RE: 'Speed kills' policy unsafe: campaign
Discussion
Guys
Better not to have a template. If papers see "mass production" they will not print.
Keep it short. Use your own words. Make sure it's appropriate for the paper that you read/ write to.
If writing for "The Times" then add stats or evidence.
If writing for the "Sun", be upset / outraged about the "war" on ordinary people
Just go to it!
Better not to have a template. If papers see "mass production" they will not print.
Keep it short. Use your own words. Make sure it's appropriate for the paper that you read/ write to.
If writing for "The Times" then add stats or evidence.
If writing for the "Sun", be upset / outraged about the "war" on ordinary people
Just go to it!
Flat in Fifth said:
deltafox said:
Who gives a stuff what the speed limits are? Who actually takes f@ck all notice of what these pricks say? Theyre no indicator of safe driving practices anyway.
Ignore them and continue to drive safely above the "limits"!
Ignore them and continue to drive safely above the "limits"!
Know where you are coming from, but from experience in the 70s when the blanket 50 limit was in place it altered how vulnerable one was to detection.
Remember this was before the days of the 50,60,70 malarkey that we have to put up with today, NSL was 70, and actually providing you were clearly sensible about things, NSL still sort of meant NSL.
and N didn't stand for National say no more. Plus there was no, or very little, electronic enforcement, and what there was had a proper trained class 1 involved at the time.
The change it made though from my perspective was that with a 70 limit, someone could be seen to be getting a wiggle on, but that prior opinion HAD to be reinforced by a measurement. Anyone getting a similar wiggle on with a blanket 50 clearly was above the limit and it seemed to me the balance of things somehow changed.
just my 2p.
Points taken on board and processed.
Response- Drive illegally- its the only way left open to law abiding people to get themselves heard over the cacophony of nonsense coming from the speed kills idiots and to avoid "the law".
Ive said it before, ill say it again: Treat us like criminals and we may as well become criminals.
It would seem that the authorities would like us to all be classified as such, catalogued, processed and monitored.
It may well come to this state of affairs if people do not get up and do their part to fight back- i for one will never conform, no matter what they say, threaten, or do.
F@ck em all.
Me neither Deltafox. I have absolutely no intention whatsoever of sticking to a blanket 40mph on all rural roads. I will continue to exercise my judgement as to what is safe, as I have for the last 25 years, although I do have some sympathy with some bits of road, such as outside my local school, being classified as 20mph at various times of the day.
For the record, nor do I have any intention of ever having a satellite spy-in-the-cab tracker system. I will not co-operate. They can lock me up and throw away the key but I will not have my freedoms abused. If enough of us make a stand we can make the poll tax rebellion look like the vicar's tea party. As you correctly summarise, f@ck 'em.
For the record, nor do I have any intention of ever having a satellite spy-in-the-cab tracker system. I will not co-operate. They can lock me up and throw away the key but I will not have my freedoms abused. If enough of us make a stand we can make the poll tax rebellion look like the vicar's tea party. As you correctly summarise, f@ck 'em.
Edited by andy zarse on Tuesday 8th August 16:26
Now we see what the new penalties in the Road Safety Bill were really about:
Get caught doing 60 in the new reduced limits, and the nanny state will have your license. This clarifies what we've always suspected - speed limits are simply one of several tools being used to force people off the roads, they have nothing to do with safety.
Get caught doing 60 in the new reduced limits, and the nanny state will have your license. This clarifies what we've always suspected - speed limits are simply one of several tools being used to force people off the roads, they have nothing to do with safety.
It seems to me that if we all complain then perhaps our MP's may just wake -up in time to lose their seats.As to this being a dictatorial state I am afraid it is already here,my mother grew-up in Nazi Germany and she has confirmed to me on a number of occasions that she enjoyed more freedom under that regime than we now have in the UK, what a sad state of affairs.This is not only about raising money but control of all that we do.I am an accountant by profession so we are not all bad.
Eberhardt said:
It seems to me that if we all complain then perhaps our MP's may just wake -up in time to lose their seats.As to this being a dictatorial state I am afraid it is already here,my mother grew-up in Nazi Germany and she has confirmed to me on a number of occasions that she enjoyed more freedom under that regime than we now have in the UK, what a sad state of affairs.This is not only about raising money but control of all that we do.I am an accountant by profession so we are not all bad.
I saw a post (it may have been in the p & p but I can't find it) where the laws passed by the Nazi Government in the 30's are compared with those passed by the latest Labour Govt and there is a frighteningly strong resemblance.
Can any one dig that up, just to make sure I'm not dreaming it?
711 said:
Now we see what the new penalties in the Road Safety Bill were really about:
Get caught doing 60 in the new reduced limits, and the nanny state will have your license. This clarifies what we've always suspected - speed limits are simply one of several tools being used to force people off the roads, they have nothing to do with safety.
Get caught doing 60 in the new reduced limits, and the nanny state will have your license. This clarifies what we've always suspected - speed limits are simply one of several tools being used to force people off the roads, they have nothing to do with safety.
The more they(government) push me the more I'll push back.
It won't be long until there are enough people pushing bloody hard to give them a bloody big shock!
I think a systematic attack of all UK fixed speed camera's would be a good start... no Plod out there to catch anyone these days so nothing really stopping anyone doing what they like anyway
Dave
Edited by Mr Whippy on Tuesday 8th August 17:24
I agree, lets get on the offensive, a new wave of complaints and actions, at least to the same extent that the govt propeganda is being produced.
I also learnt to drive and live in Devon, and drive at the speed appropriate for the road (when in comes to NSL roads). On some sections, when weather/traffic/personal state is appropriate, 100mph can be achieved just as 'safely' as 60, yet in other places 15mph is seriouly risking your life. The problem is that the average person cannot realise this in a sensible way, and sees a reduced speed as 'losing out', in the race of the roads.
I also learnt to drive and live in Devon, and drive at the speed appropriate for the road (when in comes to NSL roads). On some sections, when weather/traffic/personal state is appropriate, 100mph can be achieved just as 'safely' as 60, yet in other places 15mph is seriouly risking your life. The problem is that the average person cannot realise this in a sensible way, and sees a reduced speed as 'losing out', in the race of the roads.
Mr Whippy said:
It won't be long until there are enough people pushing bloody hard to give them a bloody big shock!
I really wish that I could agree with you on this one, but if they're prepared to go and invade another country in the face of one of the largest protests the country has ever seen, I can't see Tony being too concerned by some wailing and gnashing of teeth over speeding.
Mr Whippy said:
I think a systematic attack of all UK fixed speed camera's would be a good start... no Plod out there to catch anyone these days so nothing really stopping anyone doing what they like anyway
It's funny how the police and courts always seem to find the energy to prosecute "offences" that tear at the fabric of the state.
I'm seriously thinking about getting out of this little island dictatorship whilst I still can.
Being in disagreement with the "results" is one thing, but I'm finding that being in disagreement with the way "results" are obtained is a lot harder to swallow.
Just watched this on tonights Calender (Yorkshire news) have sky+ so the following is most of what was said:
Calender presenter Allan Whithouse next to a main road:
Said what the plan is to do about reducing road limits on urban roads, mention at moment 60mph is almost as fast as you are allowed to travel on a three lane motorway (think you can guess where this is heading), and winding country roads could not be more different.
Cue local council plod, David Bowe (North Yorks County council) says they will look at if a 30mph zone would have a benefit impact on traveling vehicals, wether it would reduce speeds and more importantly if it will reduce the accidents that occur as a consequence of speed.
Christa (or whatever her name is) in studio, says that she can imagine the motor organisations saying its just another way of getting at motorists.
Back to BBC's transport correspondant Allan at some roadside
(These are his words)
"Well most people now believe that there is a direct link between speed and road safety, there are still a few BACKWOODS men who insist speed and road safety - no linkage at all, <and that they say> its all about driver education, driver awareness. But elsewhere there is a broad concensus that the faster, the more likely you are to kill or injur someone. Thats certainly the view of North Yorkshire Police, we spoke to one of their traffic offices earlier, lets have a look at what he has to say about speed and road safety."
Then onto sgt Michael Barron (North Yorks Police).
"Speed causes the damage, speed causes people to be killed and injured on the roads, that doubtless. However, enforcing and getting the public to stick to those limits, may prove a little more difficult"
Allan a bit more about nothing happeing yet, and still under consultation etc.
Seems that the BBC's correspondant thinks our Paul from safespeed is in the Backwoods??? Nice isnt it. Aswell as a lie that people like Paul say there is no link between speed and safety, think its more like theres no link between speed enforcement and safety, and thats not the same thing!
Paul, sure you dont want to write them a nice letter?
Calender presenter Allan Whithouse next to a main road:
Said what the plan is to do about reducing road limits on urban roads, mention at moment 60mph is almost as fast as you are allowed to travel on a three lane motorway (think you can guess where this is heading), and winding country roads could not be more different.
Cue local council plod, David Bowe (North Yorks County council) says they will look at if a 30mph zone would have a benefit impact on traveling vehicals, wether it would reduce speeds and more importantly if it will reduce the accidents that occur as a consequence of speed.
Christa (or whatever her name is) in studio, says that she can imagine the motor organisations saying its just another way of getting at motorists.
Back to BBC's transport correspondant Allan at some roadside
(These are his words)
"Well most people now believe that there is a direct link between speed and road safety, there are still a few BACKWOODS men who insist speed and road safety - no linkage at all, <and that they say> its all about driver education, driver awareness. But elsewhere there is a broad concensus that the faster, the more likely you are to kill or injur someone. Thats certainly the view of North Yorkshire Police, we spoke to one of their traffic offices earlier, lets have a look at what he has to say about speed and road safety."
Then onto sgt Michael Barron (North Yorks Police).
"Speed causes the damage, speed causes people to be killed and injured on the roads, that doubtless. However, enforcing and getting the public to stick to those limits, may prove a little more difficult"
Allan a bit more about nothing happeing yet, and still under consultation etc.
Seems that the BBC's correspondant thinks our Paul from safespeed is in the Backwoods??? Nice isnt it. Aswell as a lie that people like Paul say there is no link between speed and safety, think its more like theres no link between speed enforcement and safety, and thats not the same thing!
Paul, sure you dont want to write them a nice letter?
deltafox said:
Flat in Fifth said:
deltafox said:
Who gives a stuff what the speed limits are? Who actually takes f@ck all notice of what these pricks say? Theyre no indicator of safe driving practices anyway.
Ignore them and continue to drive safely above the "limits"!
Ignore them and continue to drive safely above the "limits"!
Know where you are coming from, but from experience in the 70s when the blanket 50 limit was in place it altered how vulnerable one was to detection.
Remember this was before the days of the 50,60,70 malarkey that we have to put up with today, NSL was 70, and actually providing you were clearly sensible about things, NSL still sort of meant NSL.
and N didn't stand for National say no more. Plus there was no, or very little, electronic enforcement, and what there was had a proper trained class 1 involved at the time.
The change it made though from my perspective was that with a 70 limit, someone could be seen to be getting a wiggle on, but that prior opinion HAD to be reinforced by a measurement. Anyone getting a similar wiggle on with a blanket 50 clearly was above the limit and it seemed to me the balance of things somehow changed.
just my 2p.
Points taken on board and processed.
Response- Drive illegally- its the only way left open to law abiding people to get themselves heard over the cacophony of nonsense coming from the speed kills idiots and to avoid "the law".
Ive said it before, ill say it again: Treat us like criminals and we may as well become criminals.
It would seem that the authorities would like us to all be classified as such, catalogued, processed and monitored.
It may well come to this state of affairs if people do not get up and do their part to fight back- i for one will never conform, no matter what they say, threaten, or do.
F@ck em all.
OK so you are talking mass civil disobediance.
What instances of mass civil disobediance heve ever got the law changed in Britain?
1. suffragettes,
2. right to roam,
3. poll tax,
any more for any more?
Far as I'm concerned poll tax was right on the money, but Labour and the scum didn't want it.
Right to roam, bit ambivalent about that one to be honest,, sitting on the fence, pardon the pun.
Suffragette movement, well I hope I'd have been out there with them at the time....
Re MCD on speed limits, interesting, lot of pain in the pipeline on that one vs enormous resources who believe they are right. A huge burgeoning class of muppets who don't care diddley squat about their driving. Like the driver of a Swift (haha) Motorhome today. 35/40 in NSL, 40/45 in 30s, wandering all over the road, texting on his mobile ffs!!!!!!
trax said:
Calender presenter Allan Whithouse next to a main road:
Said what the plan is to do about reducing road limits on urban roads, mention at moment 60mph is almost as fast as you are allowed to travel on a three lane motorway (think you can guess where this is heading), and winding country roads could not be more different.
So what Allan _S_hithouse is implying, although he sounds too indoctrinated to work it out, is that the current motorway limit is way too low?
711 said:
trax said:
Calender presenter Allan Whithouse next to a main road:
Said what the plan is to do about reducing road limits on urban roads, mention at moment 60mph is almost as fast as you are allowed to travel on a three lane motorway (think you can guess where this is heading), and winding country roads could not be more different.
So what Allan _S_hithouse is implying, although he sounds too indoctrinated to work it out, is that the current motorway limit is way too low?
Dont think the unbiased independant BBC correspondant would agree with that.
Timberwolf said:
Mr Whippy said:
Doesn't using average speeds as a guide for the limit mean (no pun intended) that eventually we will end up with speeds around 0mph?
0mph, "10%+2" = 2mph, 2mph enforcement threshold = Speed camera revenue to die for!
(Oh, and the complete collapse of every industry reliant on travel, but let's brush that one under the carpet.)
Here's the thing that gets me (and I'm sure many of you, but obviously not the powers that be):
I send an engineer out to a job. He does the job. He travels to a second site. He completes a job there and returns home/to base.
Now, the speed limits reduce. The engineer is reliant on his licence for his work, hence he is more than reluctant to regularly break the speed limit. Suddenly the above scenario turns into this:
I send an engineer out to a job. He does the job. He doesn't have the time left to make it to the second site and then get home/to base.
Now, I still have to pay that engineer this month. Hence, I charge the first customer more because I can no longer split the costs of that engineer between two seperate customers.
More than that, I have to employ more engineers because the ones I have can no longer service all our customers. My costs increase while my customer base doesn't. I have to charge more. I may or may not now be able to maintain my competetive edge over other companies. Nonetheless, my turnover may well diminish because I can no longer deliver my goods and (more to the point) services at the costs my customers have come to expect.
My margins reduce substantially.
The roads become more conjested because of the extra engineers travelling at lower speeds. More vehicles in less space with more frustrated drivers create more accidents.
This is remedied when I go bust. Now there are no more engineers on the roads.
At least until some other fool comes along to mortgage their house and set up a new company. Don't worry though - they'll not last long.
J1mmyD said:
Timberwolf said:
Mr Whippy said:
Doesn't using average speeds as a guide for the limit mean (no pun intended) that eventually we will end up with speeds around 0mph?
0mph, "10%+2" = 2mph, 2mph enforcement threshold = Speed camera revenue to die for!
(Oh, and the complete collapse of every industry reliant on travel, but let's brush that one under the carpet.)
Here's the thing that gets me (and I'm sure many of you, but obviously not the powers that be):
I send an engineer out to a job. He does the job. He travels to a second site. He completes a job there and returns home/to base.
Now, the speed limits reduce. The engineer is reliant on his licence for his work, hence he is more than reluctant to regularly break the speed limit. Suddenly the above scenario turns into this:
I send an engineer out to a job. He does the job. He doesn't have the time left to make it to the second site and then get home/to base.
Now, I still have to pay that engineer this month. Hence, I charge the first customer more because I can no longer split the costs of that engineer between two seperate customers.
More than that, I have to employ more engineers because the ones I have can no longer service all our customers. My costs increase while my customer base doesn't. I have to charge more. I may or may not now be able to maintain my competetive edge over other companies. Nonetheless, my turnover may well diminish because I can no longer deliver my goods and (more to the point) services at the costs my customers have come to expect.
My margins reduce substantially.
The roads become more conjested because of the extra engineers travelling at lower speeds. More vehicles in less space with more frustrated drivers create more accidents.
This is remedied when I go bust. Now there are no more engineers on the roads.
At least until some other fool comes along to mortgage their house and set up a new company. Don't worry though - they'll not last long.
Who's average speed is anywhere near that of the current speed limit all the way (where they are keeping to the limits in the first place) ?
Invariably all you are speeding to is the next thing that will make you drop under it & the others catch you back up. The only way you can travel at an average anywhere near the current speed limit & keep ahead of those sticking to the current limits is by breaking them substantially &/or for prolonged periods.
It amazes me that speed is the major reason for road problems. Inappropriate speed contributes to road problems, but what about other things?
Confusing signs
Info overoad - too maqny signs.
Not having a test before going on a motorway.
Lane hopping.
Tailgating - at any speed.
No signalling.
Poor lane discipline esp roundabouts
Inexperience - newly passed drivers not enough roadsense or ability to see potential problems.
etc etc
The list can get quite long.
Surely a better way to reduce accidents would be to make learning better and produce drivers more aware of the surroundings and what is safe and not safe.
Also have more ways of spotting the bad drivers such as unmarked cars etc.
Having commuted 120 miles a day for several years i have seen horrific beahviour on roads. Many near catastrophes.
Its driving standards that matter not just speed.
Phil
Confusing signs
Info overoad - too maqny signs.
Not having a test before going on a motorway.
Lane hopping.
Tailgating - at any speed.
No signalling.
Poor lane discipline esp roundabouts
Inexperience - newly passed drivers not enough roadsense or ability to see potential problems.
etc etc
The list can get quite long.
Surely a better way to reduce accidents would be to make learning better and produce drivers more aware of the surroundings and what is safe and not safe.
Also have more ways of spotting the bad drivers such as unmarked cars etc.
Having commuted 120 miles a day for several years i have seen horrific beahviour on roads. Many near catastrophes.
Its driving standards that matter not just speed.
Phil
Von, I know from experience that 14 or 15 years ago my average speed on the motorways was 60-65 mph. My average speed cross country around 50mph. Now, my driving may well have changed over that period of time, but my average speed on the motorways now is closer to 55mph.
I'm pretty sure that this is down to increased traffic volume and seemingly interminable roadworks (who's idea was it to put roadworks on the M1, A1 and M11 at the same time, thus removing any alternative to sitting in traffic??).
My cross country average is below 50mph now. This, again, is due partly to increased traffic volume but also lowered speed limits.
I suggest that further lowering speed limits is only going to decrease that average speed further.
Now, I refuse point blank to speed through any built up area be that limit 20, 30, 40 or 50. I rarely exceed the speed limit where the NSL applies (although I do wonder how many people insist they stick at 60 on a dual carriageway). I do exceed the speed limit on motorways. I'm sure there are those out there (and you may be one of them) who believes that makes me a threat to civilisation and perhaps even the continuance of mankind itself. However, I would point out that *IMHO* I do not drive in any way dangerously.
In order to make a point, may I share my accident rate:
in the last 5 years, I have been involved in three accidents.
In each case, my vehicle was stationary and/or legally parked.
The one instance where speed was not an issue, the other driver failed to stop or report the accident. (Hitting my parked vehicle).
The other incidents involved a young driver taking a blind corner at approx 40mph (NSL applied), only to find me waiting at a T junction around the bend; the last involved a driver travelling in a motorway contraflow at an estimated 70mph with stationary traffic ahead. He was also arguing with his wife at the time.
It is my proposition that speed is only ever a contributing factor to any accident. Admittedly, in some accidents it is a greater factor but by far (and again, this is my anecdotal experience) it is inattention to conditions and other road users - ALL users, not only other vehicles - that is the bigger factor in road accidents.
Reducing speed limits will have at least two other effects:
1) it will increase the frustration felt by drivers, thus increasing aggression; and
2) it will reduce the attention paid by road users to others on the road (the assumption being 'I'm travelling slowly, so there's nothing bad that can happen')
The Americans have a saying about the 55 limit - it's slow enough to make you feel safe while being fast enough to kill you.
*Just so I don't sound like a magnet for accidents, I'd like to point out that I have covered an estimated 950,000-1,000,000 miles in the last 15 years and my accident rate is around 1 every 120,000 miles (which probably means I'm due another one pretty soon).
I'm pretty sure that this is down to increased traffic volume and seemingly interminable roadworks (who's idea was it to put roadworks on the M1, A1 and M11 at the same time, thus removing any alternative to sitting in traffic??).
My cross country average is below 50mph now. This, again, is due partly to increased traffic volume but also lowered speed limits.
I suggest that further lowering speed limits is only going to decrease that average speed further.
Now, I refuse point blank to speed through any built up area be that limit 20, 30, 40 or 50. I rarely exceed the speed limit where the NSL applies (although I do wonder how many people insist they stick at 60 on a dual carriageway). I do exceed the speed limit on motorways. I'm sure there are those out there (and you may be one of them) who believes that makes me a threat to civilisation and perhaps even the continuance of mankind itself. However, I would point out that *IMHO* I do not drive in any way dangerously.
In order to make a point, may I share my accident rate:
in the last 5 years, I have been involved in three accidents.
In each case, my vehicle was stationary and/or legally parked.
The one instance where speed was not an issue, the other driver failed to stop or report the accident. (Hitting my parked vehicle).
The other incidents involved a young driver taking a blind corner at approx 40mph (NSL applied), only to find me waiting at a T junction around the bend; the last involved a driver travelling in a motorway contraflow at an estimated 70mph with stationary traffic ahead. He was also arguing with his wife at the time.
It is my proposition that speed is only ever a contributing factor to any accident. Admittedly, in some accidents it is a greater factor but by far (and again, this is my anecdotal experience) it is inattention to conditions and other road users - ALL users, not only other vehicles - that is the bigger factor in road accidents.
Reducing speed limits will have at least two other effects:
1) it will increase the frustration felt by drivers, thus increasing aggression; and
2) it will reduce the attention paid by road users to others on the road (the assumption being 'I'm travelling slowly, so there's nothing bad that can happen')
The Americans have a saying about the 55 limit - it's slow enough to make you feel safe while being fast enough to kill you.
*Just so I don't sound like a magnet for accidents, I'd like to point out that I have covered an estimated 950,000-1,000,000 miles in the last 15 years and my accident rate is around 1 every 120,000 miles (which probably means I'm due another one pretty soon).
The problem here gentlemen is that, in a rather cunning PR move, this has been released at that most extreme scraping of the news barrel time of the year: silly season. No Parliament means no 'real' politics (if that's what it can be described as) to report, giving undue attention to statistical manipulation like this.
I can't even be arsed to go into all the reasons it's wrong - I'm pretty sure they've been covered.
However, I do have a suggestion aside from the letter writing to put forward. In the event that this 30mph rubbish does go ahead, I propose the planning of a route through some of the B roads with new limits around the UK - possibly several events happening at the same time around the country. We then get as many people as we can to drive, en mass, up to the sixty limit along the route in as safer fashion as we can - briskly, but cautiously based on the 'old' speed limit.
They can't nick everyone, and this is the sort of story the media love.. if it was done in a way that promoted the reasons discussed here and involved Safe Speed (they're clearly getting a very high media profile) it could get really good press. Get some racing drivers involved, I'm sure the IAM would support it - try to get the idea back into peoples' heads that driving a car is basically no different to flying a helicopter, operating a crane or whatever. It is a machine that you are operating... the human is the weak link.
On the subject of racing drivers, would you be able to get a stretch of road closed for a 'look how fast this car can go round bends - it's not speed that causes crashes it's s*it drivers' type demo?
Actually, to hell with waiting - we should be doing this now. Aside fom anything, no one will get points! In fact, I'm going to call Paul tomorrow. What say you?
I can't even be arsed to go into all the reasons it's wrong - I'm pretty sure they've been covered.
However, I do have a suggestion aside from the letter writing to put forward. In the event that this 30mph rubbish does go ahead, I propose the planning of a route through some of the B roads with new limits around the UK - possibly several events happening at the same time around the country. We then get as many people as we can to drive, en mass, up to the sixty limit along the route in as safer fashion as we can - briskly, but cautiously based on the 'old' speed limit.
They can't nick everyone, and this is the sort of story the media love.. if it was done in a way that promoted the reasons discussed here and involved Safe Speed (they're clearly getting a very high media profile) it could get really good press. Get some racing drivers involved, I'm sure the IAM would support it - try to get the idea back into peoples' heads that driving a car is basically no different to flying a helicopter, operating a crane or whatever. It is a machine that you are operating... the human is the weak link.
On the subject of racing drivers, would you be able to get a stretch of road closed for a 'look how fast this car can go round bends - it's not speed that causes crashes it's s*it drivers' type demo?
Actually, to hell with waiting - we should be doing this now. Aside fom anything, no one will get points! In fact, I'm going to call Paul tomorrow. What say you?
Edited by MrKipling43 on Tuesday 8th August 22:45
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff