A question of speed
Discussion
Big Fat F'r said:
Perhaps, although I’m not sure that saying “its my choice to speed, and if some little person dies by running out when they should be looking, tough” is the best way of refuting the ‘speed kills’ message.
To be fair, the message that you're objecting to is not one that is common or popular among the anti-camera lobby either.GreenV8S said:
Big Fat F'r said:
Perhaps, although I’m not sure that saying “its my choice to speed, and if some little person dies by running out when they should be looking, tough” is the best way of refuting the ‘speed kills’ message.
To be fair, the message that you're objecting to is not one that is common or popular among the anti-camera lobby either.I have to say, it's not only objectionable, it's a really good way of ensuring their (the individual, not the lobby) message is not taken seriously.
Anyway, 'nuff said.
BFF
Edited by Big Fat F'r on Friday 29th June 18:14
R_U_LOCAL said:
It's an interesting point. I think I'm posting the articles in the correct forum, bearing in mind my background and experience, but if anyone wants to link to them from another forum, then feel free.
I have created wikis of your articles in General Gassing - http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=411044 .
tank slapper said:
R_U_LOCAL said:
It's an interesting point. I think I'm posting the articles in the correct forum, bearing in mind my background and experience, but if anyone wants to link to them from another forum, then feel free.
I have created wikis of your articles in General Gassing - http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&t=411044 .Reg, serious question here. I've been out on a drive with you (and it WAS fun!) and there's no doubt in my mind that - in my limited experience and assessment - you are fast yet safe.
However, does it cause a conflict for you with your conscience when you're about to book someone (potentially causing them a lot of grief, cost etc) for something you may well be doing yourself on the way home? Does that fact that you're highly likely to be a better driver than them factor in, ie. 100mph with you behind the wheel is a different prospect to 100mph with *other driver* behind the wheel?
I'm genuinely interested to know.
However, does it cause a conflict for you with your conscience when you're about to book someone (potentially causing them a lot of grief, cost etc) for something you may well be doing yourself on the way home? Does that fact that you're highly likely to be a better driver than them factor in, ie. 100mph with you behind the wheel is a different prospect to 100mph with *other driver* behind the wheel?
I'm genuinely interested to know.
Funk said:
Reg, serious question here. I've been out on a drive with you (and it WAS fun!) and there's no doubt in my mind that - in my limited experience and assessment - you are fast yet safe.
However, does it cause a conflict for you with your conscience when you're about to book someone (potentially causing them a lot of grief, cost etc) for something you may well be doing yourself on the way home? Does that fact that you're highly likely to be a better driver than them factor in, ie. 100mph with you behind the wheel is a different prospect to 100mph with *other driver* behind the wheel?
I'm genuinely interested to know.
Fortunately, Funk, us real, live Police Officers are still allowed to use our discretion occasionally. Any speed enforcement I've ever carried out has always been within posted speed limit areas - mostly 30 and 40 MPH speed limits. If I were to see someone driving enthusiastically and safely in a national speed limit area, then, (within reason, of course) I'd be far more inclined to just have a word with the driver than to book them.However, does it cause a conflict for you with your conscience when you're about to book someone (potentially causing them a lot of grief, cost etc) for something you may well be doing yourself on the way home? Does that fact that you're highly likely to be a better driver than them factor in, ie. 100mph with you behind the wheel is a different prospect to 100mph with *other driver* behind the wheel?
I'm genuinely interested to know.
You're right though - there is a bit of a dilemma there for Police Officers, but I've never been the type that would "book 'em as soon as look at 'em".
R_U_LOCAL said:
Funk said:
Reg, serious question here. I've been out on a drive with you (and it WAS fun!) and there's no doubt in my mind that - in my limited experience and assessment - you are fast yet safe.
However, does it cause a conflict for you with your conscience when you're about to book someone (potentially causing them a lot of grief, cost etc) for something you may well be doing yourself on the way home? Does that fact that you're highly likely to be a better driver than them factor in, ie. 100mph with you behind the wheel is a different prospect to 100mph with *other driver* behind the wheel?
I'm genuinely interested to know.
Fortunately, Funk, us real, live Police Officers are still allowed to use our discretion occasionally. Any speed enforcement I've ever carried out has always been within posted speed limit areas - mostly 30 and 40 MPH speed limits. If I were to see someone driving enthusiastically and safely in a national speed limit area, then, (within reason, of course) I'd be far more inclined to just have a word with the driver than to book them.However, does it cause a conflict for you with your conscience when you're about to book someone (potentially causing them a lot of grief, cost etc) for something you may well be doing yourself on the way home? Does that fact that you're highly likely to be a better driver than them factor in, ie. 100mph with you behind the wheel is a different prospect to 100mph with *other driver* behind the wheel?
I'm genuinely interested to know.
You're right though - there is a bit of a dilemma there for Police Officers, but I've never been the type that would "book 'em as soon as look at 'em".
What a superb article, clearly demonstrating why safe driving does go down the pan if you creep to 61 in a 60 ...
Interestingly, ever 'advanced driving' course I've been on, my instructor has 'suggested' I 'make some progress' in the NSLs ... x2 out of x3 of these courses, the instructor was a current serving officer.
Interestingly, ever 'advanced driving' course I've been on, my instructor has 'suggested' I 'make some progress' in the NSLs ... x2 out of x3 of these courses, the instructor was a current serving officer.
Things have changed since this thread was started with many NSLs becoming 50mph limits, including a lot of those in R U Local's overtaking video on another of his threads, with many other limits being lowered as well. It's become rather more of a grey area which limits you can perhaps choose to break if you're prepared to brake some but not others. The police, for training purposes, will exceed NSLs but not red ringed limits and this is why the same idea has crept into advanced driving circles. However, with NSL roads where you can get a good turn of speed drying up, many forces now apparently treat 50mph roads as NSLs and exceed the limit.
Quite understandable, really. I suspect that a large chunk of the population do similar.
The "we must be seen to do something" downward plunge of speed limits is something that is quietly spreading throughout the nation. I'm not quite sure of the ultimate point though.
I've no idea how these limits re lowered. I'm assuming that retired middle-Englanders and Brake! Disciples have the time and inclination to get involved with council consultations though.
The "we must be seen to do something" downward plunge of speed limits is something that is quietly spreading throughout the nation. I'm not quite sure of the ultimate point though.
I've no idea how these limits re lowered. I'm assuming that retired middle-Englanders and Brake! Disciples have the time and inclination to get involved with council consultations though.
The government has given local authorities the power to make decisions on a wide range of issues that were previously controlled by central government and included in this is the power to set speed limits on the roads that fall under their jurisdiction. This can even include small sections of local motorways.
There have always been people campaigning to have speed limits lowered on their local roads in response to accidents or their perceptions that traffic has been travelling too fast on them. Sometimes they're people who's children or other relatives have been killed on them. Sometimes they're just people who love nothing more than a good campaign for something whether it's a speed limit reduction, stopping houses being built or making the guy in the local newsagent's shop put the lads' mags on the top shelf. Some parents of a child who was killed on East Lancs Road even got David Hasselhoff to back their campaign for a 30mph limit on the section where the accident happened.
It's easy to snigger at people who are just busybodies. Often they can be just as guilty as the rest of us of slipping over the speed limit, the difference being they don't even know when they're doing it. Hence the cases of people being caught by the speed traps they've demanded be set up and the guy someone on here described telling his colleagues on a community speedwatch program to ignore all the speeding drivers they were catching because they were his mates. They want to feel a sense of power over people in general by having them punished for doing things they don't think they should but when those things are tied to people they know or themselves they suddenly have a different viewpoint on it in those instances.
Another factor is that, as someone mentioned on here, a car driving past you at 30mph can seem to be going quickly while driving at 30mph feels slow. Many people will overestimate the speed of passing traffic and believe people are speeding when they aren't while underestimating their own speed as they're driving. As they don't think they speed they don't look out for speed traps so people who are anti speeding and pro speed limit enforcement often end up being the ones caught out.
It's harder to argue with people who's children have been killed. Of course they should teach them to cross the road responsibly and use pedestrian crossings, not cycle up the insides of HGVs where the drivers can't see them and not treat roads as playgrounds. On the other hand, children should be allowed to play out around where they live and older children should be allowed to cross roads and walk to and from school safely. There are some drivers who are selfish and that attitude is occasionally even displayed on this site when people say children should be kept locked up indoors. As long as there are drivers willing to display a selfish attitude there will be parents demanding that something be done about them.
A lot of people take a very simplistic attitude to road safety. When they're driving themselves they go through the motions of operating the car but don't put any thought or forward planning into the process. This includes people demanding speed limit changes, the local councillors passing the demands on and people working for local authorities receiving those demands. They don't understand concepts of observation and planning and probably don't bother about car maintenance or any of the factors those of us who enjoy cars and driving know matter as much, if not more, than staying below a certain speed. I've heard people talk about everything getting away from them when they go over a certain speed as they're driving. Speed intimidates them, both their own speed and other people's.
The idea of slowing down for hazards and driving in such a way as to be able to stop within the distance you can see to be clear, fundamental and perfectly sound principle of driving safely has been turned into the soundbite "Speed kills" for shock tactic television and billboard adverts. Now people see slow as safe and fast as dangerous so they want everyone driving faster than the speed they feel comfortable with slowed down because they assume that driving faster than the speed they can handle is dangerous for everyone.
The other issue is attempts to encourage cycle use and walking. Millions of pounds has been spent digging up roads and junctions and narrowing roads to create cycle lanes and part of the process has been lowering speed limits.
The government, national and local, takes a very short term view of everything and dropping speed limits when people say something must be done about accident rates or perceived dangers is a quick and easy way of pandering to them and keeping their votes. Other people don't like being delayed and don't like speed traps but don't notice the speed limit changes or don't bother making a fuss. They just carry on driving at the same speed they did before and getting mad when they get caught speeding.
If we don't like it we need to take it up with our local councillors and local authorities and tell them what steps for ensuring road safety we think are better and more effective than lowering speed limits and setting up speed traps everywhere.
There have always been people campaigning to have speed limits lowered on their local roads in response to accidents or their perceptions that traffic has been travelling too fast on them. Sometimes they're people who's children or other relatives have been killed on them. Sometimes they're just people who love nothing more than a good campaign for something whether it's a speed limit reduction, stopping houses being built or making the guy in the local newsagent's shop put the lads' mags on the top shelf. Some parents of a child who was killed on East Lancs Road even got David Hasselhoff to back their campaign for a 30mph limit on the section where the accident happened.
It's easy to snigger at people who are just busybodies. Often they can be just as guilty as the rest of us of slipping over the speed limit, the difference being they don't even know when they're doing it. Hence the cases of people being caught by the speed traps they've demanded be set up and the guy someone on here described telling his colleagues on a community speedwatch program to ignore all the speeding drivers they were catching because they were his mates. They want to feel a sense of power over people in general by having them punished for doing things they don't think they should but when those things are tied to people they know or themselves they suddenly have a different viewpoint on it in those instances.
Another factor is that, as someone mentioned on here, a car driving past you at 30mph can seem to be going quickly while driving at 30mph feels slow. Many people will overestimate the speed of passing traffic and believe people are speeding when they aren't while underestimating their own speed as they're driving. As they don't think they speed they don't look out for speed traps so people who are anti speeding and pro speed limit enforcement often end up being the ones caught out.
It's harder to argue with people who's children have been killed. Of course they should teach them to cross the road responsibly and use pedestrian crossings, not cycle up the insides of HGVs where the drivers can't see them and not treat roads as playgrounds. On the other hand, children should be allowed to play out around where they live and older children should be allowed to cross roads and walk to and from school safely. There are some drivers who are selfish and that attitude is occasionally even displayed on this site when people say children should be kept locked up indoors. As long as there are drivers willing to display a selfish attitude there will be parents demanding that something be done about them.
A lot of people take a very simplistic attitude to road safety. When they're driving themselves they go through the motions of operating the car but don't put any thought or forward planning into the process. This includes people demanding speed limit changes, the local councillors passing the demands on and people working for local authorities receiving those demands. They don't understand concepts of observation and planning and probably don't bother about car maintenance or any of the factors those of us who enjoy cars and driving know matter as much, if not more, than staying below a certain speed. I've heard people talk about everything getting away from them when they go over a certain speed as they're driving. Speed intimidates them, both their own speed and other people's.
The idea of slowing down for hazards and driving in such a way as to be able to stop within the distance you can see to be clear, fundamental and perfectly sound principle of driving safely has been turned into the soundbite "Speed kills" for shock tactic television and billboard adverts. Now people see slow as safe and fast as dangerous so they want everyone driving faster than the speed they feel comfortable with slowed down because they assume that driving faster than the speed they can handle is dangerous for everyone.
The other issue is attempts to encourage cycle use and walking. Millions of pounds has been spent digging up roads and junctions and narrowing roads to create cycle lanes and part of the process has been lowering speed limits.
The government, national and local, takes a very short term view of everything and dropping speed limits when people say something must be done about accident rates or perceived dangers is a quick and easy way of pandering to them and keeping their votes. Other people don't like being delayed and don't like speed traps but don't notice the speed limit changes or don't bother making a fuss. They just carry on driving at the same speed they did before and getting mad when they get caught speeding.
If we don't like it we need to take it up with our local councillors and local authorities and tell them what steps for ensuring road safety we think are better and more effective than lowering speed limits and setting up speed traps everywhere.
Gassing Station | Advanced Driving | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff