Speed Awareness Courses - Do they work?
Discussion
funkyrobot said:
vonhosen said:
Corpulent Tosser said:
vonhosen said:
Fed & thriving mainly from the contributions of plums.
Thats a bit harsh, refering to people who break the speed limit by a relatively small margin as 'plums'
Jasandjules said:
The Govt to focus on the main causes of accidents in order to actually reduce the deaths and serious injuries on the roads.
BUT that would cost money, not make it.
What are these main causes of accidents?BUT that would cost money, not make it.
Why does that approach have to result in the current approach being removed? Why can't they run concurrently?
vonhosen said:
mybrainhurts said:
Of course they work.
Just like a money tree, only better.
Fed & thriving mainly from the contributions of plums.Just like a money tree, only better.
ks again.Driving isn't an exact science, you need fuzzy logic to drive. However, the laws and more importantly now, the way they are enforced are binary.
As I have said umpteen times, driving on the road is by miles the least sensitive to forward speed of all of the driving I do. But woe betide me if I should stray above the speed limit, because no matter the conditions, it's prosecution time for you sunny boy.
We only have to look at how people have been treated in box junctions that are enforced by camera. There's a gap across the junction, you continue forward, someone pushes in front of you and now you're stuck in a yellow box of prosecution hell.
Street lights on a road = 30, no? There has been a plague of lowered speed limits in Essex for seemingly inexplicable reasons. So you're driving along a road in Essex with street lights on, that looks like it really should be NSL, but there are street lights and there's not much by way of repeaters, so do you slow to 30 or risk it? But lo, a repeater is hanging forth of a lamp post. He's a bit grubby and tells me it's a 40. So we're on a road that by any sensible measure should be 60, the lamps and lack of repeaters suggest so window licker thinks it should be 30, but just to add to the confusion an easily missed sign says 40. And you have the audacity to suggest people are "plums" when they get tripped up by local authorities sowing tonne bags of seeds of doubt in their minds.
There was a time when 30's, 40's and NSL's were quite obvious, but now the speed limit is 10, 20 and sometimes 30mph lower than the road was initially intended for. Then a camera gets chucked up and around here, more often than not it is positioned so it's obscured, maybe not totally, put usually at least partially by street furniture.
When I'm driving at work it's quite usual to be tweaking the speed by 0.1km/hr at a time. Some times the forward speed is part of a formula and I have to stop and do some sums to work out how fast to go. I have pages and pages of notes in my cab with these sums on. Other times, the number of the dash* is meaningless, but the forward speed is still critical. Too fast or too slow and the application rate is wrong every time. Too fast or too slow and what ever machine I am using is over or under loaded every time. I leave for home mentally frazzled, but seemingly not capable of judging the prevailing conditions on the roads, which frankly are relatively easy to judge.
- for the record, the machine has 2 speedometers, both digital that are calibrated to the wheels fitted and have a radar to give true ground speed and the machine I was on last week also has GPS guidance that has an accuracy of +- 1cm, so if that says it's going 9.4km/hr, it's doing 9.4km/hr.
Willy Nilly said:
However, the laws and more importantly now, the way they are enforced are binary.
Not really, no.Exceeding the speed limit IS binary, yes. 60mph in a 60mph zone is legal, 61mph in a 60mph zone is illegal. Enforcement is a long way from being binary, though. Minor transgressions aren't prosecuted. Less minor may result in a course, an FPN or a day in court, depending on the force's policies and the state of the driver's licence. Very serious offences will result in a day in court - but that may or may not end in a ban, depending on a wide variety of factors.
Other laws - not least careless driving and dangerous driving - certainly aren't binary. The transition point between exceeding the speed limit, careless and dangerous is not clear-cut, either. Scotland will see high speeds prosecuted as dangerous where other forces won't.
Centurion07 said:
Mill Wheel said:
...one must ask if the thousands of drivers going on speed awareness courses are actually any safer afterwards?
By definition they must be.Three points plus a fine with no education involved versus a course where, in what seems to be most Pher's experiences including mine, the vast majority of attendees display a staggering amount of ignorance towards all aspects of driving.
The course will educate almost all attendees to some degree thus making them, theoretically, safer. Whether they utilise this new-found knowledge or not is debatable.
I suspect for most it all goes in one ear and out the other, forgotten within a week. As it probably was before they first heard it and in some cases will be when they next hear it again. Odds are they won't ever be in an accident anyway.
Still, as you say it's all theoretical, because no one will be allowed to publish a study on it lest everything topples down. As long as everyone involved gets paid, who cares?
It's safe to say that almost every driver breaks a speed limit on a regular basis, by such a margin that he/she qualifies for a speed awareness course.
Consequently, if plod and Highways England were more efficient at catching people, the courses would be as profitable as the lottery.
Consequently, if plod and Highways England were more efficient at catching people, the courses would be as profitable as the lottery.
I attended a SAC in Cambridgeshire in 2015; it was OK. Somewhat patronising but not completely focussed on speed; I felt the course focussed on encouraging better observation rather than speed awareness.
Did the course 'work' ..........curates egg, but overall I don't think so. I certainly don't think I'm a better, safer driver as a result; quite the reverse in fact. I honestly feel that every second I now spend monitoring my speed or setting / adjusting the car's cruise control would still be far better spent monitoring traffic, pedestrians and all manor of other potential hazards instead.
Did the course 'work' ..........curates egg, but overall I don't think so. I certainly don't think I'm a better, safer driver as a result; quite the reverse in fact. I honestly feel that every second I now spend monitoring my speed or setting / adjusting the car's cruise control would still be far better spent monitoring traffic, pedestrians and all manor of other potential hazards instead.
Edited by Crackie on Tuesday 6th December 00:55
I have attended the course twice. Learnt a bit and it does make you think about speed a bit more. There was 6 years between courses and no points inbetween.
Most worrying was at the last course they asked by going around the room over 50% of the people the sequence of traffic lights before someone (me) got it right. People were saying flashing amber, yellow and all sorts.
Most worrying was at the last course they asked by going around the room over 50% of the people the sequence of traffic lights before someone (me) got it right. People were saying flashing amber, yellow and all sorts.
skilly1 said:
Most worrying was at the last course they asked by going around the room over 50% of the people the sequence of traffic lights before someone (me) got it right. People were saying flashing amber, yellow and all sorts.
Is it that worrying though? I don't see mass confusion at traffic lights, I think most people just manage by discarding information that isn't much use.Looks like standard neural network behaviour to me.
Jasandjules said:
Gavia said:
What are these main causes of accidents?
Why does that approach have to result in the current approach being removed? Why can't they run concurrently?
http://www.driving-test-success.com/causes-car-crash.htmWhy does that approach have to result in the current approach being removed? Why can't they run concurrently?
Someone else also asked whether your initial comment means that you believe all speed limit enforcement should be done away with.
mybrainhurts said:
It's safe to say that almost every driver breaks a speed limit on a regular basis, by such a margin that he/she qualifies for a speed awareness course.
Consequently, if plod and Highways England were more efficient at catching people, the courses would be as profitable as the lottery.
excellent post. One that 2cvs might want to note.Consequently, if plod and Highways England were more efficient at catching people, the courses would be as profitable as the lottery.
SidJames said:
mybrainhurts said:
It's safe to say that almost every driver breaks a speed limit on a regular basis, by such a margin that he/she qualifies for a speed awareness course.
Consequently, if plod and Highways England were more efficient at catching people, the courses would be as profitable as the lottery.
excellent post. One that 2cvs might want to note.Consequently, if plod and Highways England were more efficient at catching people, the courses would be as profitable as the lottery.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff