War on the motorist or media hype?

[Funkycoldribena]

oyster said:

Boosted LS1 said:

The law is farcical, why shouldn't we break it when it's safe to do so?

Just be a man when you get caught.

I've been caught before and just accept my punishment.


Seeing all the threads on here about people trying to evade or mitigate punishment is embarrassing.

Seeing people so conditioned to follow the law,however much of an ass it is,is embarrassing.If it gets reduced to 10 mph (which it will do eventually) will you just roll over as usual?

[Europa1]

Funkycoldribena said:

Hosenbugler said:

Thats disgraceful, is the "councillor" in question a green blob looney?

How is it these plonkers always end up in authority?

I suspect the sad truth is to mangle an old quote into "All that's needed for idiocy to prevail is for sensible people to do nothing" - I suspect most sensible people have little faith in, and therefore do not engage with, local government and its politicians (turnout figures for local elections are generally shockingly low). The people who do engage are the activists and those with a burning cause. You then end up with a small section of the local community wielding a disproportionate influence over the apathetic majority, and mediocre, out of touch local politicians in positions of influence which are far beyond their competence.

In Cambridge, there is definitely a war on the motorist. It is now surrounded by a band of 50mph speed limits on perfectly decent A roads, and in the centre there is a blanket 20mph limit. The 20mph limit I'm actually not too fussed about, but the idiotic phasing of traffic lights, 24 hour bus lanes taking up road capacity for pretty infrequent buses, floating bus stops and the Council's naive belief that if you simply don't provide parking spaces, people will magically take to bikes or buses seriously yank my chain. Their latest gem of an idea is to close some of the major routes in town to cars during rush hour, as this will apparently "cut congestion". I must write to the Council and ask for a ticket to their planet: it seems nice there.

[tannhauser]

oyster said:

Boosted LS1 said:

The law is farcical, why shouldn't we break it when it's safe to do so?

Just be a man when you get caught.

I've been caught before and just accept my punishment.


Seeing all the threads on here about people trying to evade or mitigate punishment is embarrassing.

Such a good little citizen. Cringe.

[schmunk]

tannhauser said:

Re-read my post FFS! I am referring to drink driving having no sliding scale!

Apologies - my mistake whilst trying to fix the mangled quoting in that post.

The sliding scale for drink driving offences is shown here:

http://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_sentenci...

[tannhauser]

schmunk said:

tannhauser said:

Re-read my post FFS! I am referring to drink driving having no sliding scale!

Apologies - my mistake whilst trying to fix the mangled quoting in that post.

The sliding scale for drink driving offences is shown here:

http://www.drinkdriving.org/drink_driving_sentenci...

OK thanks.

I think I was aware there were varying lengths of ban, but there's no sliding scale as such in terms of having a ban - i.e. a ban of some sorts is guaranteed. Just seems a little harsh that you can be one side of the legal limit and be fine; then just over (although I know there are margins allowed) and face a ban - such a life changing event for being just the wrong side of a very specific figure. Especially now the legal limit is now lower in Scotland (and presumably here at some point no doubt); so what was deemed perfectly legal 12 months ago or so, is now totally illegal! If that makes sense...

Also you could have someone lose their licence for failing the breath test, but someone else "equally as intoxicated" ultimately keeping theirs if say for procedural reasons, their breath test was delayed and perhaps they had sobered up slightly. Anyway, I'm rambling.

I can't help thinking there should be perhaps more moderate consequences for being very slightly over the limit (whatever that limit is determined to be); but more serious and eventually severe consequences (including custodial) the higher up the scale you go.

[Hosenbugler]

Europa1 said:

Funkycoldribena said:

Hosenbugler said:

Thats disgraceful, is the "councillor" in question a green blob looney?

How is it these plonkers always end up in authority?

I suspect the sad truth is to mangle an old quote into "All that's needed for idiocy to prevail is for sensible people to do nothing" - I suspect most sensible people have little faith in, and therefore do not engage with, local government and its politicians (turnout figures for local elections are generally shockingly low). The people who do engage are the activists and those with a burning cause. You then end up with a small section of the local community wielding a disproportionate influence over the apathetic majority, and mediocre, out of touch local politicians in positions of influence which are far beyond their competence.

In Cambridge, there is definitely a war on the motorist. It is now surrounded by a band of 50mph speed limits on perfectly decent A roads, and in the centre there is a blanket 20mph limit. The 20mph limit I'm actually not too fussed about, but the idiotic phasing of traffic lights, 24 hour bus lanes taking up road capacity for pretty infrequent buses, floating bus stops and the Council's naive belief that if you simply don't provide parking spaces, people will magically take to bikes or buses seriously yank my chain. Their latest gem of an idea is to close some of the major routes in town to cars during rush hour, as this will apparently "cut congestion". I must write to the Council and ask for a ticket to their planet: it seems nice there.

Interesting you should talk of Cambridge. A friend of mine has immediate family living there. She has become so frustrated at the hoops she has to jump through to visit her relatives, she has now insisted they come to her. One of the key reasons she cites is the traffic scenario , she really does loath the place. Hard criticism from an Oxford graduate.

[Pebbles167]

JNW1 said:

it's surely only a matter of time before cameras on smart motorways are used to enforce National Speed Limits and not just temporary limits as and when they're displayed.....

tannhauser said:

JNW1 said:

Terminator X said:

^^ Hadecs3 allegedly doing that now.

TX.

Obviously it's possible technically - and will be the thin end of a very nasty wedge once it starts - but I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted for exceeding the NSL as a result of being flashed by a camera on a smart motorway gantry; any particular stretches of road where you believe this is happening?

I think precisely this has been discussed of late, in SP&L?

Yep, the stretch of M4 going past Bristol (J19-20) has this exact thing. Know several who've been done, ranging from 79mph +. Fairly sure M25 has it too in some places.

[Moonhawk]

Funkycoldribena said:

Seeing people so conditioned to follow the law,however much of an ass it is,is embarrassing.If it gets reduced to 10 mph (which it will do eventually) will you just roll over as usual?

Yep. I think people would respect limits more if they could see some rhyme or reason for their implementation.

Often however speed limits seem to be set (and in particular reduced) due to political agenda and nimbyism - rather than as a last resort following an evidence led assessment (which is what the government's white paper implies should be the case).

Poor compliance with speed limits should lead to a review of that speed limit and where it is deemed appropriate - the limit should be raised.

[moreymach]

Hosenbugler said:

Thats disgraceful, is the "councillor" in question a green blob looney?

He's an independent but I'm sure with a green leaning from his policies.

His bio states "I have worked mainly in the creative industries, as a musician, writer, administrator, manager, event coordinator and animateur." What experience he has in traffic management I know not

He doesn't drive.....

[Mr Snrub]

It has been the policy of local councils to make city driving as expensive and frustrating as possible for many years. Then they wonder why the high street it dying and pollution won't go down. My local one spent millions on a bus lane with automatic green lights. Outside rush hour all it means is a few minicabbers can get back to the depot faster whilst everyone else breaths in fumes.

[Moonhawk]

moreymach said:

He doesn't drive.....

Just another 'centric' thinking politician.

Because his job allows him to live and work in a town, make use of public transport etc - he can apply the same to everybody.

Conveniently ignores the fact that not everybody enjoys great public transport links. Not everybody can (or wants to) live in a town. Not everybody can live close to work. People have dogs, kids, stuff that needs carting around. Couples often work in different locations.

My commute to work is a little under 30 minutes by car in normal rush hour traffic. The same journey by public transport would take over 2 hours and involve half an hour of walking, plus one train and two buses.....and that assumes all of the connections are made.

At the moment my wife and I happen to work in similar locations - so it could be argued that we could move closer to work (apart from the fact that our places of work are in a complete st hole). However that wasn't the case a couple of years back when we worked an hour each way in opposite directions and bought our current house as it equalised our commutes to a reasonable time. If we moved house every time one of us changed jobs just so we could live close to work, the cost would be prohibitive and we'd be moving house every 12-18 months.

[rxe]

Funkycoldribena said:

How is it these plonkers always end up in authority?

That's easy. Being a local councillor means you have to give up at least an evening a week and sit through tedious meetings about planning and schools. You also have to listen to similar ste from every dim witted person who has some opnion about it, from either end of the spectrum.

Most sensible people work for a living, get in too late to attend a council meeting and would rather gouge their eyes out with a teaspoon than get involved.

It's why sensible people are under represented in all walks of public life - they're too damn busy.

[oyster]

tannhauser said:

oyster said:

Boosted LS1 said:

The law is farcical, why shouldn't we break it when it's safe to do so?

Just be a man when you get caught.

I've been caught before and just accept my punishment.


Seeing all the threads on here about people trying to evade or mitigate punishment is embarrassing.

Such a good little citizen. Cringe.

Hardly. In any case it seems you didn't read what I said.

How do our limits stack up against other developed countries? Are these countries out to get you too?

[JNW1]

Pebbles167 said:

JNW1 said:

it's surely only a matter of time before cameras on smart motorways are used to enforce National Speed Limits and not just temporary limits as and when they're displayed.....

tannhauser said:

JNW1 said:

Terminator X said:

^^ Hadecs3 allegedly doing that now.

TX.

Obviously it's possible technically - and will be the thin end of a very nasty wedge once it starts - but I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted for exceeding the NSL as a result of being flashed by a camera on a smart motorway gantry; any particular stretches of road where you believe this is happening?

I think precisely this has been discussed of late, in SP&L?

Yep, the stretch of M4 going past Bristol (J19-20) has this exact thing. Know several who've been done, ranging from 79mph +. Fairly sure M25 has it too in some places.

Oh heck, better watch my speed next time I'm on a stretch of smart motorway then! I don't normally drive with my foot in but it's very easy to stray from 80mph to 85mph in a car that's pulling 45mph/'000 in top and from the sounds of it low to mid-80's could be fast enough to land you with a SAC or points. Increased use of cruise control may be the way forward.....

[Mill Wheel]

Pothole said:

Mill Wheel said:

Take this headline from the Daily Mail:

Stop reading this drivel.

I don't, but if you do a DDG search and the Daily Mail is top of the search results, it indicates just how many people ARE reading it! They are often several days behind the other papers with their scandal headlines!

[heebeegeetee]

Mill Wheel said:

I don't, but if you do a DDG search and the Daily Mail is top of the search results, it indicates just how many people ARE reading it! They are often several days behind the other papers with their scandal headlines!

I've noticed that, the DM is very often late with the stories, but the stories aren't drivel when they first appear, apparently.

As someone who reads both the DM website (amongst many other sources) and Pistonheads, I can say that the opinions in both are much the same, with the DM being less right-wing.

[Boosted LS1]

oyster said:

Hardly. In any case it seems you didn't read what I said.

How do our limits stack up against other developed countries? Are these countries out to get you too?

Who cares, stick to the Uk.

[Terminator X]

JNW1 said:

Pebbles167 said:

JNW1 said:

it's surely only a matter of time before cameras on smart motorways are used to enforce National Speed Limits and not just temporary limits as and when they're displayed.....

tannhauser said:

JNW1 said:

Terminator X said:

^^ Hadecs3 allegedly doing that now.

TX.

Obviously it's possible technically - and will be the thin end of a very nasty wedge once it starts - but I've not heard of anyone being prosecuted for exceeding the NSL as a result of being flashed by a camera on a smart motorway gantry; any particular stretches of road where you believe this is happening?

I think precisely this has been discussed of late, in SP&L?

Yep, the stretch of M4 going past Bristol (J19-20) has this exact thing. Know several who've been done, ranging from 79mph +. Fairly sure M25 has it too in some places.

Oh heck, better watch my speed next time I'm on a stretch of smart motorway then! I don't normally drive with my foot in but it's very easy to stray from 80mph to 85mph in a car that's pulling 45mph/'000 in top and from the sounds of it low to mid-80's could be fast enough to land you with a SAC or points. Increased use of cruise control may be the way forward.....

There is one on the M25 between A3 and M3 and EVERYONE slows to 70 for it. I go past it 4x per week.

TX.

[Mill Wheel]

heebeegeetee said:

I've noticed that, the DM is very often late with the stories, but the stories aren't drivel when they first appear, apparently.

As someone who reads both the DM website (amongst many other sources) and Pistonheads, I can say that the opinions in both are much the same, with the DM being less right-wing.

I don't think we should underestimate the influence of the media, in shaping our thoughts and lives.
Currently two companies are battling a bad press, who are reporting difficulties within companies, with very little hard evidence of problems.
Deutsche Bank being one. A crippling fine is being touted as one reason, but as yet there is no indication when or if this fine will be paid - it is being appealed, and even then the position of such a large bank is essential to the economic well being in Germany, so despite contrary indications from the head of Government, the banks position - should it ever become more difficult, is likely to be supported.
The other scare story is Monarch, all of whose customers are protected by ATOL bond, yet the media are continuously failing to report this in the same type size as their gloom and doom headlines!
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-37524259
Their "War on the Motorist" headlines seem to find favour with some here, and they should bare some of the responsibility for the reactions of some, like burning speed cameras, and obscuring number plates, when they highlight these countermeasures!

[Mill Wheel]

Funkycoldribena said:

There's more leniency in drink driving, blow a slightly over reading and you get another go down the police station. I don't remember the wife getting another go through the mobile camera when she got got done for speeding at 35 in a 30.

Isn't this due to an acceptance that the technology for measuring breath alcohol at the roadside is not as accurate as the machine at the station, while the technology of measuring your speed is conveniently (for the authorities) generally taken to be infallible?
The view put forward by the pro camera club is that it is better that a few innocent drivers are penalised than to taint the perfect ideal of the infallible speed detection device!