Watch out for Tractors
Discussion
Devil2575 said:
This story isn't concerned with drivers doing 40/50/60 though is it. It's specifically about drivers doing 90 mph + in a 60 limit.
I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
Do you have any guarantees that it will stay that way? I have my doubts.I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
Just for starters, if they detect someone going at just above the prosecution threshold then I don't think they're allowed any discretion in the matter.
If they really want to keep speeds down over the length of the road then why don't they just stick up a pair of SPECS cameras? - job done!
They have more than enough of them around motorway roadworks, where they arguably do more harm than good.
Edited by Pete317 on Thursday 1st October 21:54
Devil2575 said:
This story isn't concerned with drivers doing 40/50/60 though is it. It's specifically about drivers doing 90 mph + in a 60 limit.
I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
It's funny, but all too often the fact that some people are exceeding the legal speed limit on a road, is used to justify lowering the limit!!I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
No doubt as we debate this, somebody is already thinking the 60 should be a 50!
Pete317 said:
I'm not the one pushing fundamental and far-reaching changes to enforcement
Who is doing that? Pete317 said:
seemingly on the basis of someone thinking it's a good idea. Where's the justification? Where's the research? Where's the evidence?
For what, precisely? Punitive measures present us with facing a loss. Humans are averse to losses, which is a fundamental principle of psychology. Punitive measures are a fundamental part of the justice system to stop people from offending / re-offending. Targeting those doing excess speed at the speeds they are targeting = going to court with the outcome probably being quite a few points on the speeder's licence. This makes the threat, and the loss, of their licence within touching distance. This increases the probability of behaviour change to avoid the loss.
Greendubber said:
RobinOakapple said:
It's difficult to be sympathetic with such a case. If she was unable to observe speed limits despite having been caught several times, what other rules of the road was she breaking?
If only she had been caught 4 times before and slowed down...Its a black and white offence because if you start bringing disability etc into account where do you draw the line? Tough s
t in my opinion, shes clearly not adjusted her driving style so she only has herself to blame.Meanwhile all those pricks with a tomtom barrel along way above the limit then brake hard when the warning goes off.
Who needs to change their behaviour?
Hackney said:
If she's anything like my mum she was caught doing 34 on a very steep hill in her 900c Hyundai automatic. Frankly I'm amazed it could get up to 34 on that hill. She knew the camera was there but was concentrating ON DRIVING.
Meanwhile all those pricks with a tomtom barrel along way above the limit then brake hard when the warning goes off.
Who needs to change their behaviour?
She cant have been concentrating that hard.. Meanwhile all those pricks with a tomtom barrel along way above the limit then brake hard when the warning goes off.
Who needs to change their behaviour?
Greendubber said:
Hackney said:
If she's anything like my mum she was caught doing 34 on a very steep hill in her 900c Hyundai automatic. Frankly I'm amazed it could get up to 34 on that hill. She knew the camera was there but was concentrating ON DRIVING.
Meanwhile all those pricks with a tomtom barrel along way above the limit then brake hard when the warning goes off.
Who needs to change their behaviour?
She cant have been concentrating that hard.. Meanwhile all those pricks with a tomtom barrel along way above the limit then brake hard when the warning goes off.
Who needs to change their behaviour?
Mill Wheel said:
Devil2575 said:
This story isn't concerned with drivers doing 40/50/60 though is it. It's specifically about drivers doing 90 mph + in a 60 limit.
I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
It's funny, but all too often the fact that some people are exceeding the legal speed limit on a road, is used to justify lowering the limit!!I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
No doubt as we debate this, somebody is already thinking the 60 should be a 50!
Pete317 said:
Devil2575 said:
This story isn't concerned with drivers doing 40/50/60 though is it. It's specifically about drivers doing 90 mph + in a 60 limit.
I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
Do you have any guarantees that it will stay that way? I have my doubts.I don't wish to get into a debate about speed limits but there is a vast difference between doing 60mph on a road that used to be NSL but has been lowered to 50 and doing 90+ on a road where those kinds of speeds are too fast when other road users are involved.
Just for starters, if they detect someone going at just above the prosecution threshold then I don't think they're allowed any discretion in the matter.
You could use that logic to try and justify stopping people doing a great many things.
Pete317 said:
If they really want to keep speeds down over the length of the road then why don't they just stick up a pair of SPECS cameras? - job done!
They have more than enough of them around motorway roadworks, where they arguably do more harm than good.
Specs do more harm than good? Have you got any proof of that?They have more than enough of them around motorway roadworks, where they arguably do more harm than good.
Edited by Pete317 on Thursday 1st October 21:54
Maybe they don't want to go down the line of rigid enforcement that specs would bring or maybe they don't think they would stop the kind of behaviour they are trying to stop? On a motorway you can't have a quick blast and then stop to bring down your average like you could on the road in question.
You'r objecting to the subject of the story by shifting your argument to a different situation.
dacouch said:
I've heard the Dutch Police use even sneakier tactics.
It does not bother me as I don't speed, but maybe the guidelines should be reviewed as this appears to go against the current guidelines
There are no current guidelines. Even when this guidance was introduced by the DfT it had within it that they were optional so police could, if they wished, follow absolutely none of it.It does not bother me as I don't speed, but maybe the guidelines should be reviewed as this appears to go against the current guidelines
It would seem that you as well as the Sun journalist have simply not read them but are still willing to comment as if you have.
PAULJ5555 said:
They should just hide all speed cameras then people will have to stick to the limit as you never know where they are.
I can see your point and it is valid. You don't need to hide all of them though, having a few visible ones reminds people there are some in operation; you should however hide most of them for the best effect.tapereel said:
I can see your point and it is valid. You don't need to hide all of them though, having a few visible ones reminds people there are some in operation; you should however hide most of them for the best effect.
What is the best effect? Less offenders, more prosecutions or anything else?
rewc said:
tapereel said:
I can see your point and it is valid. You don't need to hide all of them though, having a few visible ones reminds people there are some in operation; you should however hide most of them for the best effect.
What is the best effect? Less offenders, more prosecutions or anything else?
RobinOakapple said:
The best effect would be less speeders, from my POV. And that would be the inevitable consequence of large scale use of hidden cameras.
Perhaps if there were less offenders the Police would make some up?http://www.fleetnews.co.uk/news/manufacturer-news/...
RobinOakapple said:
rewc said:
tapereel said:
I can see your point and it is valid. You don't need to hide all of them though, having a few visible ones reminds people there are some in operation; you should however hide most of them for the best effect.
What is the best effect? Less offenders, more prosecutions or anything else?
tapereel said:
That would be my POV too.
I doubt Dorset Police would see it that way. They have got used to retaining the surplus from Driver Awareness Courses to fund their activities. How would they explain how all those covert cameras were having no effect on the county's KSI collisions?rewc said:
tapereel said:
That would be my POV too.
I doubt Dorset Police would see it that way. They have got used to retaining the surplus from Driver Awareness Courses to fund their activities. How would they explain how all those covert cameras were having no effect on the county's KSI collisions?If the modern thinking on speed enforcement has the desired effect of everyone staying below the speed limits the real reason for most accidents will then have to be finally addressed .Driving standards , more and more driving along with thumb in bum and mind in the clouds .Until we have people reading the road ahead not just reacting to whats happening 15 ft in front of them the accident rate will continue .
With the current level of police staffing the chance of police educating the public is slim and will only get worse .
Speed cameras only catch speeders , flashing speed warnings slow people down which is the desired effect but they don't develop revenue .
With the current level of police staffing the chance of police educating the public is slim and will only get worse .
Speed cameras only catch speeders , flashing speed warnings slow people down which is the desired effect but they don't develop revenue .
RobinOakapple said:
That presupposes that there would be no effect. But if people were, on average, driving more slowly then simple physics requires that those accidents that occur would be less serious, and some would be avoided altogether.
Perhaps we should bring back the red flag act.GoodOlBoy said:
RobinOakapple said:
That presupposes that there would be no effect. But if people were, on average, driving more slowly then simple physics requires that those accidents that occur would be less serious, and some would be avoided altogether.
Perhaps we should bring back the red flag act.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff