A poem for those that love speed limits
Discussion
fluffnik said:Sorry but can't quite fathom that one fluffnik, the call for much much higher limits (i.e. lower restrictions and constraints, yes?) points to other factors than the driver, but in calling for the removal or loosening of archaic restrictions, definitely.
The driver was the limiting factor then though & the driver is invariably now also.
...but at a much, much higher limit.
If there was evidence that average driving standards had risen considerably over the last 40 years rather than marginally, then yes the whole thing would hang together, but the ability of an average driver to be safe in circumstances they would not have been safe in when driving the cars and using the roads of 40 years ago overrides any marginal improvements in driver specific factors. This means that the archaic restrictions and limits applicable then are not applicable now because of those specific improvements surely?
turbobloke said:
The driver was the limiting factor then though & the driver is invariably now also.
...but at a much, much higher limit.
If there was evidence that average driving standards had risen considerably over the last 40 years rather than marginally, then yes the whole thing would hang together, but the ability of an average driver to be safe in circumstances they would not have been safe in when driving the cars and using the roads of 40 years ago overrides any marginal improvements in driver specific factors. This means that the archaic restrictions and limits applicable then are not applicable now because of those specific improvements surely?
Quite right TB. Cars are much much more safer all round than those manufactured forty years ago. This improves a driver's (though arguably not a pedestrian or cyclists) chance of avoiding serious injury or death in the event of an accident which would definitely have killed them back then. Various mechanisms may also assist to help a driver in trouble avoid an accident which might previously have been inevitable. But the majority of drivers are barely any better. This must be mainly due to poor training and laziness. Examples of poor driving have also become much more obvious given the higher density of modern traffic on our roads.
JJ
fluffnik said:
You don't have a right to speed on land that you don't own (or share with others) - I've never quite understood why some people think they do
By what right is my freedom constrained?
Because your freedom affects other's freedoms.
Sometimes, sometimes not...
So, when it does not:
By what right is my freedom constrained?
vonhosen said:
There has to be a balance struck & you'll never get everybody happy with where that is placed, but it will be required.
The default should always be less law and less regulation, anything else is oppression.
Quite right too. The trouble is, is that control freaks can't see this, they have a natural instinct for adding ever more control in their search for perfection. Whether they realise their actions are actually destroying morality and the general way of life I don't know, but what I am certain of is, as a start, we need a change of government to change the controlling atmosphere in the UK.
jazzyjeff said:
Various mechanisms may also assist to help a driver in trouble avoid an accident which might previously have been inevitable. But the majority of drivers are barely any better. This must be mainly due to poor training and laziness. Examples of poor driving have also become much more obvious given the higher density of modern traffic on our roads.
JJ
There's also the dumbing down factor cauased, wittingly or unwittingly, by the "stare at your speedo, stick to the limit, and you're safe" result of the government's speed kills claptrap.
The authorities may not consider this to be what they're saying, but it's precisely what's happening.
james_j said:Yes please, when can you deliver
The trouble is, is that control freaks can't see this, they have a natural instinct for adding ever more control in their search for perfection. Whether they realise their actions are actually destroying morality and the general way of life I don't know, but what I am certain of is, as a start, we need a change of government to change the controlling atmosphere in the UK.
Sadly there are even more detached and arrogant control freaks in the EU who are, as we type, sneaking in elements of the derided and rejected 'constitution' by the back door while plotting to ride roughshod over the people's wishes for the sake of their european experiment - which (another thread) is difficult to label but could be described as neo-pinkogreen totalitarianism, there's another c-word for it of course. So even if we get shot of the control freaks here there's some way to go as a lot of the future restrictions on drivers will come from the EU.
turbobloke said:
Various mechanisms may also assist to help a driver in trouble avoid an accident which might previously have been inevitable. But the majority of drivers are barely any better. This must be mainly due to poor training and laziness. Examples of poor driving have also become much more obvious given the higher density of modern traffic on our roads.
JJ
There's also the dumbing down factor cauased, wittingly or unwittingly, by the "stare at your speedo, stick to the limit, and you're safe" result of the government's speed kills claptrap.
The authorities may not consider this to be what they're saying, but it's precisely what's happening.
True...but there's also plenty of dumbing down caused by the "I've got ABS,LSD, EBD, GBH etc. etc. so I think I can get away with braking later". Safer cars has arguably led to greater apathy.
JJ
fluffnik said:
The default should always be less law and less regulation, anything else is oppression.
It depends what you're looking to regulate.
For example removing prosecution for ANY crime might lead to anarchy. It would certainly distinguish the genuinely decent people from the rest!! ;-)
JJ
WildCat said:
Lots
Of course not everyone who can fly a plane, can safely & adequately fly a multi million pound war plane. To do so you have to have a lot of training.
Measured in flying hours
Hours in the Piper don't count for hours in the Eurofighter though. It's not just the number of hours but those in the environment that matter.
Wildcat said:
Until then it's Pipers not Eurofighters.
Of course there would then be the question of do we all need Eurofighters or are Pipers actually perfectly serviceable for the intended job etc.
But we all learn with experience as well - und driving hours do bring about expertise - an IAM course would consolidate that learning curvefor many
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
vonhosen said:
Lots
Of course not everyone who can fly a plane, can safely & adequately fly a multi million pound war plane. To do so you have to have a lot of training.
Measured in flying hours
Hours in the Piper don't count for hours in the Eurofighter though. It's not just the number of hours but those in the environment that matter.
But the pilots practise low flights here in Cumbria. Ist where they learn und ist hardly a war zone
As said I enjoy und appreciate watching the fly pasts. My neighbours say "noisy"
But they still qualify for pilot licence by hours flown
vonhosen said:
Until then it's Pipers not Eurofighters.
Of course there would then be the question of do we all need Eurofighters or are Pipers actually perfectly serviceable for the intended job etc.
But we all learn with experience as well - und driving hours do bring about expertise - an IAM course would consolidate that learning curve
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
A lot of drivers are just as competent as I am. I have IAM/RoSPSA/RoADA goldy standard
und HPC und brake/skid courses under belt. But I will still acknowledge competence through experience just the same. Und in any case these same drivers can drive 80 mph in EU.. 90 mph in Italy.. any speed on German derestricts.. und the ton in Carinthia
I do not think average Hans any different than average Joe
turbobloke said:
The driver was the limiting factor then though & the driver is invariably now also.
...but at a much, much higher limit.
What I was trying to say was:
"Even if the driver is a limiting factor in the driver/vehicle system that limit is much, much higher than it was in 1965"
...or something like that.
vonhosen said:Perhaps not, but many ex-Police instructors are perfectly happy for people under instruction from them who show sufficient competence to exceed limits where it is safe to do so.
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
Zod said:
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
Really, who still currently qualified to give that training is allowing that then ?
Have you checked their qualification to do so ?
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 16th April 23:00
vonhosen said:
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
Really, who still currently qualified to give that training is allowing that then ?
>> Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 16th April 22:58
On a recentish appraisal - my objective und non-related POLICE observer told me that I could drive at whatever speed I deemed safe - so long as I kept distance in which I could see to be clear to stop safely und smoothly on my own side of road in ;}
He never needed to pray
I have clean bill of health vonhosen said:
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
Really, who still currently qualified to give that training is allowing that then ?
Have you checked their qualification to do so ?
When I did my advanced driving course a few years back with a serving traffic police officer I was encouraged to make progress where possible - frequently that was above the posted limit.
(30 in a 30, 40 in a 40. After that it was fair game - Driving to the conditions of the road/weather etc etc)
I lived to tell the tale!
jazzyjeff said:
The default should always be less law and less regulation, anything else is oppression.
It depends what you're looking to regulate.
For example removing prosecution for ANY crime might lead to anarchy. It would certainly distinguish the genuinely decent people from the rest!! ;-)
As a general principle laws should only impinge on freedoms to the extent necessary to protect freedom.
pmanson said:
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
Really, who still currently qualified to give that training is allowing that then ?
Have you checked their qualification to do so ?
When I did my advanced driving course a few years back with a serving traffic police officer I was encouraged to make progress where possible - frequently that was above the posted limit.
(30 in a 30, 40 in a 40. After that it was fair game - Driving to the conditions of the road/weather etc etc)
I lived to tell the tale!
Were they qualified to teach such things though ?
Are they doing it right ?
Just because they are a traffic officer doesn't mean they are.
Somebody might be a decent golfer, but that doesn't mean they can teach you to be a good one.
How many hours was your "advanced driving course" ?
Who tested you after & against what performance competencies ?
vonhosen said:Why do they need a formal qualification? the people I have been with do have such qualifications. I have undertaken training iwth some very high quality instructors and spent many hours at it. Why not try asking some of the respected trainers in the Advanced Driving forum what their attitude is to speed limit adherence by people under instruction?
The IAM sanction no training in excess of our limits.
If we are going to have driving without limits, training first followed by consolidated practice, not suck it & see without training.
Really, who still currently qualified to give that training is allowing that then ?
Have you checked their qualification to do so ?
When I did my advanced driving course a few years back with a serving traffic police officer I was encouraged to make progress where possible - frequently that was above the posted limit.
(30 in a 30, 40 in a 40. After that it was fair game - Driving to the conditions of the road/weather etc etc)
I lived to tell the tale!
Were they qualified to teach such things though ?
Are they doing it right ?
Just because they are a traffic officer doesn't mean they are.
Somebody might be a decent golfer, but that doesn't mean they can teach you to be a good one.
How many hours was your "advanced driving course" ?
Who tested you after & against what performance competencies ?
You continue to show that your principal motivation is a deep-seated devotion to speed limits.
Your use of quotation marks is highly offensive.
Zod said:
Why do they need a formal qualification? the people I have been with do have such qualifications. I have undertaken training iwth some very high quality instructors and spent many hours at it. Why not try asking some of the respected trainers in the Advanced Driving forum what their attitude is to speed limit adherence by people under instruction?
You continue to show that your principal motivation is a deep-seated devotion to speed limits.
Your use of quotation marks is highly offensive.
But for a Police instructor to retain their qualification they have to reclassify regularly.
No reclass = no qualification to teach at speeds in excess of our limits.
Also being a Police advanced driver is no qualification to teach using exemptions or above our limits.
It is all academic anyway, nobody can encourage or train you outside of a lawful exemption above the speed limit, without commiting an offence themselves.
My motivation is both safety & the law.
If we are going to have tiered licencing & instruction, then it should be through standardised instruction & testing through suitably qualified people only, not everyone doing their own thing.
That is a decision for society as to whether they want such a thing.
I am happy to express my own opinion but ultimately go with & abide by the decision of society on that matter. A decision that will be expressed through the law.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff