Discussion
Raygun said:
C70R said:
Really excellent stuff.
This post needs to be Stickied at the top of this forum, and referred to every time this conversation is recycled.
I was caught speeding, by a van, in my irresponsible youth. I was lucky and got 3pts for 90-something on a DC, but I hadn't even noticed the van (part-obscured in a laybay, on the opposite carriageway).
Glad to hear your a reformed character as 90+ is taking the piss a bit just like exceeding 30 past schools but certain areas of 30 zones don't warrant 'doing someone' for doing 36.This post needs to be Stickied at the top of this forum, and referred to every time this conversation is recycled.
I was caught speeding, by a van, in my irresponsible youth. I was lucky and got 3pts for 90-something on a DC, but I hadn't even noticed the van (part-obscured in a laybay, on the opposite carriageway).
A bit of common sense is needed to get everyone on side.
eldar said:
Greenmantle said:
using a mobile phone - virtually every other vehicle on the A40 rush hour is doing it.
John
Not just the A40. Handheld use while driving has nearly quadrupled in two years (8% to 31% of drivers admit to doing it). A result I guess of fewer traffic cars and more cameras.John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37370828
RobinOakapple said:
When you learn to spell "voracity" correctly I still won't 'credit your opinion' more highly because your opinion about the matters under discussion is clearly based on a very distorted understanding of the issues.
about the spelling, serves me right! 
What is it you do that gives you a less distorted understanding than me of the issues being discussed? Traffic police?
eldar said:
Greenmantle said:
using a mobile phone - virtually every other vehicle on the A40 rush hour is doing it.
John
Not just the A40. Handheld use while driving has nearly quadrupled in two years (8% to 31% of drivers admit to doing it). A result I guess of fewer traffic cars and more cameras.John
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-37370828
Cat
Greenmantle said:
Cat said:
Phone use may be increasing but it certainly isn't more prevalent than speeding.
Cat
You certainty is re-assuring. Are you omnipotent?Cat
Until there is a proper study I will reserve the right to disagree.
John
Greenmantle said:
You certainty is re-assuring. Are you omnipotent?
Until there is a proper study I will reserve the right to disagree.
John
I'm not omnipotent (I think you actually mean omniscient) but nor am I stupid. It is blatantly obvious to anyone with basic cognitive and observational abilities that more drivers exceed speed limits than use a mobile phone whilst driving. Until there is a proper study I will reserve the right to disagree.
John
You reserving the right to disagree until there's a proper study doesn't alter reality.
Cat
Edited by Cat on Thursday 15th September 13:12
Heaveho said:
Did driving at 90 mph on a DC feel like you were doing something dangerous? If it were inherently dangerous, every time someone did it, someone would be injured or killed. Lots of people do this day in, day out, without incident.
Not in and of itself, no. And, in fact, I've been much, much faster on public roads without any fear for myself or anyone else.However, I'm also not stupid enough to fail to understand that the Law is sacrosanct. If you feel really strongly and want to change it, form a lobby group with some likeminded individuals and approach a friendly MP for representation.
Moaning about the way it's enforced, particularly when said enforcement is clear and absolute, achieves nothing but to make you sound like a stroppy teenager.
C70R said:
Not in and of itself, no. And, in fact, I've been much, much faster on public roads without any fear for myself or anyone else.
However, I'm also not stupid enough to fail to understand that the Law is sacrosanct. If you feel really strongly and want to change it, form a lobby group with some likeminded individuals and approach a friendly MP for representation.
Moaning about the way it's enforced, particularly when said enforcement is clear and absolute, achieves nothing but to make you sound like a stroppy teenager.
The law seems especially sacrosanct when it comes to speeding. Why do you feel it's ok to break the law yourself with regard to speeding if you don't think it's acceptable generally?However, I'm also not stupid enough to fail to understand that the Law is sacrosanct. If you feel really strongly and want to change it, form a lobby group with some likeminded individuals and approach a friendly MP for representation.
Moaning about the way it's enforced, particularly when said enforcement is clear and absolute, achieves nothing but to make you sound like a stroppy teenager.
C70R said:
TheBear said:
Heaveho said:
The conversation is more centred around the hyperactive approach to policing speeding compared to all other forms of car related misdemeanours, and the reasons behind it, ie, financial, not safety.
It's not a hyeractive approach at all. There are a teeny amount of vans in action it's just that they are incredibly efficient at processing large numbers of transgressions and above a certain threshold there is no roadside discretion. That's what people really care about when they moan about camera vans. A person might let them off, a van won't. It's that simple.
This other stuff about not detecting other aspects of driving is just sounding off at the efficiency of speed detection.
There are more resources looking at other aspects of driving on the roads everyday compared to speeding, it's just that those resources can't process anywhere near the amount of transgressions that one van can.
People don't like the odds and think they should be let off, nothing more to it than that.
I was caught speeding, by a van, in my irresponsible youth. I was lucky and got 3pts for 90-something on a DC, but I hadn't even noticed the van (part-obscured in a laybay, on the opposite carriageway).
Rather than moan about revenues and entrapment, I took this as an opportunity to improve my driving. I vowed to only exceed ~80mph where conditions are absolutely appropriate (visibility, weather, traffic etc.), and to improve my observational skills.
It's tough to have much sympathy for anyone complaining about being caught out by an easily and arbitrarily enforced law that has been in place for 50 years.
The fact that a Policeman may let them off shows that people are being convicted who shouldn't be - using an experienced Policeman as a yardstick seems entirely reasonable.
When I drive should I be watching the road and other road users or looking around for semi hidden camera vans - which is safest ?
Whilst the speeding laws have been in place a long time - car, brake, tyre technology has all improved, yet limits have DECREASED and enforcement has massively INCREASED as have the points awarded.
20 years ago it was rare to have points on your license and only absolute nutters got a ban - these days, most have points and thousands get bans - many drive through them with, of course, no insurance.
Heaveho said:
Why do you feel it's ok to break the law yourself with regard to speeding if you don't think it's acceptable generally?
Not sure where I've said that. Happy for you to point it out, but I think you'll struggle.I agree that the reality of the 70mph limit is unreasonable for some motorists and many scenarios. However, I'm also realistic enough to understand that Parliament are NEVER going to consider upping/removing these limits, because of the "Speed Kills" rhetoric.
Also, coming back to the "some motorists" bit, there's no hope that any kind of sliding scale would be implemented in such a way that does anything other than limit high-risk drivers (e.g. the Swedish model of bhp limiting).
Therefore, like a sane and sensible human-being, I speed sparingly, in the knowledge that I could potentially be punished for it. I try to mitigate for this using every tool available to me, in the knowledge that there's no cast-iron guarantee.
If I couldn't understand or rationalise all of the above, I too would probably be quite frustrated.
C70R said:
TheBear said:
Heaveho said:
What a dull, stereotypically brainwashed response. It goes without saying that if you get caught, and it's a legitimately dealt with procedure, you " take your medicine like a big boy ".
The conversation is more centred around the hyperactive approach to policing speeding compared to all other forms of car related misdemeanours, and the reasons behind it, ie, financial, not safety.
It's not a hyeractive approach at all. There are a teeny amount of vans in action it's just that they are incredibly efficient at processing large numbers of transgressions and above a certain threshold there is no roadside discretion. The conversation is more centred around the hyperactive approach to policing speeding compared to all other forms of car related misdemeanours, and the reasons behind it, ie, financial, not safety.
That's what people really care about when they moan about camera vans. A person might let them off, a van won't. It's that simple.
This other stuff about not detecting other aspects of driving is just sounding off at the efficiency of speed detection.
There are more resources looking at other aspects of driving on the roads everyday compared to speeding, it's just that those resources can't process anywhere near the amount of transgressions that one van can.
People don't like the odds and think they should be let off, nothing more to it than that.
This post needs to be Stickied at the top of this forum, and referred to every time this conversation is recycled.
I was caught speeding, by a van, in my irresponsible youth. I was lucky and got 3pts for 90-something on a DC, but I hadn't even noticed the van (part-obscured in a laybay, on the opposite carriageway).
Rather than moan about revenues and entrapment, I took this as an opportunity to improve my driving. I vowed to only exceed ~80mph where conditions are absolutely appropriate (visibility, weather, traffic etc.), and to improve my observational skills.
It's tough to have much sympathy for anyone complaining about being caught out by an easily and arbitrarily enforced law that has been in place for 50 years.
Yes some t
ts will abuse it but they always will no matter what the limit is.TX.
V8RX7 said:
C70R said:
TheBear said:
Heaveho said:
The conversation is more centred around the hyperactive approach to policing speeding compared to all other forms of car related misdemeanours, and the reasons behind it, ie, financial, not safety.
It's not a hyeractive approach at all. There are a teeny amount of vans in action it's just that they are incredibly efficient at processing large numbers of transgressions and above a certain threshold there is no roadside discretion. That's what people really care about when they moan about camera vans. A person might let them off, a van won't. It's that simple.
This other stuff about not detecting other aspects of driving is just sounding off at the efficiency of speed detection.
There are more resources looking at other aspects of driving on the roads everyday compared to speeding, it's just that those resources can't process anywhere near the amount of transgressions that one van can.
People don't like the odds and think they should be let off, nothing more to it than that.
I was caught speeding, by a van, in my irresponsible youth. I was lucky and got 3pts for 90-something on a DC, but I hadn't even noticed the van (part-obscured in a laybay, on the opposite carriageway).
Rather than moan about revenues and entrapment, I took this as an opportunity to improve my driving. I vowed to only exceed ~80mph where conditions are absolutely appropriate (visibility, weather, traffic etc.), and to improve my observational skills.
It's tough to have much sympathy for anyone complaining about being caught out by an easily and arbitrarily enforced law that has been in place for 50 years.
The fact that a Policeman may let them off shows that people are being convicted who shouldn't be - using an experienced Policeman as a yardstick seems entirely reasonable.
When I drive should I be watching the road and other road users or looking around for semi hidden camera vans - which is safest ?
Whilst the speeding laws have been in place a long time - car, brake, tyre technology has all improved, yet limits have DECREASED and enforcement has massively INCREASED as have the points awarded.
20 years ago it was rare to have points on your license and only absolute nutters got a ban - these days, most have points and thousands get bans - many drive through them with, of course, no insurance.
Re: The "watching the road not looking for camera vans" this has been done to death.
If you can't moderate your speed and be observant, you probably shouldn't be driving and definitely shouldn't be exceeding the limit.
If you can't take your eyes off the road/traffic for a moment without risking a serious accident, you should probably address your driving.
If you find yourself spending too much time looking for speed cameras, you should be more careful with your speed.
Raygun said:
Greendubber said:
What is all this get people on side business? People dont need to be 'kept on side'
It's that sort of attitude that makes 'the bores in blue' very unpopular.I'm not sure how speed enforcement can be made more 'matey'
V8RX7 said:
C70R said:
TheBear said:
Heaveho said:
The conversation is more centred around the hyperactive approach to policing speeding compared to all other forms of car related misdemeanours, and the reasons behind it, ie, financial, not safety.
It's not a hyeractive approach at all. There are a teeny amount of vans in action it's just that they are incredibly efficient at processing large numbers of transgressions and above a certain threshold there is no roadside discretion. That's what people really care about when they moan about camera vans. A person might let them off, a van won't. It's that simple.
This other stuff about not detecting other aspects of driving is just sounding off at the efficiency of speed detection.
There are more resources looking at other aspects of driving on the roads everyday compared to speeding, it's just that those resources can't process anywhere near the amount of transgressions that one van can.
People don't like the odds and think they should be let off, nothing more to it than that.
I was caught speeding, by a van, in my irresponsible youth. I was lucky and got 3pts for 90-something on a DC, but I hadn't even noticed the van (part-obscured in a laybay, on the opposite carriageway).
Rather than moan about revenues and entrapment, I took this as an opportunity to improve my driving. I vowed to only exceed ~80mph where conditions are absolutely appropriate (visibility, weather, traffic etc.), and to improve my observational skills.
It's tough to have much sympathy for anyone complaining about being caught out by an easily and arbitrarily enforced law that has been in place for 50 years.
The fact that a Policeman may let them off shows that people are being convicted who shouldn't be - using an experienced Policeman as a yardstick seems entirely reasonable.
When I drive should I be watching the road and other road users or looking around for semi hidden camera vans - which is safest ?
Whilst the speeding laws have been in place a long time - car, brake, tyre technology has all improved, yet limits have DECREASED and enforcement has massively INCREASED as have the points awarded.
20 years ago it was rare to have points on your license and only absolute nutters got a ban - these days, most have points and thousands get bans - many drive through them with, of course, no insurance.
If you don't speed you don't have to spend your time looking out for cameras.
Limits have been around a long time & there have been changes in vehicle technology. There have also been changes in traffic density & why do you assume that safety benefits from vehicle technology would be used to increase speeds/risk rather than to simply benefit from reduced risks?
Limits are reviewed regularly & some stay the same, some go down & some even go up.
The only reason 20 years ago it was rarer to have points was that detection/prosecutions were less efficient than today.
Terminator X said:
99% of people are not "law-breakers" if they speed then it's only because those 50 year old limits are out of date. Let's just say that people mostly drive at 75-85 on the m/way or DC; if say the limit was increased to 80 you wouldn't all of a sudden see them driving at 85-95 as imho that really is too fast for the majority. What would happen though is that the amount of tickets issued for speeding would collapse Yes some tts will abuse it but they always will no matter what the limit is.
TX.
They are law breakers & that doesn't make it bad law either. Yes some tts will abuse it but they always will no matter what the limit is.TX.
99%+ of drivers also commit Sec 3 RTA offences from time to time too. It doesn't make that bad law either & we shouldn't consider removing the offence because they do.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff