Speed cameras: Are we interested in evidence?
Discussion
Dave Finney said:
So maybe you might estimate about 15% of all miles driven are above the speed limit?
I'd estimate a bit less than that but, yes, somewhere in that area.
15% - no I'd think it's a lot higher I'd estimate a bit less than that but, yes, somewhere in that area.
I mean exceeding it even by 1 MPH
If you try driving at the speed limit on most roads, there will soon be a queue behind you
KTMsm said:
15% - no I'd think it's a lot higher
I mean exceeding it even by 1 MPH
If you try driving at the speed limit on most roads, there will soon be a queue behind you
Yes, correct, if you try to drive at speed limit you get tailgated. I mean exceeding it even by 1 MPH
If you try driving at the speed limit on most roads, there will soon be a queue behind you
If we think of how many vehicles will drive above speed limit at least once on each journey, the figure will be way over 15%. I'd have to have a think about how far over 50% I think it is.
heebeegeetee said:
KTMsm said:
15% - no I'd think it's a lot higher
I mean exceeding it even by 1 MPH
If you try driving at the speed limit on most roads, there will soon be a queue behind you
Yes, correct, if you try to drive at speed limit you get tailgated. I mean exceeding it even by 1 MPH
If you try driving at the speed limit on most roads, there will soon be a queue behind you
If we think of how many vehicles will drive above speed limit at least once on each journey, the figure will be way over 15%. I'd have to have a think about how far over 50% I think it is.
- Speed limits are too low which is why so many drivers break them. Some should be increased.
- The epidemic of lawlessness must be eliminated urgently, by draconian means if necessary.
Which is it?
I think it goes back to policing by consent
You deliberately set the limits too low but don't rigorously enforce them
Everyone complains if they are stopped a couple of miles an hour over and most think it's reasonable if they are only stopped occasionally and at a reasonable amount over the limit
My issue is that the limits have been consistently reduced whilst the technology / ability of cars has massively increased, as has enforcement over the last 30 years
One argument is that whilst the cars have improved the drivers haven't - which is why I have long advocated for retesting every 5 years
The only argument against it is that it would be another cost but overall I suggest it would save money (fewer accidents) and create jobs
I've sped every day for the last 30+ years and haven't had an accident, yet the focus is on catching people like me - because it's easy
I suggest it should be on the poor drivers who cause / have accidents, maybe after you've had 3 accidents you should be banned for 5 years / life ?
You deliberately set the limits too low but don't rigorously enforce them
Everyone complains if they are stopped a couple of miles an hour over and most think it's reasonable if they are only stopped occasionally and at a reasonable amount over the limit
My issue is that the limits have been consistently reduced whilst the technology / ability of cars has massively increased, as has enforcement over the last 30 years
One argument is that whilst the cars have improved the drivers haven't - which is why I have long advocated for retesting every 5 years
The only argument against it is that it would be another cost but overall I suggest it would save money (fewer accidents) and create jobs
I've sped every day for the last 30+ years and haven't had an accident, yet the focus is on catching people like me - because it's easy
I suggest it should be on the poor drivers who cause / have accidents, maybe after you've had 3 accidents you should be banned for 5 years / life ?
heebeegeetee said:
KTMsm said:
15% - no I'd think it's a lot higher
I mean exceeding it even by 1 MPH
If you try driving at the speed limit on most roads, there will soon be a queue behind you
Yes, correct, if you try to drive at speed limit you get tailgated. I mean exceeding it even by 1 MPH
If you try driving at the speed limit on most roads, there will soon be a queue behind you
If we think of how many vehicles will drive above speed limit at least once on each journey, the figure will be way over 15%. I'd have to have a think about how far over 50% I think it is.
Completely different question,
That's probably not far off 100%.
bigothunter said:
Which means not far off 100% are committing a criminal offence every time they drive 
Most of the time I speed it's a few MPH over; in keeping with the social pace.I like the sounding of the US model, where most mild speeding is a Civil matter, I like to be Civil. Should have that over here so it sounds like what it is...
Your speed is Civil today Sir.. Yes, I thought so too..
KTMsm said:
I
My issue is that the limits have been consistently reduced whilst the technology / ability of cars has massively increased, as has enforcement over the last 30 years
Problem is that average driver attention has also diminished by a great amount. The stopping distance might be better on a 2024 car Vs a 1994 car (might not be, of course) but that counts for nothing if Baz has his attention focused on what Wayne had for lunch, on Instagram.My issue is that the limits have been consistently reduced whilst the technology / ability of cars has massively increased, as has enforcement over the last 30 years
The number of people I see speeding in residential roads whilst also staring at their knob... Two completely independent yet still both d
headed things, done in tandem.Peter3442 said:
Do we agree that the standard of driving is falling? If it is, could it be due to excessive enforcement of stupidly low speed limits.
No. It's a combination of aholes on phones, and people who know they can get away with jumping lights, driving third world style and other dumb things because there is negligible enforcement.Some bloke ragging past my house gawping at Facebook isn't doing so because you can't do 70 on parts of the M4. For one thing, the speed limit on my road has been 30mph for 90 years now and centenarians rarely use Facebook.
Peter3442 said:
Do we agree that the standard of driving is falling? If it is, could it be due to excessive enforcement of stupidly low speed limits.
It's both the low limits and feeling safe in a modern carIt's proven we drive in our comfort zone of perceived risk - so if we feel safe and slow there's every chance that we will zone out
I'm perfectly happy to drive a local A road hitting 120mph in an Impreza but recently I've been driving my late father's 1930/40's cars which don't have seat belts and have appalling brakes etc 50mph feels fast enough !
The 30 limit in urban areas was set in 1934 !
Peter3442 said:
Do we agree that the standard of driving is falling? If it is, could it be due to excessive enforcement of stupidly low speed limits.
It could be directly linked, this week I observed a mobile mechanic/nurse/delivery driver fuming about a near and on threshold nip, suffering clear signs of "the motions" that are now resulting.. We all know the human mind in turmoil, anger or upset functions much differently than a mind in harmony with the current task at hand.
A friends farming uncle once nipped a finger off whilst upset about a ticket, at no other time had he put his fingers towards interlinking gears to clear something, normally he picked up a stick and used that. But he was impaired by the resulting mood and didn't think.
With drivers behind the wheel, anything from missing a bright yellow car, to knocking little jane off her bike and into oncoming traffic, mowing little Timmy or Miss Miggins down and smearing them along the road under the car is increased.
KTMsm said:
I think it goes back to policing by consent
You deliberately set the limits too low but don't rigorously enforce them
Everyone complains if they are stopped a couple of miles an hour over and most think it's reasonable if they are only stopped occasionally and at a reasonable amount over the limit
My issue is that the limits have been consistently reduced whilst the technology / ability of cars has massively increased, as has enforcement over the last 30 years
One argument is that whilst the cars have improved the drivers haven't - which is why I have long advocated for retesting every 5 years
The only argument against it is that it would be another cost but overall I suggest it would save money (fewer accidents) and create jobs
I've sped every day for the last 30+ years and haven't had an accident, yet the focus is on catching people like me - because it's easy
I suggest it should be on the poor drivers who cause / have accidents, maybe after you've had 3 accidents you should be banned for 5 years / life ?
Perfectly put. I saw a work van get a ticket the other day on a smart motorway. Limit down to 50 on a clear motorway due to an “accident” that wasn’t there. Now, yes the van should have slowed to 50, but what an utterly point less process it is. You deliberately set the limits too low but don't rigorously enforce them
Everyone complains if they are stopped a couple of miles an hour over and most think it's reasonable if they are only stopped occasionally and at a reasonable amount over the limit
My issue is that the limits have been consistently reduced whilst the technology / ability of cars has massively increased, as has enforcement over the last 30 years
One argument is that whilst the cars have improved the drivers haven't - which is why I have long advocated for retesting every 5 years
The only argument against it is that it would be another cost but overall I suggest it would save money (fewer accidents) and create jobs
I've sped every day for the last 30+ years and haven't had an accident, yet the focus is on catching people like me - because it's easy
I suggest it should be on the poor drivers who cause / have accidents, maybe after you've had 3 accidents you should be banned for 5 years / life ?
Peter3442 said:
Do we agree that the standard of driving is falling?
No, I don't think so,but it may appear to us as though it is.
1. Far greater traffic levels.
2. More driving laws and increasing restrictions.
3. devolved enforcement.
4. Health and safety culture.
1. If only 1% of drivers are of a poor standard but there's double the traffic levels,
we see double the number of bad drivers.
2. With new mobile phone laws, lower speed limits, more yellow box junctions, tighter parking regulations etc
we see an increase in "illegal actions".
3. With law enforcement delegated from the Police down to council officials and private companies using cameras, and enforcement cars, etc
we see an increase in the number of people penalised.
4. We used to drive without seat belts, airbags or ABS, and we were not worried.
Now, we are much more risk averse.
We would not consider buying a car without them, even if it were legal and a lot cheaper!
So the "the standard of driving" may be just the same as it ever was,
but our perception has changed.
Is there any way to provide evidence of the standard of driving falling?
I don't know how many more cars are on the road compared to 1975 when I first started driving but my impression is that there are easily 10 times as many bad drivers now. I certainly don't remember so many people deliberately ignoring driving laws and restrictions.
Crossing double whites, overtaking blind, cutting across three lanes to exit, overtaking over solid white hatching or around keep lefts, straight lining roundabouts, crossing mini roundabouts blind and at speed, parking on double yellows, blocking pavements and access, and especially, driving while using the phone - endless entitled fkwittery.
Crossing double whites, overtaking blind, cutting across three lanes to exit, overtaking over solid white hatching or around keep lefts, straight lining roundabouts, crossing mini roundabouts blind and at speed, parking on double yellows, blocking pavements and access, and especially, driving while using the phone - endless entitled f
kwittery. 5s Alive said:
I don't know how many more cars are on the road compared to 1975 when I first started driving but my impression is that there are easily 10 times as many bad drivers now. I certainly don't remember so many people deliberately ignoring driving laws and restrictions.
Crossing double whites, overtaking blind, cutting across three lanes to exit, overtaking over solid white hatching or around keep lefts, straight lining roundabouts, crossing mini roundabouts blind and at speed, parking on double yellows, blocking pavements and access, and especially, driving while using the phone - endless entitled fkwittery.
The UK vehicle population has approximately tripled since the late 60s. Of course the road network hasn’t been expanded with the same enthusiasm so it’s hard to draw conclusions about driving standards with first separating the impact of traffic congestion.Crossing double whites, overtaking blind, cutting across three lanes to exit, overtaking over solid white hatching or around keep lefts, straight lining roundabouts, crossing mini roundabouts blind and at speed, parking on double yellows, blocking pavements and access, and especially, driving while using the phone - endless entitled f
kwittery. Dave Finney said:
4. We used to drive without seat belts, airbags or ABS, and we were not worried.
Now, we are much more risk averse.
We would not consider buying a car without them, even if it were legal and a lot cheaper!
It depends how much cheaper. As I am happy using most roads on a push bike I am obviously happy to accept far higher risks than no seat belts. If the lowest possible risk was the aim we would all be replacing as many car trips as possible with trains. I value journey time and cost more that the safety difference between cars and trains.Now, we are much more risk averse.
We would not consider buying a car without them, even if it were legal and a lot cheaper!
Likewise car size. If the best safety was the object bigger cars are better. People accept the trade offs of smaller cars. Usually cheaper. Easier to park.
Dave Finney said:
4. We used to drive without seat belts, airbags or ABS, and we were not worried.
Now, we are much more risk averse.
We would not consider buying a car without them, even if it were legal and a lot cheaper!
As my mate always said "We used to have children in coalmines", we used to have a lot of things, always rememember the one on seatbeslts, "My brother would have been killed if he had been WEARING his seat belt" apparantly in this incident his brother was able to lie down on the front seas as he skidded under an truck.Now, we are much more risk averse.
We would not consider buying a car without them, even if it were legal and a lot cheaper!
Vipers said:
As my mate always said "We used to have children in coalmines", we used to have a lot of things, always rememember the one on seatbeslts, "My brother would have been killed if he had been WEARING his seat belt" apparantly in this incident his brother was able to lie down on the front seas as he skidded under an truck.
Yes, seat belts can lead to deaths sometimes, egopen-top cars that overturn,
cars that fall into deep water,
cars being crushed/going under trucks, etc.
There are examples of crashes where seat belts helped save lives (I know of one myself)
and examples where lives were not lost because a seat belt was not worn.
But overall seat belts save lives (although not as many as I had thought).
Speed cameras are supposed to save lives but can lead to deaths too.
Interestingly, there are examples of speed cameras leading to deaths,
but no examples of where they may save lives,
at least according to the Police, the speed camera operators, the Department for Transport and local council road safety departments.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff