limit could be raised, and I would still be an advocate for not exceeding that limit.
If we all drove to the rules, it would be a safer, less stressful exercise for everyone. Never going to be 100% safe, mistakes happen, and mechanical failures happen.
Long and short of it is that I just want us all to be driving together, not against each other. | | | |
| The war on the motorist on 15:12 - Jun 1 with 1179 views | CamberleyR |
The national speed limit was set over half a century ago. When the M1 first opened in the late 1950s it didn't have a national speed limit. The 70 mph speed limit was initially only introduced as a temporary measure in 1965 for two years due to the high number of accidents. It was made permanent in 1967.
I can see a case for it being increased as cars are more solidly built, have better tyres, better brakes, airbags etc than cars of 50 years ago which many didn't even have seat belts in. 70 mph in a car 50 years ago would be equivalent to a much higher speed in a modern day car. |  |
| |
| The war on the motorist on 15:21 - Jun 1 with 1173 views | QPR_Jim |
| The war on the motorist on 14:30 - Jun 1 by DeepcutHoop |
That's exactly what I'm saying. You've decided what's a safe speed and ignored the speed limits. Do you do the same at traffic lights, or about your seat belt?
Yet again, I don't really care what the speed limit is, if it's proven to be safer to have a faster speed limit (I don't see how that would be possible, but would bow to evidence) then the speed limit could be raised, and I would still be an advocate for not exceeding that limit.
If we all drove to the rules, it would be a safer, less stressful exercise for everyone. Never going to be 100% safe, mistakes happen, and mechanical failures happen.
Long and short of it is that I just want us all to be driving together, not against each other. |
So we agree, neither of us care what the speed limit is! 
Of course I don't ignore traffic lights, you can't drive safely if you ignore traffic lights, whereas I believe you can whilst exceeding the speed limit in some circumstances. You're increasing the risk if driving without a seatbelt, you're dangerous if drunk or on your phone, I would even say that headphones are a form of sensory deprivation which reduces your capacity to react.
It's interesting you say safer, what if it was equally as safe? No more dangerous to do 80mph would you still approve or does it need a tangible benefit? I think I could prove a speed limit of 30mph would be safer on the motorway but that's clearly a bad idea so safer isn't necessarily correct.
Basically I would say it's time to review our speed limits nationally, as I said before 30mph on some roads is too fast, 80mph on motorways is seen as fair by many motoring organisations. Why do we stick to out of date rules and why are some so vociferous in protecting them rather than querying them? | | | |
| The war on the motorist on 17:52 - Jun 1 with 1105 views | Juzzie |
| The war on the motorist on 15:12 - Jun 1 by CamberleyR |
The national speed limit was set over half a century ago. When the M1 first opened in the late 1950s it didn't have a national speed limit. The 70 mph speed limit was initially only introduced as a temporary measure in 1965 for two years due to the high number of accidents. It was made permanent in 1967.
I can see a case for it being increased as cars are more solidly built, have better tyres, better brakes, airbags etc than cars of 50 years ago which many didn't even have seat belts in. 70 mph in a car 50 years ago would be equivalent to a much higher speed in a modern day car. |
I think the speeds limit and certainly things like stopping distances were, and still are!, based on the good old Ford Anglia. They are so out of date but I think they're left in to make people think about stopping distances being longer than they really are therefore keeping up the safety aspect..
Personally I'm not in favour of increasing the speed limits, put motorway up to 80mph and people will just do 90.
Many moons ago (about 336) someone I worked with's brother was a traffic cop in the Manchester area mainly covering the local motorways. They were specifically told by the Chief Constable not to stop anyone doing 80mph if they were just simply cruising and basically not all over the place and a clear danger to anyone else.
I say just leave it at 70, if people are clocked at 80 let it go but any more then fine them. | | | |
| The war on the motorist on 18:09 - Jun 1 with 1088 views | Hunterhoop |
| The war on the motorist on 17:52 - Jun 1 by Juzzie |
I think the speeds limit and certainly things like stopping distances were, and still are!, based on the good old Ford Anglia. They are so out of date but I think they're left in to make people think about stopping distances being longer than they really are therefore keeping up the safety aspect..
Personally I'm not in favour of increasing the speed limits, put motorway up to 80mph and people will just do 90.
Many moons ago (about 336) someone I worked with's brother was a traffic cop in the Manchester area mainly covering the local motorways. They were specifically told by the Chief Constable not to stop anyone doing 80mph if they were just simply cruising and basically not all over the place and a clear danger to anyone else.
I say just leave it at 70, if people are clocked at 80 let it go but any more then fine them. |
Nice idea in theory.
But that leaves it in the subjective hands of the police. You risk the imposition of the laws of the land not being applied equally to all inhabitants, which is palpably unfair.
What if the copper is a Utd fan and sees a car of City fans, etc, etc, etc?
Just up the motorway limit to 80 and be done with it. What's the point in having a speed limit that the vast proportion of society break regularly (and safely), which is out of date for the technology and safety improvements in cars, and which cannot be proven to be any safer than a limit of 80mph?! | | | |
| The war on the motorist on 18:12 - Jun 1 with 1084 views | WrightUp5hit___ |
| The war on the motorist on 17:52 - Jun 1 by Juzzie |
I think the speeds limit and certainly things like stopping distances were, and still are!, based on the good old Ford Anglia. They are so out of date but I think they're left in to make people think about stopping distances being longer than they really are therefore keeping up the safety aspect..
Personally I'm not in favour of increasing the speed limits, put motorway up to 80mph and people will just do 90.
Many moons ago (about 336) someone I worked with's brother was a traffic cop in the Manchester area mainly covering the local motorways. They were specifically told by the Chief Constable not to stop anyone doing 80mph if they were just simply cruising and basically not all over the place and a clear danger to anyone else.
I say just leave it at 70, if people are clocked at 80 let it go but any more then fine them. |
Unfortunately, therein is the problem with the average speed cameras (or any of the other types of "safety" camera) with no discretion regarding the road conditions, light, amount of traffic, manner of driving the vehicle.
They may give you 10% plus one, but no consideration whatsoever of any situational factors.
My only ever three points in 40 odd years of driving were collected on a section of dual carriageway with a 40mph limit imposed due to very heavy traffic during rush hour. I was doing 52 with no one within half a mile ahead or behind me in dry, clear conditions, no side roads, no pedestrian footpaths, cycleways, nothing. | | | |
| The war on the motorist on 20:38 - Jun 1 with 1020 views | PunteR |
I think speeding cameras will become a thing of the past. I think its gearing up for trackers in your sat nav. My sat nav tells me when im going over the limited as soon as im on a 20,30 40,70 mph road. Im sure technology will catch up when speeding gets logged and you get sent a £50 fine every time you do.
Still wont stop dangerous driving though. | |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| The war on the motorist on 21:22 - Jun 1 with 1007 views | actonman |
| The war on the motorist on 20:38 - Jun 1 by PunteR |
I think speeding cameras will become a thing of the past. I think its gearing up for trackers in your sat nav. My sat nav tells me when im going over the limited as soon as im on a 20,30 40,70 mph road. Im sure technology will catch up when speeding gets logged and you get sent a £50 fine every time you do.
Still wont stop dangerous driving though. |
Yes I'm afraid that in about 10 years (if that) most of us will have dash cams and trackers as a requirement for insurance purposes. They are gradually sneaking in now and once they start giving discounts to people other than young drivers to have them, money will talk and it will end up being vastly more expensive to insure your car without them fitted.
This will be the end of our liberty and as good as a dictatorship , although there will be less speeding / reckless driving on the road.
But be warned people, this will not be a good thing ! I have a tracker fitted to my van I use for work and ever since the entire management (I work for a large utility company) have basically given up their day job and turned into the fking traffic police and spend most of their time making sure we
Don't speed
Don't accelerate too fast
Don't brake too harsh
Don't corner too fast
Don't leave our engine running without moving
Don't go anywhere we are not supposed to be
Don't stop anywhere other than where we should be
Don't leave for work later than the set time
Don't go home before time
Now some might say, you should comply with all of above anyway but now imagine your in your own car and have an accident, insurance company says... Nah mate you have been noted as doing 32mph in a 30 twice this year and you brake too harsh on occasion also you say you do 8k miles a year and you have done 8200 so far this year so we're not paying out !
Big brother is watching |  | | |
| The war on the motorist on 22:22 - Jun 1 with 979 views | PunteR |
| The war on the motorist on 21:22 - Jun 1 by actonman |
Yes I'm afraid that in about 10 years (if that) most of us will have dash cams and trackers as a requirement for insurance purposes. They are gradually sneaking in now and once they start giving discounts to people other than young drivers to have them, money will talk and it will end up being vastly more expensive to insure your car without them fitted.
This will be the end of our liberty and as good as a dictatorship , although there will be less speeding / reckless driving on the road.
But be warned people, this will not be a good thing ! I have a tracker fitted to my van I use for work and ever since the entire management (I work for a large utility company) have basically given up their day job and turned into the fking traffic police and spend most of their time making sure we
Don't speed
Don't accelerate too fast
Don't brake too harsh
Don't corner too fast
Don't leave our engine running without moving
Don't go anywhere we are not supposed to be
Don't stop anywhere other than where we should be
Don't leave for work later than the set time
Don't go home before time
Now some might say, you should comply with all of above anyway but now imagine your in your own car and have an accident, insurance company says... Nah mate you have been noted as doing 32mph in a 30 twice this year and you brake too harsh on occasion also you say you do 8k miles a year and you have done 8200 so far this year so we're not paying out !
Big brother is watching |
The fashion police should be giving out fines for anyone wearing Lycra.
If cyclist want to go faster without any "drag" , get a motorbike or safer still ...a car. | |
| Occasional providers of half decent House music. |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
