Difficult to present the safety argument here I feel.

[DoubleD]

Devil2575 said:

fangio said:

No point as such, just a reply to cmaguire but I knew some goody-goody would chime in, hence my last remark.
Unnecessary, but fun!

By goody-goody you mean someone who likes to base arguments on facts?

Mind you we are living in a post fact world where what matters most is not whether you can back your argument up with facts, it's how loud you shout.

Is that a fact?

[Devil2575]

DoubleD said:

Devil2575 said:

fangio said:

No point as such, just a reply to cmaguire but I knew some goody-goody would chime in, hence my last remark.
Unnecessary, but fun!

By goody-goody you mean someone who likes to base arguments on facts?

Mind you we are living in a post fact world where what matters most is not whether you can back your argument up with facts, it's how loud you shout.

Is that a fact?

Yes.

[Rovinghawk]

vonhosen said:

The government's choice ............

I'd say it's the wrong choice.

They are on the whole a bunch of scummy, self-serving parasites who contribute almost nothing.

(I have a clean licence & no SACs, btw)

[vonhosen]

Rovinghawk said:

vonhosen said:

The government's choice ............

I'd say it's the wrong choice.

They are on the whole a bunch of scummy, self-serving parasites who contribute almost nothing.

(I have a clean licence & no SACs, btw)

You'd rather the people who would have got a FPN received that than get offered a SAC in lieu of it?
Each to their own I guess.
Of course people can still take the FPN (or court hearing), they don't have to do the SAC they are just offered it if they qualify.

(I have a clean licence & no SACs, btw)

[Devil2575]

Rovinghawk said:

They are on the whole a bunch of scummy, self-serving parasites who contribute almost nothing.

That says far more about you than them.

[Rovinghawk]

vonhosen said:

You'd rather the people who would have got a FPN received that than get offered a SAC in lieu of it?

I'd rather we had sensible speed limits & reasonable enforcement as opposed to the opportunistic self-serving system currently in place.

[Corpulent Tosser]

Rovinghawk said:

I'd rather we had sensible speed limits & reasonable enforcement as opposed to the opportunistic self-serving system currently in place.

You are not keen on the current system then ?

What would you like to see introduced ?

I am curious as I think the current limits out of built up areas are often too low and think 80 maybe 90 on motorways would be acceptable, as many/most do that when traffic allows I don't think it would increase incidents.

[vonhosen]

Rovinghawk said:

vonhosen said:

You'd rather the people who would have got a FPN received that than get offered a SAC in lieu of it?

I'd rather we had sensible speed limits & reasonable enforcement as opposed to the opportunistic self-serving system currently in place.

I think a non zero tolerance policy where not insignificant amounts over the limit results in a graduated disposal/penalty system is reasonable & fair enforcement.

Of course when it comes to 'sensible' speed limits people's view of what amounts to 'sensible' is going to vary quite a bit.
I'd personally like to travel quite a bit faster than the limits at times, but I can also understand why people who have to take a much wider consideration than I do might not like me/us to be able to do that.
However, although I'd personally wish to travel faster quite a bit of the time I don't in the main find our current limits & enforcement levels to be unreasonably restrictive given that.

Sure some limits could be tweaked here or there a bit, but for the amounts the change would likely result in it's not worth any campaigning effort to do it with where they currently stand.

Edited by vonhosen on Friday 2nd December 09:30

[Rovinghawk]

Corpulent Tosser said:

You are not keen on the current system then ?

You noticed?

Corpulent Tosser said:

What would you like to see introduced ?

1 A repeal of the blanket 50mph limits introduced for no real reason followed by a tailored approach to limits, ie making them appropriate to the conditions.

2 SCPs receiving a fixed budget from central govt rather than having financial stake in issuing tickets.

3 Camera vans to be sited at 'vulnerable' points (schools, etc) rather than profitable ones.

Corpulent Tosser said:

I am curious as I think the current limits out of built up areas are often too low and think 80 maybe 90 on motorways would be acceptable, as many/most do that when traffic allows I don't think it would increase incidents.

Where conditions allow, then yes. In tandem with this I'd support greater enforcement for tread depth, tailgating, lane discipline, etc. rather than the obsession with speed.

[The Surveyor]

Rovinghawk said:

Corpulent Tosser said:

You are not keen on the current system then ?

You noticed?

Corpulent Tosser said:

What would you like to see introduced ?

1 A repeal of the blanket 50mph limits introduced for no real reason followed by a tailored approach to limits, ie making them appropriate to the conditions.

2 SCPs receiving a fixed budget from central govt rather than having financial stake in issuing tickets.

3 Camera vans to be sited at 'vulnerable' points (schools, etc) rather than profitable ones.

Corpulent Tosser said:

I am curious as I think the current limits out of built up areas are often too low and think 80 maybe 90 on motorways would be acceptable, as many/most do that when traffic allows I don't think it would increase incidents.

Where conditions allow, then yes. In tandem with this I'd support greater enforcement for tread depth, tailgating, lane discipline, etc. rather than the obsession with speed.

All sensible suggestions, and will would generally be well received on a 'speed matters' forum like this. You'll be the devil incarnate to the 'speed kills' mob for example.

The main difficulty would be 'if' those suggestions were implemented, and 'if' there was an increase in fatalities then would that be acceptable?

It's the fear of that scenario that means it's easier for the politicians to take the 'safe' route and agree with the 'speed kills' view. Whether right or wrong, that is why they will never increase speed limits, ever.

[funkyrobot]

Rovinghawk said:

I'd rather we had sensible speed limits & reasonable enforcement as opposed to the opportunistic self-serving system currently in place.

I don't think the sensible speed limit idea works.

Who on here would argue about 30mph through a residential area? Well, it seems that most drivers (my opinion is backed up by recent speed surveys I have witnessed) who pass my house think 30 mph is far too slow.

I'm talking silly speeds here too. Quite unnerving when you are walking along a pavement with your two year old and some dumb tt zooms past at 50mph or above.

[Corpulent Tosser]

Rovinghawk said:

1 A repeal of the blanket 50mph limits introduced for no real reason followed by a tailored approach to limits, ie making them appropriate to the conditions.

2 SCPs receiving a fixed budget from central govt rather than having financial stake in issuing tickets.

3 Camera vans to be sited at 'vulnerable' points (schools, etc) rather than profitable ones.

1. Variable speed limits ? It works on motorways with gantry signs but not workable in most locations, so the speed limits have to reflect if not worst case conditions certainly sub-optimal conditions.

2. Not sure it would make much difference, and it certainly makes no difference to me which pot my fine goes into.

3. They are often sited at sites such as schools etc and there should probably be more focus on these areas, however they are also sited where there is history, or likelihood of catching people speeding (breaking the law) so generally I don't have much issue with the siting, there are exceptions.

[Devil2575]

funkyrobot said:

Who on here would argue about 30mph through a residential area? Well, it seems that most drivers (my opinion is backed up by recent speed surveys I have witnessed) who pass my house think 30 mph is far too slow.

I'm talking silly speeds here too. Quite unnerving when you are walking along a pavement with your two year old and some dumb tt zooms past at 50mph or above.

They're clearly right it is too slow. If you or your two year old get hit then it's clearly a case of natural selection as you should have taught him/yourself the Green cross code.

And no, for the avoidance of doubt I don't think that.