RE: Six points for speeding
Discussion
A lot of people earlier agreed with someone who made comments that people who get hit on the road for not concentrating deserve to die?!
What if your mum, dad, sister, girlfriend was crossing the road whilst on their mobile, or walking with a friend and not concentrating, then simply walked out without judjing the appraching cars speed properly, gets hit at more than the speed limit indicates, and due to that higher speed, their chance of survival is reduced massively?
Your opinion would not be, "yeah, miss you mum, but you deserved to die, how dare you not concentrate when crossing the road you inhuman beast, Im glad that driver was doing 40mph in a 30, and killed you, when 30mph would have simply injured you badly and you would be alive"
You need your heads examining. People do make mistakes when crossing the road, but driving a dangerous machine should surely hold much more responsibility, as well as padestrians concentrating more as well.
What if your mum, dad, sister, girlfriend was crossing the road whilst on their mobile, or walking with a friend and not concentrating, then simply walked out without judjing the appraching cars speed properly, gets hit at more than the speed limit indicates, and due to that higher speed, their chance of survival is reduced massively?
Your opinion would not be, "yeah, miss you mum, but you deserved to die, how dare you not concentrate when crossing the road you inhuman beast, Im glad that driver was doing 40mph in a 30, and killed you, when 30mph would have simply injured you badly and you would be alive"
You need your heads examining. People do make mistakes when crossing the road, but driving a dangerous machine should surely hold much more responsibility, as well as padestrians concentrating more as well.
All speed limits should be scrapped and replaced with tougher careless and dangerous driving laws enforced by real human police officers.
And to the poster who said that you deserve all you get for 45mph in a 30 limit: Well, I know loads of 30 limits where 45pmh would be perfectly safe and acceptable.
And to the poster who said that you deserve all you get for 45mph in a 30 limit: Well, I know loads of 30 limits where 45pmh would be perfectly safe and acceptable.
I am a physicist from Germany with engineering background and considered doing my PhD about vehicle simulation in the UK. Experiencing the workaday reality of motoring compared to our still mostly nanny-free roads, I decided to stay in Germany, where a Lotus can be used on B-roads properly.
doddy1982 said:
A lot of people earlier agreed with someone who made comments that people who get hit on the road for not concentrating deserve to die?!
What if your mum, dad, sister, girlfriend was crossing the road whilst on their mobile, or walking with a friend and not concentrating, then simply walked out without judjing the appraching cars speed properly, gets hit at more than the speed limit indicates, and due to that higher speed, their chance of survival is reduced massively?
Your opinion would not be, "yeah, miss you mum, but you deserved to die, how dare you not concentrate when crossing the road you inhuman beast, Im glad that driver was doing 40mph in a 30, and killed you, when 30mph would have simply injured you badly and you would be alive"
You need your heads examining. People do make mistakes when crossing the road, but driving a dangerous machine should surely hold much more responsibility, as well as padestrians concentrating more as well.
Yes, blame the driver. It's all his fault. Blanket 20mph limits everywhere What if your mum, dad, sister, girlfriend was crossing the road whilst on their mobile, or walking with a friend and not concentrating, then simply walked out without judjing the appraching cars speed properly, gets hit at more than the speed limit indicates, and due to that higher speed, their chance of survival is reduced massively?
Your opinion would not be, "yeah, miss you mum, but you deserved to die, how dare you not concentrate when crossing the road you inhuman beast, Im glad that driver was doing 40mph in a 30, and killed you, when 30mph would have simply injured you badly and you would be alive"
You need your heads examining. People do make mistakes when crossing the road, but driving a dangerous machine should surely hold much more responsibility, as well as padestrians concentrating more as well.
If you are a soft squidgy thing, then you should take a lot more care of big hard moving metal things.
It's not rocket science.
And cut the emotive bullshit, it doesn't go down well here.
Perhaps you'd be better off at Brake?
PhantomPH said:
Who is Jim Thingy? It's stated like I should know. :shrug:
30mph limits are there for a reason and should be adhered to - but I think that before people start getting sweeping about their statements, it should be acknowledged that not all 30 limits are appropriate for the road.
P~
Agreed.30mph limits are there for a reason and should be adhered to - but I think that before people start getting sweeping about their statements, it should be acknowledged that not all 30 limits are appropriate for the road.
P~
In Bucks this year a large number of roads had their speed limit lowered to 30, 40 & 50 limits for seemingly no reason (would be nice if they did the roadmarking aswell, so the new limit is enforcable, but that's another matter).
What the council fail to realise is that by imposing an unrealistic limit, a larger number of people will simply choose to ignore it. And we don't really want to encourage that.
It is essential that drivers respect speed limits, in order to acheive this they must be appropriate.
In addition, accident records need to be examined properly, some of the accidents are simply nothing to do with the speed of the road or traffic that uses it.
Rant over.
On the subject of points for speeding, why can't they just make it simple and stick with it.
Things seem to get more and more complicated as time goes on and there are constant changes to the rules. Soon the only people who will know the rules properly will be the ones writing them. Not good for the motorist really.
Seems to me the "Pistonheads ethos" is cars first, everything else 2nd. How can you even dare to say I shouldn't bring the emotive side into things?! I agree, roads are for cars, and pavements are for people, but drivers and padestrians make mistakes. I am simply agreeing that greater punishment for excessive speeding in built up areas is a good idea to deter foolish people who disregard to law, and drive with such arrogance. Do you actually understand what I write, or is it to intelligent and down to earth for you? Or has that last comment made you so angry, you want to beat your chest and speed off into the sunset wiping out insignificant people crossing your path as they are foolish enough to dare be in the road EVER.
To finalise my point:
1) New law, good idea, speeding in built up areas is not a good idea really, whats the point?
2) People should cross the road properly.
3) Idiots doing something completely stupid when crossing the road don't "deserve" to get hit and injured/killed.
How should this effect your happy life of blasting down a derestricted b-road? Surely residential areas where people are likely to be, and are likely to get hit are not places you would naturally go for a blast?!
Speeding laws get you lots so riled up!!! They are simply punishing people more who are blatantly taking the p.i.s.s out of the law?!
To finalise my point:
1) New law, good idea, speeding in built up areas is not a good idea really, whats the point?
2) People should cross the road properly.
3) Idiots doing something completely stupid when crossing the road don't "deserve" to get hit and injured/killed.
How should this effect your happy life of blasting down a derestricted b-road? Surely residential areas where people are likely to be, and are likely to get hit are not places you would naturally go for a blast?!
Speeding laws get you lots so riled up!!! They are simply punishing people more who are blatantly taking the p.i.s.s out of the law?!
spoonoff said:
Obviously in residential areas it's a no-brainer.
Let's consider the far less common senario of, say, a deserted 10 mile stretch of duel carrigeway, that for whatever reason is under a 30 mph limit. You would be tempted to put your foot down, but you aren't going to enjoy the drive any more at 45 than at 30.
Time taken to cover the distance at 45 mph: 13 minutes 20 seconds.
Time taken to cover it at 30 mph: 20 minutes.
So the pertinent question is really, what exactly do you intend to do with the extra 6 minutes 40 seconds???
Speed saves time, and time is life.Let's consider the far less common senario of, say, a deserted 10 mile stretch of duel carrigeway, that for whatever reason is under a 30 mph limit. You would be tempted to put your foot down, but you aren't going to enjoy the drive any more at 45 than at 30.
Time taken to cover the distance at 45 mph: 13 minutes 20 seconds.
Time taken to cover it at 30 mph: 20 minutes.
So the pertinent question is really, what exactly do you intend to do with the extra 6 minutes 40 seconds???
There is so much unscientific claptrap being talked on this subject.
The facts actually are, that only a small proportion of crashes are caused by speeding. The vast majority are caused by error or inattention or similar.
It is safest to make judgements for yourself, and take responsibility for your actions. There is a continual assessment of risk and speed going on in all driver's minds, better in experienced and thinking ones. Blindly obeying a set of commands is not as good, no matter how low the limit. Anything that takes away or dimishes thought, judgement and responsibility is a bad think and will lead to an increase in crashes.
The policy is wrong, wrong, wrong. We need realistic limits and training. A law that 90% of drivers reularly break cannot be a good one. What other law do you know of like this?
The facts actually are, that only a small proportion of crashes are caused by speeding. The vast majority are caused by error or inattention or similar.
It is safest to make judgements for yourself, and take responsibility for your actions. There is a continual assessment of risk and speed going on in all driver's minds, better in experienced and thinking ones. Blindly obeying a set of commands is not as good, no matter how low the limit. Anything that takes away or dimishes thought, judgement and responsibility is a bad think and will lead to an increase in crashes.
The policy is wrong, wrong, wrong. We need realistic limits and training. A law that 90% of drivers reularly break cannot be a good one. What other law do you know of like this?
Edited by rbryant on Friday 9th November 17:23
doddy1982 said:
I am simply agreeing that greater punishment for excessive speeding in built up areas is a good idea
There is already a greater punishment for speeding. Since the introduction of speed cameras, the chances of being prosecuted for speeding has increased by a huge amount (anyone know the exact figure?) therefore so has the chances of toting up 12 points. This to me is already a greater punishment. To propose to increase the chance losing one's licence even further is just like rubbing salt into the wound.
Like someone else has already said, a law that 90% of people break cannot be a good one.
An article on TV on this subject said that 50% of drivers admitted to breakin the speed limit. If speeding was that dangerous then 50% of all drivers would be causing accidents. If they do bring in this penalty system, which I feel is a nonesense, they will likely see that road accident and death figures will stay about the same. I don't really have an issue with harsher penalties for speeding in built up areas but how does that stop joy riders? All they'll get is a drivin ban on a licence they don't have and a £100 fine. Big whoop! How can doing 95mph on a motorway be dangerous when on sections of Autobahn, which are arguably similar, that speed can be seen as being perfectly acceptable. Our Government seem to be cluthcing at straws whereas Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor, has rejected recent calls for an 80mph speed limit on the autobahn. Do you think that would have happened here?
doddy1982 said:
They are simply punishing people more who are blatantly taking the p.i.s.s out of the law?!
I don't respect the law because the law is wrong.Before there were speed limits in this country, people still crashed and people stil died, yet no one was "speeding" because there was no law to brake.
Crashing kills, not speeding. It would therefore make more sense to give anybody who causes a crash 6 points - regardless of whether they weren't speeding or driving without due care and attention or drunk etc. They crashed - therefore they clearly did something wrong and should be punished accordingly, to act as a deterrant and focus the mind in future. Crash twice and you're banned for a year. Police unable to establish who was to blame when two cars crash? - both drivers get 6 points.
Crashes don't "just happen" - someone
ed up and it's usually because of poor driving habits, lack of anticipation and foresight or lack of attention. These are what need to be stamped out to make the roads safer.......probably quite difficult to make any money out of it though, I would imagine....Bing o said:
doddy1982 said:
It seems to me this new law has been introduced because people do speed too much in built up areas (30mph zones). I agree whole heartedly with the punishment of 6 points if you do 45 in a 30. That is quite a big difference in speed, and a person being hit at 50% greater speed than they would have been if the driver was not speeding will make a massive difference to survival chances.
I know people should not be in the road at all when cars are there, and cross the road in a much safer and more sensible fashion, (stop, look, listen, think then cross, I learnt this when I was a kid!) but people are quite often plain stupid or easily distracted when they should be concentrating, yet it would be nice to know if you make that error when crossing, there is someone doing the speed limit.
All I do in the speed debates is say 2 things.
1) People should learn how to cross the road properly.
2) Imagine a loved one was run over by a speeder in a 30mph limit and died. Those who argue against the idea would feel very different then.
FFS, lets put in a blanket limit of 10 mph everywhere so no-one will die...I know people should not be in the road at all when cars are there, and cross the road in a much safer and more sensible fashion, (stop, look, listen, think then cross, I learnt this when I was a kid!) but people are quite often plain stupid or easily distracted when they should be concentrating, yet it would be nice to know if you make that error when crossing, there is someone doing the speed limit.
All I do in the speed debates is say 2 things.
1) People should learn how to cross the road properly.
2) Imagine a loved one was run over by a speeder in a 30mph limit and died. Those who argue against the idea would feel very different then.
Accidents happen, people should be more responsible for their own actions rather than relying on someoone else to bail them out. If you are too
ing stupid not to be looking where you are going when there are 2 ton pieces of metal flying about then you are too stupid to live, and your swift removal from the gene pool will be of immense benefit to everyone.I agree that some limits are stupid, and shouldn't be 30. Any residential areas should be 30, schools should be 20 but give you lots of warning so you can slow down economically and safely.
I think part of the problem is people push you. Having only recently passed my test, (july) I have noticed that nearly all drivers will get right up my arse and try to force me to go faster than 30. Some have been so close that it would have been safer to speed up and then pull over and let the idiots go. Speeding is not the only problem, its also irresponsible and impatient drivers and ignorant pedestrians who think they always have right of way.
Don't think I'm a spoil sport by this, I'm as much of a speed freak as most of the people on here, but there is a time and a place for it, 30 zones, even 40 zones isn't the place and people need to realise this.
Rocky Balboa said:
Speed saves time, and time is life.
Indeed.The very reason the car exists at all is
that it's faster than a horse.
Interesting to note that the UK Gov
are using a "stick and stick" approach.
They propose to act more severely with
the 45'in'30 club and they propose
to act more severely with the 95'in'a
widely ignored'70 club.
This doesn't seem fair to me.
While I've got no major problem with
the 45'in'30 solution, I've got major
problems with the 95'in'70 solution.
Are they seriously suggesting the ten
per cent or so of all UK drivers who
are doing those sorts of speeds are
going to get caught ?
I think not - the prisons are full.
doddy1982 said:
How should this effect your happy life of blasting down a derestricted b-road? Surely residential areas where people are likely to be, and are likely to get hit are not places you would naturally go for a blast?!
Speeding laws get you lots so riled up!!! They are simply punishing people more who are blatantly taking the p.i.s.s out of the law?!
I don't think you're getting the full story mate. The proposed new law doesn't just target people speeding in built up areas, it also applies to people doing 94+ on a motorway.Speeding laws get you lots so riled up!!! They are simply punishing people more who are blatantly taking the p.i.s.s out of the law?!
The reason 'us lot' get so riled by all these anti-speed laws is that, as any good driver knows (and what the Government's own stats even show!), speeding isn't what causes the vast majority of accidents, its shite driving. Shite driving can happen below the speed limit and still cause accidents.
'Speed Kills', Brake, speed cameras, speed bumps, none of these things stop shite driving, in fact they go as far as letting people away with it!
seanmaccann said:
Oh my god! I've only just read the Executive Summary and I am already amazed at the complete sense this guy is talking!I think the following quote should be the last thing said in this debate, because it nails it completely!
"Every reasonable person wants effective road safety measures, but for them to be effective, they need the support and acceptance of the public. People do not respond to being hectored, bullied and unduly penalised. The “carrot” as well as the “stick” must be employed."
spoonoff said:
If you are doing over 45 in a 30 zone you deserve what you get.
Where I live, a country road that I've used for 10 years was a 60 mph limit. Then one day... 30 mph signs popped up. Everyone does 40 to 50 mph on this section of road despite the 30 mph signs. In the 10 years that it was a 60 mph zone, I never saw one accident.I'm not saying that I am against 30 mph limits, etc. What I am saying is though... that the people that set these limits need to properly evaluate the road in question and come up with a sensible limit for the type of road and conditions, etc. Not 'blanket' the area with 30 mph zones regardless.
I live in Buckinghamshire, where recently, the council's (or whoever) have gone mad with 30 signs nearly everywhere. I don't think the roads are any safer at all... just frustrating slow in places where they needn't be.
They think throwing up 30 mph signs everywhere is the answer... it's not. Because people get frustrated with the snail like pace and speed anyway. Far better to have a limit that is 'progressing' without being frustrating. People are more likely to stick to reasonable, well thought out limits... I do.
This will simply add to the growing underclass of motorists who don't register/insure their cars as people are prepared to take greater risks (PCJ) to avoid big points.
Speeding motorists should be physically pulled over by police officers and each incident dealt with appropriately. Like wot we used to do.
Speeding motorists should be physically pulled over by police officers and each incident dealt with appropriately. Like wot we used to do.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff