Speed Awareness Courses - Do they work?
Discussion
TwigtheWonderkid said:
cmaguire said:
I'll take the 5200. I won't be one of them or responsible for any of them.
Really? Of course you're a flawless driver, that goes without saying (
) but don't you think it's possible that you might be killed by someone else's stupidity?I can pretty much guarantee I will see an example of it on every journey I make.
However the percentage which is down to exceeding the applicable speed limit is pretty low.
As I'm a human being I'm not immune either, although I try my best not to
up.The problem with the obsessive focus on speed is that it creates a false mindset.
As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.
Our driving test should be akin to those of the Scandinavian countries.
The requirements for obtaining a UK licence are not sufficiently rigorous.
Mill Wheel said:
vonhosen said:
It's not about us as individuals, it's one size for all.
Good... so let us see driving with fog lights on 24/7 prosecuted to the same extent as speeding - when I am cycling home in the dark it is more dangerous than drivers exceeding the speed limit, as the extra dazzle removes my ability to see the cycle path margins!How about dodgy number plates? They are easy to spot and trace.
Missing headlights?
Careless driving?
Nobody is keen to see ANY of those offences addressed, as there is no money in it for the authorities.
Better to simply set up a camera on a section of road where drivers routinely stray over the speed limit, and penalise them while the majority of dangerous practice on the roads remains, and continues to lead to accidents and resulting injuries, fatalities and hold ups on our roads.
People are prosecuted for those offences, just not to the degree that speeding, yellow lines, no right turns, red lights, bus lanes etc are.
That's because it's the Police who have to get the evidence & prosecute for lighting offences, number plate offences & careless driving etc & they are too busy with other stuff.
On the other hand speeding, yellow lines, no right turns, red lights, bus lanes etc have been farmed out to other agencies who don't have to worry about the other stuff Police are busy with, so they can give those offences their full attention (which is the reason those offences were given to them to deal with so the Police wouldn't have to bother with them.)
silverfoxcc said:
Gavia said:
Explain "kerching".
Kerching pronounced Ker-ChingSound made by a Jewish Piano.... origin Golders Green /Stamford Hill London in 1950's possibly earlier
Here's my full quote, so that your unbelievably laugh out loud comment can be put into perspective with the rest of the point that was really being made
Gavia said:
Explain "kerching".
If you're offered a course you're paying a fine of £100 or for an SAC (normally around the £100 mark), or if you're really daft arguing it all the way to court and getting stuck with a much higher fine and victim surcharge.
Just because a provider is making money out of it doesn't make it automatically bad.
If you're offered a course you're paying a fine of £100 or for an SAC (normally around the £100 mark), or if you're really daft arguing it all the way to court and getting stuck with a much higher fine and victim surcharge.
Just because a provider is making money out of it doesn't make it automatically bad.
Red Devil said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
cmaguire said:
I'll take the 5200. I won't be one of them or responsible for any of them.
Really? Of course you're a flawless driver, that goes without saying () but don't you think it's possible that you might be killed by someone else's stupidity?If your are going to be crashed into by a t
t, you want that to happen at a lower speed. singlecoil said:
Red Devil said:
As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.
Have heard this strawman many many times on similar threads.TwigtheWonderkid said:
Red Devil said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
cmaguire said:
I'll take the 5200. I won't be one of them or responsible for any of them.
Really? Of course you're a flawless driver, that goes without saying () but don't you think it's possible that you might be killed by someone else's stupidity?If your are going to be crashed into by a t
t, you want that to happen at a lower speed. JNW1 said:
singlecoil said:
Red Devil said:
As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.
Have heard this strawman many many times on similar threads.singlecoil said:
JNW1 said:
singlecoil said:
Red Devil said:
As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.
Have heard this strawman many many times on similar threads.
Devil2575 said:
Guybrush said:
It's because cars are much safer now, even though there're faster and many more of them..over 310 billion miles a year travelled in the UK and a high percentage exceeding stupidly low speed limits on a daily basis. Unless the figures are lower because there a far fewer police on the roads.
Safer cars is just one factor. You can't say for certain how much of the reduction in fatalities is down to that. Speed cameras turned OFF in Northamptonshire... http://www.roadsafetyknowledgecentre.org.uk/knowle...
Road Safety Analysis said:
In the period after the cameras were switched off, the findings highlight a 45% reduction in KSI at camera sites (29 to 16), compared to a 27% reduction across the rest of the county’s road network (1,628 to 1,193). In the same period, casualties of all types at camera sites were down 21% (from 90 to 71) while across Northamptonshire’s other roads there was a 29% fall (from 7,293 to 5,189).
Vehicle manufacturers make decisions on what features they can add to a vehicle on commercially based data - and have added features which cost hundreds of pounds because they work, and because owners are prepared to pay to have them.If they didn't work they would not be included.
Drivers fear getting caught. With a speed awareness course to fall back on, many will be happy to push the boundaries - just as the course tutor saw fit to take a risk which ended in the death of an unfortunate victim of her haste.
This was highlighted in a recent study on SUPPORT and COMPLIANCE.
University of West England said:
This paper reports a study undertaken by the authors that used a population wide survey of GB drivers to explore how support and compliance were interlinked. Whilst as expected many supporters said they would comply with the limits, and many opponents might not comply, more surprisingly it was also found that some supporters claimed not to comply, while some opponents of 20 mph limits were compliers. Explanations included the strong likelihood of strong moral adherence to not breaking laws amongst opponent–compliers, and self-enhancement bias amongst supporter–non-compliers.
cmaguire said:
As far as cameras go, dump all of them and chances are the effect on road deaths would be nominal anyway, particularly on Motorways.
I'd take 2000-2500 deaths over what we have now to get rid of all the current cr@p, which is probably a realistic number of deaths if we did.
But this is all just made up numbers though isn't it. You have no idea what would happen, you're just picking numbers to suit your argument.I'd take 2000-2500 deaths over what we have now to get rid of all the current cr@p, which is probably a realistic number of deaths if we did.
singlecoil said:
Red Devil said:
As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.
Have heard this strawman many many times on similar threads.vonhosen said:
No, that's simply not true.
People are prosecuted for those offences, just not to the degree that speeding, yellow lines, no right turns, red lights, bus lanes etc are.
That's because it's the Police who have to get the evidence & prosecute for lighting offences, number plate offences & careless driving etc & they are too busy with other stuff.
Elsewhere you stated that it's done to the extent it's done because it's easy. Don't deny it now.People are prosecuted for those offences, just not to the degree that speeding, yellow lines, no right turns, red lights, bus lanes etc are.
That's because it's the Police who have to get the evidence & prosecute for lighting offences, number plate offences & careless driving etc & they are too busy with other stuff.
Rovinghawk said:
vonhosen said:
No, that's simply not true.
People are prosecuted for those offences, just not to the degree that speeding, yellow lines, no right turns, red lights, bus lanes etc are.
That's because it's the Police who have to get the evidence & prosecute for lighting offences, number plate offences & careless driving etc & they are too busy with other stuff.
Elsewhere you stated that it's done to the extent it's done because it's easy. Don't deny it now.People are prosecuted for those offences, just not to the degree that speeding, yellow lines, no right turns, red lights, bus lanes etc are.
That's because it's the Police who have to get the evidence & prosecute for lighting offences, number plate offences & careless driving etc & they are too busy with other stuff.
It's because it's simple, low level and binary it was given to them to deal with, so that the Police could deal with more important matters.
They do more of it because they aren't distracted by other matters & it's easy for them to detect/prove.
Edited by vonhosen on Thursday 8th December 13:48
Devil2575 said:
singlecoil said:
Red Devil said:
As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.
Have heard this strawman many many times on similar threads.JNW1 said:
singlecoil said:
JNW1 said:
singlecoil said:
Red Devil said:
As a result far too many people think that driving below the limit is therefore synonymous with safety.
Have heard this strawman many many times on similar threads.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff