Speed Camera Cut Down
Discussion
CLK-GTR said:
Debaser said:
Every time I return from Europe I can't help but imagine how much better our motorways would be with no limits. I know it'll never happen, but it's a nice dream to have.
Germany is the example. Derestricted autobahns have lower accident rates than those with speed limits, however the accidents that do occur are more likely to cause injury.To me there appears to very little argument against increasing speed limits on the quieter stretches of UK motorway other than it goes against the general anti-car ethos of the current government.
Labour governments hate cars and love speed limits. We have Labour to thank for the 70 motorway limit and widespread 20 limits in Wales and London.
When Labour come to power, motoring is going to become more expensive and slower. Aligned with the Dutch daytime motorway limit of 100 km/h (62 mph), I predict a new improved motorway limit of 60 mph. Except our limit will apply day and night, 24/7.
We shall see
According to legend we have AC and Jaguar to thank for motorway speed limits 
.
A Cobra Coupe apparently hit 185mph while using the M1 as a test track and Jaguar used it for high speed runs in the E Type. The government didn't want to encourage that sort of behaviour so the speed limits came in.
. A Cobra Coupe apparently hit 185mph while using the M1 as a test track and Jaguar used it for high speed runs in the E Type. The government didn't want to encourage that sort of behaviour so the speed limits came in.
JerseyRoyal said:
According to legend we have AC and Jaguar to thank for motorway speed limits .
A Cobra Coupe apparently hit 185mph while using the M1 as a test track and Jaguar used it for high speed runs in the E Type. The government didn't want to encourage that sort of behaviour so the speed limits came in.
No. . A Cobra Coupe apparently hit 185mph while using the M1 as a test track and Jaguar used it for high speed runs in the E Type. The government didn't want to encourage that sort of behaviour so the speed limits came in.
It was because drivers didn't drive to the conditions resulting in multiple fatality pile ups in fog.
vonhosen said:
Speed limits are to help save lives, help traffic management & control pollution etc.
Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Classic mission creep and classic Von Hosen. "How many reasons can I come up with to continue to justify a policy that penalises (sometimes seriously) millions of people going about their daily lives and does nothing to solve the problems it's claimed to." Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Whatever next Von? It helps you lose weight, stop smoking, fight cancer?
bigothunter said:
Debaser said:
Every time I return from Europe I can't help but imagine how much better our motorways would be with no limits. I know it'll never happen, but it's a nice dream to have.
No limits on UK motorways worked from 1959 to December 1965. But we lost the urge to travel quickly and efficiently. Randy Winkman said:
bigothunter said:
Debaser said:
Every time I return from Europe I can't help but imagine how much better our motorways would be with no limits. I know it'll never happen, but it's a nice dream to have.
No limits on UK motorways worked from 1959 to December 1965. But we lost the urge to travel quickly and efficiently. Debaser said:
Randy Winkman said:
bigothunter said:
Debaser said:
Every time I return from Europe I can't help but imagine how much better our motorways would be with no limits. I know it'll never happen, but it's a nice dream to have.
No limits on UK motorways worked from 1959 to December 1965. But we lost the urge to travel quickly and efficiently. 
Randy Winkman said:
Most cars could barely do about 80mph then and we also have about 4 times as many of them.
The limit was what, 75% of the top speed of the average car back then? It wasn't designed to limit us all, it was designed to reign in the upper extreme driving beyond the limits of themselves/their cars. It's been changed now to drag us all down to the opposite extreme, the worst drivers and cars on the road.jm doc said:
vonhosen said:
Speed limits are to help save lives, help traffic management & control pollution etc.
Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Classic mission creep and classic Von Hosen. "How many reasons can I come up with to continue to justify a policy that penalises (sometimes seriously) millions of people going about their daily lives and does nothing to solve the problems it's claimed to." Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Whatever next Von? It helps you lose weight, stop smoking, fight cancer?
I'm not really fussed either way, so I'm not invested in who wins out in this.
I'm merely pointing out that if you have speed limits then it makes sense to enforce them & it makes no sense having them if you don't have enforcement of them.
CLK-GTR said:
Debaser said:
Every time I return from Europe I can't help but imagine how much better our motorways would be with no limits. I know it'll never happen, but it's a nice dream to have.
Germany is the example. Derestricted autobahns have lower accident rates than those with speed limits, however the accidents that do occur are more likely to cause injury.To me there appears to very little argument against increasing speed limits on the quieter stretches of UK motorway other than it goes against the general anti-car ethos of the current government.
I don't think this or any previous govt is anti car. If you think they are, why not give up motoring for a spell and see how you get on?
I think you'll find the govt is strongly against anyone not using a car (apart from those on private jets, obvs). A constant, permanent war (and a strong restriction on choice) has been waged against the poor sods who can't use a car for whatever reason.
heebeegeetee said:
I don't think this or any previous govt is anti car. If you think they are, why not give up motoring for a spell and see how you get on?
Welsh Government is overtly anti car. And Angela Rayner applauds Welsh Labour as the Blueprint for Britain. Not difficult to see where this is heading...vonhosen said:
JerseyRoyal said:
According to legend we have AC and Jaguar to thank for motorway speed limits .
A Cobra Coupe apparently hit 185mph while using the M1 as a test track and Jaguar used it for high speed runs in the E Type. The government didn't want to encourage that sort of behaviour so the speed limits came in.
No. . A Cobra Coupe apparently hit 185mph while using the M1 as a test track and Jaguar used it for high speed runs in the E Type. The government didn't want to encourage that sort of behaviour so the speed limits came in.
It was because drivers didn't drive to the conditions resulting in multiple fatality pile ups in fog.
Pea soup fog so thick that safely maintaining 30mph was a challenge.
So Labour imposed a 70 limit to fix the problem, at a time when most cars had max speeds just a smidgen over 70 mph.
Made no sense back in 1965. Makes even less sense today. Sustained political gesturing at its most cynical
bigothunter said:
Welsh Government is overtly anti car. And Angela Rayner applauds Welsh Labour as the Blueprint for Britain. Not difficult to see where this is heading...
Our last 3 trips into Wales were to marshal on stage rallies, we got about ok, saw surprisingly few (if any?) 20mph zones, the rallies were taking place, everyone going about the business, I haven't been into South Wales for a while but i saw nothing anti-car whatsoever. Saw nothing out of the usual at all. The one rally was totally disrupted by this banker https://www.dailypost.co.uk/news/north-wales-news/...
Caused total mayhem, apparently HGVs were getting stuck on hills on the diversion etc.
There were European crews on the event who had trailered right across the UK, paid expensive entry fees etc, only got about half an event. Families came up out of Betws y Coed on what was a nice afternoon, into the forest, waited hours, saw nothing.
Anyway, a bit off topic.
CLK-GTR said:
Randy Winkman said:
Most cars could barely do about 80mph then and we also have about 4 times as many of them.
The limit was what, 75% of the top speed of the average car back then? It wasn't designed to limit us all, it was designed to reign in the upper extreme driving beyond the limits of themselves/their cars. It's been changed now to drag us all down to the opposite extreme, the worst drivers and cars on the road.Randy Winkman said:
Debaser said:
Randy Winkman said:
bigothunter said:
Debaser said:
Every time I return from Europe I can't help but imagine how much better our motorways would be with no limits. I know it'll never happen, but it's a nice dream to have.
No limits on UK motorways worked from 1959 to December 1965. But we lost the urge to travel quickly and efficiently. Rumblestripe said:
Randy Winkman said:
Debaser said:
Randy Winkman said:
bigothunter said:
Debaser said:
Every time I return from Europe I can't help but imagine how much better our motorways would be with no limits. I know it'll never happen, but it's a nice dream to have.
No limits on UK motorways worked from 1959 to December 1965. But we lost the urge to travel quickly and efficiently. vonhosen said:
jm doc said:
vonhosen said:
Speed limits are to help save lives, help traffic management & control pollution etc.
Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Classic mission creep and classic Von Hosen. "How many reasons can I come up with to continue to justify a policy that penalises (sometimes seriously) millions of people going about their daily lives and does nothing to solve the problems it's claimed to." Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Whatever next Von? It helps you lose weight, stop smoking, fight cancer?
I'm not really fussed either way, so I'm not invested in who wins out in this.
I'm merely pointing out that if you have speed limits then it makes sense to enforce them & it makes no sense having them if you don't have enforcement of them.
I meet many people through work, a large proportion who are middle aged, elderly, law abiding citizens, and who have been caught by speed camera's whilst doing 35mph on local roads that are perfectly safe at far higher speeds, and until recently, had far higher limits.
That's harassment and extortion, not safety, and each and every person who has been caught will tell you that.
How to alienate the public, let people with agendas make up the rules.
jm doc said:
vonhosen said:
jm doc said:
vonhosen said:
Speed limits are to help save lives, help traffic management & control pollution etc.
Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Classic mission creep and classic Von Hosen. "How many reasons can I come up with to continue to justify a policy that penalises (sometimes seriously) millions of people going about their daily lives and does nothing to solve the problems it's claimed to." Enforcement of the limits is a necessity of their existence.
Sure have scientific trials, but make sure you are looking at all facets & outcomes, not just cherry picking what you fancy.
We are consistently one of the top performing countries globally when it comes to minimising road deaths with whichever metric you like (deaths per million population, per million vehicles or per billion miles).
Whatever next Von? It helps you lose weight, stop smoking, fight cancer?
I'm not really fussed either way, so I'm not invested in who wins out in this.
I'm merely pointing out that if you have speed limits then it makes sense to enforce them & it makes no sense having them if you don't have enforcement of them.
I meet many people through work, a large proportion who are middle aged, elderly, law abiding citizens, and who have been caught by speed camera's whilst doing 35mph on local roads that are perfectly safe at far higher speeds, and until recently, had far higher limits.
That's harassment and extortion, not safety, and each and every person who has been caught will tell you that.
How to alienate the public, let people with agendas make up the rules.
I meet very few of the 6% who do, yet you seem to meet a disproportionate amount of them then.
Of the few I do meet, they are of a mind that they took their chance & got caught. They knew the rules & risks. They take personal responsibility for their actions.
CLK-GTR said:
Randy Winkman said:
Most cars could barely do about 80mph then and we also have about 4 times as many of them.
The limit was what, 75% of the top speed of the average car back then? It wasn't designed to limit us all, it was designed to reign in the upper extreme driving beyond the limits of themselves/their cars. It's been changed now to drag us all down to the opposite extreme, the worst drivers and cars on the road.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff