Why speed?

[jamieduff1981]

spookly said:

vonhosen said:

A lot of people confident in their abilities fail their driving tests let alone the less confident.

I've passed 2 UK driving tests and a motorbike test, all first time. I'm pretty confident I'd pass another UK test.
If I couldn't then why should I still be driving? The test is the minimum standard to be on the road.... if I am worse than the minimum standard after 20 years driving practice then maybe I should not be on the road.

It would be quite simple to have a system where drivers have to have a 20-30 minute retest when they renew their photocard, You could even make it compulsory re-training rather than flat out take their license.... just devise a way to ensure continuous improvement.

Personally I think this would make a better penalty than driving bans for anything but the most extreme idiocy on the roads. Instead of a ban make people pay out of their own money to retrain as a better driver. A driving ban is a very blunt tool and results in no improvement in driving standards.

Speed limits are arbitrary numbers. Whether or not the consciously know it, that's why so many people ignore them to a greater or lesser degree. I don't always agree with where people ignore them, nor by what margin, but it's there.

If anyone wants to pull out the safety card, then the elephant in the room is that so many drivers simply aren't good enough when they're out and about. That may be physical skill, although driving is extremely easy and frankly a monkey could master the physical skills. For most people, it's attitude. Driving is just something that needs to be done, and that time can be used to think about anything but the task at hand.

Campaigns aimed at speeding and other such nonsense just reinforces the notion in the minds of those statistically having crashes that it's something that will happen to someone else - because they're naughty people doing something that you're not. I'm not speeding, therefore I won't crash - that's what the advert said. Now, what colour should the bedroom walls be to go with that carpet we just ord- BANG.

[spookly]

jamieduff1981 said:

Speed limits are arbitrary numbers. Whether or not the consciously know it, that's why so many people ignore them to a greater or lesser degree. I don't always agree with where people ignore them, nor by what margin, but it's there.

I agree.

jamieduff1981 said:

If anyone wants to pull out the safety card, then the elephant in the room is that so many drivers simply aren't good enough when they're out and about. That may be physical skill, although driving is extremely easy and frankly a monkey could master the physical skills. For most people, it's attitude. Driving is just something that needs to be done, and that time can be used to think about anything but the task at hand.

Agreed. But I think the physical skills do actually escape a lot of people. Inability to judge the size of their vehicle relative to gaps, inability to judge how close to objects they are, inability to judge speed/distance etc. Try doing a school run to my kids school and you'll find plenty of the local mums don't have a clue their 4x4 is in the middle of the road when they think it is almost in a bush.

jamieduff1981 said:

Campaigns aimed at speeding and other such nonsense just reinforces the notion in the minds of those statistically having crashes that it's something that will happen to someone else - because they're naughty people doing something that you're not. I'm not speeding, therefore I won't crash - that's what the advert said. Now, what colour should the bedroom walls be to go with that carpet we just ord- BANG.

Agreed.
Speeding does increase severity of outcome but is rarely the sole cause of collisions. That's why I would like to see ideas and campaigns that concentrate on improving driving standards, and policing that concentrates on bad driving standards. If people can get away with really poor driving as long as they aren't speeding it doesn't really help safety all that much does it?

[Gary C]

DoubleD said:

GetCarter said:

I was on this road today (about 18 miles long). No houses, no turnings, no roundabouts, no traffic lights, no rain, no police, no nothing.

I'm in a car that has a top speed of 155 mph and will very comfortably cruise at 120mph.

You want me to drive at 60mph because it's a rule someone decided who hasn't driven further north than Edinburgh.

Come up here, drive a decent car, and see what happens.

HTH

Edited by GetCarter on Saturday 20th August 20:29

Wow that looks like a fantastic bit of road. I must plan a trip oop north.

Bit too straight for me, need corners !

[Gary29]

I speed, heavily, held a clean licence for 16 years so far and never killed anyone, or myself.....yet.

I speed where I deem the conditions to be acceptable, rather than blindly obeying limits.

[IanCress]

For the people who do speed, what's your opinion of people who stick to the limits, particularly 30-40 limits in built up areas?

Like the OP, I often find myself being tailgated, and occasionally overtaken despite doing an indicated 5mph over the limit.

Are you thinking people like me are idiots for not breaking the law?

[techguyone]

Yes I do, because this:

Wills2 said:

Or as is more often the case recently roads that have been NSL since they introduced limits have been reduced to 50mph or 40mph for no real reason.

Cars stop better and handle better so lets reduce the speed limit and watch most people then ignore the new rule.

The current speed limit "policy/strategy" in the UK brings the law in to disrepute IMHO.

I'll quite happily obey sensible limits in sensible places and don't give a fark if I'm being tailgated in a 30, it'll ps off whoevers tailgating me far more than it will me.

Oh and around our way, the authority has a penchant for turning dual carriageways into single ones for no apparent reason. Grips my piss.

[vonhosen]

V8RX7 said:

spookly said:

A driving ban is a very blunt tool and results in no improvement in driving standards.

IME it is far worse than that.

I know many in the building trade who have received a ban - only one stopped driving.

The others saw that they had no choice otherwise they couldn't work.

So what it actually did was increase the number of uninsured drivers and in the case of the worst offenders they bought the cheapest vans they could find so they didn't mind losing them - obviously they weren't registered in their names and they didn't care about Speed cameras either.

Great system

Of course there will be offenders who when convicted up the ante & commit more serious offences. That's not unique to speeding.
The state doesn't ignore their offending because they might do that though, it just has harsher penalties for the more serious offences.
People who drive when disqualified can & do end up in prison.

[talksthetorque]

Anyone going to admit to tailgating behind cars when poster above is doing the speed limit?


The people who are tailgating you in the 30 and 40 are usually the people who do 45 everywhere.

[vonhosen]

spookly said:

stuff

It's alright saying politicians should lead, but they can't go too far out on a limb because they don't get elected/re-elected.
You can't lead if you aren't in power.

You might be happy to sit tests, but it won't happen because the masses won't want to do it.
I've passed more driving tests than you, all first time passes too, but I don't want the inconvenience & cost of having to resit them all every few years.
Testing is also ineffective, after all you yourself will obey the speed limits in order to pass the test & then happily break them immediately after the test. A test isn't an indication of what people will do when they drive.
So you have to find/recruit/train/pay for 1000's of new DVSA examiners & support infrastructure for something that changes nothing with regards to those that pass & potentially puts 50% of drivers off the road which will destroy the economy.
It's not going to happen.

Edited by vonhosen on Monday 22 August 10:52

[spookly]

IanCress said:

For the people who do speed, what's your opinion of people who stick to the limits, particularly 30-40 limits in built up areas?

Like the OP, I often find myself being tailgated, and occasionally overtaken despite doing an indicated 5mph over the limit.

Are you thinking people like me are idiots for not breaking the law?

I stick to most limits in urban areas. The potential hazards are often numerous enough to warrant the low speed limit. On some wide and well sighted roads I might drift a bit over.... funnily enough these safer areas are where the local 'safety camera partnership' put their mobile vans.

I don't have any problem with anyone sticking to a speed limit whether in urban 30/40mph limits or on a DC/Motorway. What is annoying is if they are going consistently well below the limit with no good reason, but I still wouldn't tailgate/harass. In my town this is mainly old people who probably shouldn't be on the road anymore.

I've been tailgated in town because I slowed to what I considered an appropriate speed. Doesn't bother me what anyone else thinks. But I will do my best not to be in anyone's way whenever possible no matter how silly their speed/driving is, so I would try and make sure they can pass if they seem to want to and it is safe to do so.

Outside of urban areas on a clear road I don't often seem to have anyone behind me.

[jamieduff1981]

IanCress said:

For the people who do speed, what's your opinion of people who stick to the limits, particularly 30-40 limits in built up areas?

Like the OP, I often find myself being tailgated, and occasionally overtaken despite doing an indicated 5mph over the limit.

Are you thinking people like me are idiots for not breaking the law?

I will occasionally be a couple of MPH over extraurban. To be honest, it's me who gets tailgated in 30 and 40mph limits. I can't remember the last time I caught someone up in an urban speed limit area, besides the occasional coffin dodger in a gold Skoda doing <20mph because he can't see.

Speaking for myself, I respect and encourage adherence to speed limits in towns even if the road seems clear. The hazard density in towns means something can change with minimal notice or warning.

Far, far more common are people too incompetent to maintain a decent speed extraurban and see nothing wrong with excessive speed in 30mph zones.

I'd put money on the people tailgating you in towns also being the sort who struggle to average 45mph on a good sized dry B-road.

[vonhosen]

techguyone said:

Yes I do, because this:

Wills2 said:

Or as is more often the case recently roads that have been NSL since they introduced limits have been reduced to 50mph or 40mph for no real reason.

Cars stop better and handle better so lets reduce the speed limit and watch most people then ignore the new rule.

The current speed limit "policy/strategy" in the UK brings the law in to disrepute IMHO.

I'll quite happily obey sensible limits in sensible places and don't give a fark if I'm being tailgated in a 30, it'll ps off whoevers tailgating me far more than it will me.

Oh and around our way, the authority has a penchant for turning dual carriageways into single ones for no apparent reason. Grips my piss.

Turning dual carriageways in to single carriageways?
Where, photo?

[jamieduff1981]

vonhosen said:

techguyone said:

Yes I do, because this:

Wills2 said:

Or as is more often the case recently roads that have been NSL since they introduced limits have been reduced to 50mph or 40mph for no real reason.

Cars stop better and handle better so lets reduce the speed limit and watch most people then ignore the new rule.

The current speed limit "policy/strategy" in the UK brings the law in to disrepute IMHO.

I'll quite happily obey sensible limits in sensible places and don't give a fark if I'm being tailgated in a 30, it'll ps off whoevers tailgating me far more than it will me.

Oh and around our way, the authority has a penchant for turning dual carriageways into single ones for no apparent reason. Grips my piss.

Turning dual carriageways in to single carriageways?
Where, photo?

If he means by painting hatches over Lane 2, then yes there are loads of examples of this. The A1 between Newcastle and Edinburgh has many such examples.

[anonymous-user]

IanCress said:

For the people who do speed, what's your opinion of people who stick to the limits, particularly 30-40 limits in built up areas?

Like the OP, I often find myself being tailgated, and occasionally overtaken despite doing an indicated 5mph over the limit.

Are you thinking people like me are idiots for not breaking the law?

No, and this is the point. It's inappropriate use of speed that kills people and that needs education to reinforce. I am very careful in urban environments and recall a fair amount of what was explained in my SAC. Far from being a total waste of my day it was actually very useful and made me think.

It was asked who would pay for this? In my opinion the motorist should pay each year for a course as part of the terms of holding a driving licence. Call it a refresher, call it what you will. Instead of the Police blackmailing motorists into their £50 million racket, if the funds were used by central Government for improving the roads and the course made mandatory everyone would be safer. Obviously as it is it has fk all to do with safety and is purely a revenue stream for the Police.

Until this chain is broken the 'speed kills' brigade will continue to flourish.

[ChilliWhizz]

IanCress said:

Like the OP, I often find myself being tailgated, and occasionally overtaken despite doing an indicated 5mph over the limit.

I live next to a 40 limit, and a bit further on it drops to 30... I have to pull out of my drive when there's a good gap in the traffic and then accelerate up to 40 fairly rapidly.. then just before I hit the 30 signs, I slow to 30 and, more often than not, the car behind (often a long way behind) catches up with me (invariably doing a good bit over the 30 that I'm doing), and sits just a few feet off my rear bumper, presumably trying to intimidate and maybe make me speed up a bit.... They're sufficiently close that if I had to brake in an emergency their chances of not driving into the back of me are probably pretty slim..

These people are clearly not particularly intelligent.. It used to annoy me, but it doesn't anymore... On the odd occasion I'm pretty sure I've prevented them from getting gunned by the constable that occasionally hides behind the hedges... But they're probably too stupid to realise it and too ignorant to acknowledge it..

Thanks to the OP for providing me with the opportunity for a small rant

[vonhosen]

jamieduff1981 said:

vonhosen said:

techguyone said:

Yes I do, because this:

Wills2 said:

Or as is more often the case recently roads that have been NSL since they introduced limits have been reduced to 50mph or 40mph for no real reason.

Cars stop better and handle better so lets reduce the speed limit and watch most people then ignore the new rule.

The current speed limit "policy/strategy" in the UK brings the law in to disrepute IMHO.

I'll quite happily obey sensible limits in sensible places and don't give a fark if I'm being tailgated in a 30, it'll ps off whoevers tailgating me far more than it will me.

Oh and around our way, the authority has a penchant for turning dual carriageways into single ones for no apparent reason. Grips my piss.

Turning dual carriageways in to single carriageways?
Where, photo?

If he means by painting hatches over Lane 2, then yes there are loads of examples of this. The A1 between Newcastle and Edinburgh has many such examples.

The number of lanes on a road has nothing to do with whether it's single or dual carriageway, the number of carriageways dictates if it's single or dual carriageway.

[mikeN54]

IanCress said:

For the people who do speed, what's your opinion of people who stick to the limits, particularly 30-40 limits in built up areas?

Like the OP, I often find myself being tailgated, and occasionally overtaken despite doing an indicated 5mph over the limit.

Are you thinking people like me are idiots for not breaking the law?

I speed when out of built up areas, often, but you can't get angry at people who choose to stick to the limits. I stick to 33 max in a clear 30 (speedo 33 which is GSP 30), or less if there people around / kids at crossings / traffic etc, and I often get tailgated.

But more often (nearly 95%) you get tailgated by the idiot you just passed doing 45 on the NSL A road just before the village, and he's still doing 40 in the 30 and getting irate with you.

Every day without fail I also follow folks, all bunched up, nobody overtaking, doing 45 on clear NSL A roads, why has it become acceptable to drive at 45 on a clear A road now? And without fail these same people zoom into 30 zones at 40/45 when you slow for the 30 limit.

They are the dangerous drivers, they are driving to their own absolute limit rather than a limit assessed from the risks/hazards and environment around them. But they are the ones who don't get caught because they are "safe" because they drive slowly.

Anyway, we're all human and if the limits were more reasonable then less folk would break them. I think the odd fine and points is a small price to pay. Speeders are not "playing into the hands of the partnerships" rather the partnerships are set up to take advantage of human nature.

Edited by mikeN54 on Monday 22 August 11:12

[SuperchargedVR6]

funkyrobot said:

It's got to a point now where someone like me (who sticks to limits) is regularly hounded, tailgated, abused and made to feel like a piece of st on the road. It isn't because I drive slowly and doddle around as I like to crack on as much as any PH'er.

Nobody is making you feel like a piece of schitt on the road. That's just in your head. If you don't like how being tailgated makes you feel, don't look in the mirror, or keep up with the flow of traffic, or catch the bus. There are options other than driving and feeling miserable about it.

I bet you are one of these drivers who has no sense of urgency about them what so ever. Takes an age to move off a green a light, sits there at a roundabout waiting for a written invitation to drive onto it, takes an age to get up to your beloved speed limits, brakes 5 miles in advance of an upcoming obstacle, sits in the outside lane doing 69mph for longer than necessary.....all the usual shat. I hate being stuck behind people like you in peak commuting times.

Driving is a social event. Too many people in this country feel compelled to reflect their attitude on life by the way they drive. Yes people speed, they always will. Let the police deal with them. Everbody else just needs to keep the flow of traffic going, instead of being a fricking jobsworth about every minor motoring infraction they come across.

[jamieduff1981]

vonhosen said:

jamieduff1981 said:

vonhosen said:

techguyone said:

Yes I do, because this:

Wills2 said:

Or as is more often the case recently roads that have been NSL since they introduced limits have been reduced to 50mph or 40mph for no real reason.

Cars stop better and handle better so lets reduce the speed limit and watch most people then ignore the new rule.

The current speed limit "policy/strategy" in the UK brings the law in to disrepute IMHO.

I'll quite happily obey sensible limits in sensible places and don't give a fark if I'm being tailgated in a 30, it'll ps off whoevers tailgating me far more than it will me.

Oh and around our way, the authority has a penchant for turning dual carriageways into single ones for no apparent reason. Grips my piss.

Turning dual carriageways in to single carriageways?
Where, photo?

If he means by painting hatches over Lane 2, then yes there are loads of examples of this. The A1 between Newcastle and Edinburgh has many such examples.

The number of lanes on a road has nothing to do with whether it's single or dual carriageway, the number of carriageways dictates if it's single or dual carriageway.

Going back to the statement initially - it was that roads which were laid as dual carriageways and were marked and operated as dual carriageways have since been changed to single carriageways by painting out the overtaking lane, which is annoying for anyone who doesn't feel like completing their journey at 40mph behind an HGV, a Skoda and a van. You questioned whether such roads existed.

If you're trying to be pedantic, you're probably doing it wrong. Everyone talking about dual carriageways versus single carriageways is referring to the number of lanes available for traffic in each direction.

[anonymous-user]

jamieduff1981 said:

Going back to the statement initially - it was that roads which were laid as dual carriageways and were marked and operated as dual carriageways have since been changed to single carriageways by painting out the overtaking lane, which is annoying for anyone who doesn't feel like completing their journey at 40mph behind an HGV, a Skoda and a van. You questioned whether such roads existed.

I have no difficulty in understanding the correlation between the number of marked lanes and the road classification.

If they have a boundary between the directions they're still dual carriageways, just single lane ones. 'Dual' isn't referring to the number of lanes in any one direction.