UK Report Shows Only 2% of Accidents Caused by Speeding
Discussion
The limit causes unnecessary bunching of traffic on more lightly trafficed motorways and dual carriageways. I see far more danger caused by the slow motion overtakers, made worse by the 'drive too close' brigade.
Have seen this during few drives recently down the A55 in North Wales in Brownstain country - including someone not checking their blind spot before changing lane - causing driver in outside lane to take evasive action.
Maximising space from other traffic is the key. It gives you a margin to accommodate for error. I do not see the value of a limit that feels too slow to many and feel that it is the fact that some exceed the limit on the motorway by some extent that contributes to their excellent safety record.
At rush hour times, it is hard to reach the limit, let alone exceed it. I see a lot more accidents at these times than when conditions allow a spread of speeds above and below the limit. Lack of spacing between traffic caused by congestion and people driving too close is the main problem here.
Still cheap easy to enforce a speed limit, innit!
Have seen this during few drives recently down the A55 in North Wales in Brownstain country - including someone not checking their blind spot before changing lane - causing driver in outside lane to take evasive action.
Maximising space from other traffic is the key. It gives you a margin to accommodate for error. I do not see the value of a limit that feels too slow to many and feel that it is the fact that some exceed the limit on the motorway by some extent that contributes to their excellent safety record.
At rush hour times, it is hard to reach the limit, let alone exceed it. I see a lot more accidents at these times than when conditions allow a spread of speeds above and below the limit. Lack of spacing between traffic caused by congestion and people driving too close is the main problem here.
Still cheap easy to enforce a speed limit, innit!
Edited by alphadog on Tuesday 18th September 22:47
I think the biggest problem with the scamera-etti now is that it is an established industry employing xxxx people.
No matter what is said or proved to the contrary the industry will be kept going due to the fact that it's a cost neutral employment scheme for the Government and local authorities, funded by the taxes it collects. If it were to be wound up then there would have to be a mass re-education/de-brain washing scheme for its disciples.
No matter what is said or proved to the contrary the industry will be kept going due to the fact that it's a cost neutral employment scheme for the Government and local authorities, funded by the taxes it collects. If it were to be wound up then there would have to be a mass re-education/de-brain washing scheme for its disciples.
HarryW, don’t stress… rip-off Britain is alienating all aspiring and semi-affluent individuals who own the vehicles that can easily break the speed limit to the point where we’ll all up sticks and move to the continent.
Leaving all the super rich (who are residents abroad for tax purposes anyway) whose licenses can’t be touched by scameras or the less-well-off which of course are uninsured criminals or will be; oh, and don’t forget the illegal immigrants whom they can’t deport or imprison for PC reasons.
This will only leave politicians and the employees of the scamera partnerships to catch themselves – what goes around and all that…
Sweet justice.
Leaving all the super rich (who are residents abroad for tax purposes anyway) whose licenses can’t be touched by scameras or the less-well-off which of course are uninsured criminals or will be; oh, and don’t forget the illegal immigrants whom they can’t deport or imprison for PC reasons.
This will only leave politicians and the employees of the scamera partnerships to catch themselves – what goes around and all that…
Sweet justice.
I'd welcome Vonhosen's spin-free justification of NOT raising the motorway speed limit in free-flowing conditions to 80 mph.
The 85 percentile speed may rise by about 2pc but more folks get to drive as they do without breaking the law. Then more police work can focus on lane discipline and safe distances.
The 85 percentile speed may rise by about 2pc but more folks get to drive as they do without breaking the law. Then more police work can focus on lane discipline and safe distances.
Edited by Steven Toy on Wednesday 19th September 02:02
vonhosen said:
Bing o said:
vonhosen said:
Lostusernamedamn said:
Shock horror what a surprise (not). Every now and then this is revealed, but the revenue camera spin meisters resume their bullsh1t propaganda in the hope the hope the public has a short memory.
Because it's not only about speed as a cause of collisions, it's the effect of speed as a contributory factor in incidence & severity as well. It's not going to go away.But speed limit enforcement can only hope to affect those incidents where one or more of the parties is travelling higher than the posted limit, it cannot influence any of those where all involved are travelling below the posted limit but without seeing what they're looking at.
Or are you suggesting that the majority of RTCs involve someone speeding, so while it's only actually a cause in a tiny minority of cases, enforcing limits will reduce the severity of impacts in the majority of them?
vonhosen said:
Bing o said:
vonhosen said:
Lostusernamedamn said:
Shock horror what a surprise (not). Every now and then this is revealed, but the revenue camera spin meisters resume their bullsh1t propaganda in the hope the hope the public has a short memory.
Because it's not only about speed as a cause of collisions, it's the effect of speed as a contributory factor in incidence & severity as well. It's not going to go away.Get rid of all the electronic tat that distracts drivers, and start hitting these blind numpties with DWDCA for every accident they cause.
Compulsory retests for all those involved in part or whole fault accidents (and yes, I have had a couple myself) until people learn not to drive 2 ton bits of metal into each other.
Yes it's more work for the CPS, and more work for the driving test people, but we can get round that by removing the industrialised speeding operation we have at present, and concentrate on road safety, not road revenue.
And breath.
fluffnik said:
blueyes said:
Wake up! Speeding isn't about the money. What did they net last year £48M? Pennies, as far as this goverment is concerned. It's all about control. A scamera here, another CCTV there, hold onto innocent peoples DNA.... the list is endless.
Just part of the incipient fascist twuntery.
It all needs excised, like the cancer that it is.
Think of all the jobs they've created. Not just the people in the scam vans but the people who look after the vans, process all the forms, look after the gatsos, process the films etc.
Who do you think they're going to vote for next time?
vonhosen said:
Lostusernamedamn said:
Shock horror what a surprise (not). Every now and then this is revealed, but the revenue camera spin meisters resume their bullsh1t propaganda in the hope the hope the public has a short memory.
Because it's not only about speed as a cause of collisions, it's the effect of speed as a contributory factor in incidence & severity as well. It's not going to go away.Tailgating
Poor observation
Too fast for conditions (NOT ALWAYS speeding - although sometimes it will be)
blueyes said:
fluffnik said:
Just part of the incipient fascist twuntery.
It all needs excised, like the cancer that it is.
Had another thought on the way to work.It all needs excised, like the cancer that it is.
Think of all the jobs they've created. Not just the people in the scam vans but the people who look after the vans, process all the forms, look after the gatsos, process the films etc.
Who do you think they're going to vote for next time?
...which is why we all need to vote for their extinction.
vonhosen said:
Lostusernamedamn said:
vonhosen said:
Lostusernamedamn said:
Shock horror what a surprise (not). Every now and then this is revealed, but the revenue camera spin meisters resume their bullsh1t propaganda in the hope the hope the public has a short memory.
Because it's not only about speed as a cause of collisions, it's the effect of speed as a contributory factor in incidence & severity as well. It's not going to go away.You could do it for your DSA test, you have to be able to do it afterwards as well.
I don't consider anyone an advanced driver, who can't adhere to limits.
alphadog said:
The limit causes unnecessary bunching of traffic on more lightly trafficed motorways and dual carriageways. I see far more danger caused by the slow motion overtakers, made worse by the 'drive too close' brigade.
Have seen this during few drives recently down the A55 in North Wales in Brownstain country - including someone not checking their blind spot before changing lane - causing driver in outside lane to take evasive action.
Have seen this during few drives recently down the A55 in North Wales in Brownstain country - including someone not checking their blind spot before changing lane - causing driver in outside lane to take evasive action.
How would allowing these drivers to drive faster prevent what you saw.
alphadog said:
Maximising space from other traffic is the key. It gives you a margin to accommodate for error. I do not see the value of a limit that feels too slow to many and feel that it is the fact that some exceed the limit on the motorway by some extent that contributes to their excellent safety record.
At rush hour times, it is hard to reach the limit, let alone exceed it. I see a lot more accidents at these times than when conditions allow a spread of speeds above and below the limit. Lack of spacing between traffic caused by congestion and people driving too close is the main problem here.
Still cheap easy to enforce a speed limit, innit!
Yet I've seen many many drivers bunch up far too close, at speeds well over the limit, when there was space not to have to do so. So why would making this speed legal suddenly stop them bunching.At rush hour times, it is hard to reach the limit, let alone exceed it. I see a lot more accidents at these times than when conditions allow a spread of speeds above and below the limit. Lack of spacing between traffic caused by congestion and people driving too close is the main problem here.
Still cheap easy to enforce a speed limit, innit!
BFF
TripleS said:
EU_Foreigner said:
anything that moves is at risk. The issue is wether by moving faster, that the risk is increased
I suspect that risk is increased relatively little, for fairly large (though not unlimited) excesses over the speed limit.Best wishes all,
Dave.
Does the impact speed increase. Yes.
Does the effectiveness of vision reduce. Yes.
etc, etc, etc.
It's no surprise you want to claim that it doesn't increase risk, but you would be better off claiming you can manage the increased risk. That may not be true either, but at least you could try and justify it.
BFF
Big Fat F'r said:
TripleS said:
EU_Foreigner said:
anything that moves is at risk. The issue is wether by moving faster, that the risk is increased
I suspect that risk is increased relatively little, for fairly large (though not unlimited) excesses over the speed limit.Best wishes all,
Dave.
Does the impact speed increase. Yes.
Does the effectiveness of vision reduce. Yes.
etc, etc, etc.
It's no surprise you want to claim that it doesn't increase risk, but you would be better off claiming you can manage the increased risk. That may not be true either, but at least you could try and justify it.
BFF
Edited by EU_Foreigner on Wednesday 19th September 12:53
Guam said:
...due to people with "Cockpit Fixation" ...
Like I had on the A12 running down to the Blackwall Tunnel on Sunday. Looking everywhere but at the road, and I was really trying to drive properly...Cameras everywhere, limit up and down like a yo-yo (something like 50-40-50-40-30-40-30-40
)!!!...I'm now counting the 14 days as i've no idea if I missed a change or not...
vonhosen said:
Where would the money come from for medical cures ?
The pockets of non offenders ?
Where does the money for SCPs come from ?
The pockets of offenders ?
Where does the money come from to combat robberies and murders, etc. (making the dodgy assumption that these crimes are even combatted at all), 'cos it isn't coming from the offenders is it?The pockets of non offenders ?
Where does the money for SCPs come from ?
The pockets of offenders ?
Big Fat F'r said:
TripleS said:
EU_Foreigner said:
anything that moves is at risk. The issue is wether by moving faster, that the risk is increased
I suspect that risk is increased relatively little, for fairly large (though not unlimited) excesses over the speed limit.Best wishes all,
Dave.
Does the impact speed increase. Yes.
Does the effectiveness of vision reduce. Yes.
etc, etc, etc.
It's no surprise you want to claim that it doesn't increase risk, but you would be better off claiming you can manage the increased risk. That may not be true either, but at least you could try and justify it.
BFF
We need drivers going slowest where risks are closest and highest.
With only 2% of crashes involving a vehicle exceeding the speed limit (involving a driver over 25), clearly where risks are closest and highest we don't drive anywhere near the speed limit.
On the other hand slowing down on a clear road with no hazard in sight serves no useful purpose whatsoever.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff