Discussion
Easy boys!
I thought I'd wade into this one. Please don't hate me, NoneGreen, but lorus, in a roundabout way, has a valid point.
Sure, we're living in a nanny state where we are told how to do everything other than wiping our arses (the european Parliament are looking into that one). That said, if you press the pedal in 30s, 40s or 50s, the law seems to come down hard. That's just the way it is. I think that was the point originally made.
Apart from that, on the NS roads, they seem (in the most part) more reasonable.
In support of NoneGreen, I think it's wrong to have so many cameras and so few signs reminding one of the local speed limit.
Let's face it, we all hate the anti-road cuture and the lack of logic shown by some of the speed limits imposed. We just have to live with them, though.
Smile!
I thought I'd wade into this one. Please don't hate me, NoneGreen, but lorus, in a roundabout way, has a valid point.
Sure, we're living in a nanny state where we are told how to do everything other than wiping our arses (the european Parliament are looking into that one). That said, if you press the pedal in 30s, 40s or 50s, the law seems to come down hard. That's just the way it is. I think that was the point originally made.
Apart from that, on the NS roads, they seem (in the most part) more reasonable.
In support of NoneGreen, I think it's wrong to have so many cameras and so few signs reminding one of the local speed limit.
Let's face it, we all hate the anti-road cuture and the lack of logic shown by some of the speed limits imposed. We just have to live with them, though.
Smile!
quote:
Unfortunately mate you might get a housewife from Wilmslow on the bench and unless you look like Brad Pitt, you might as well plead guilty. This lot are like the Stepford wives.
It looks like i'm in the shit then cos i look more like one of Brad pitts daogs in Snatch than i do him. Cheers anyway.
Matt
quote:
Easy boys!
I thought I'd wade into this one. Please don't hate me, NoneGreen, but lorus, in a roundabout way, has a valid point.
Sure, we're living in a nanny state where we are told how to do everything other than wiping our arses (the european Parliament are looking into that one). That said, if you press the pedal in 30s, 40s or 50s, the law seems to come down hard. That's just the way it is. I think that was the point originally made.
Apart from that, on the NS roads, they seem (in the most part) more reasonable.
In support of NoneGreen, I think it's wrong to have so many cameras and so few signs reminding one of the local speed limit.
Let's face it, we all hate the anti-road cuture and the lack of logic shown by some of the speed limits imposed. We just have to live with them, though.
Smile!
I dont think I hate anyone. Do you really think we just have to put up with it? One of the real GREENIES Tony Benn once said (Misquote no doubt) "When dealing with the authorities, my aproach is always to question from where they get their authority and from whom that person gets the authority to appoint them, so I can see what I can do about removing them from their position." Or words to that effect, have to admire the guy in a way. On that basis I fail to see why we have to put up with anything. On a personal basis I definately do not have to realise I am wrong because some other bugger says so and I certainly will never ever give up fighting for what I believe is common sense.
I don't put the same slant on the EU though, I think the fact that the German motoring lobby have just declared all the speed cameras erronious including ours is a blow for common sense. I don't believe the French would tollerate speed cameras in the same quantities we do,(in fact I think the lot would be on the skip by now).
Finally I still think Loruses point is ridiculous, the previous post highlighted the fact that speed limits are being lowered everywhere (in my opinion to create more congestion). Taking that to its logical conclusion when the speed limit is 3mph would it be over the top to do 5 mph? If Parliament declared it illegal to breath would Lorus be trying to hold his breath?
nonegreen,
I think you're missing the point, or at least making a different point. Fact is speed limits are coming down. Until common sense takes over (the sooner the better), we are stuck with senseless limits. lorus' and my initial point was that the hammer comes down harder on those exceeding the lower limits.
As an aside (speaking as a cynic myself), I think you are a little wide of the mark to suggest that speed limits have been reduced to increase congestion. Always a vote winner, congestion. On the M25, the variable speed limits are there to reduce congestion. They have been shown to work, too. The lower limits cut down the 'stop start' flow of traffic. But don't get me wrong - I still think a lot of the limits imposed on safe dual carriageways are too low.
I don't think we can take this to the 'logical' conclusion of a 3mph limit. That is no more logical a conclusion than no speed limits whatsoever in built up areas (you and I might well apply common sense to the accelerator, but Mr Nova 1.2SR won't).
We all break the speed limit (it's one of the perks of a TVR), but it's when and where we choose to do it that needs common sense. Have you never watched some idiot roaring through the middle of town and thought 'd!ckh£@d'? For the speed limits to apply to these idiots, they have to apply to everyone.
I think you're missing the point, or at least making a different point. Fact is speed limits are coming down. Until common sense takes over (the sooner the better), we are stuck with senseless limits. lorus' and my initial point was that the hammer comes down harder on those exceeding the lower limits.
As an aside (speaking as a cynic myself), I think you are a little wide of the mark to suggest that speed limits have been reduced to increase congestion. Always a vote winner, congestion. On the M25, the variable speed limits are there to reduce congestion. They have been shown to work, too. The lower limits cut down the 'stop start' flow of traffic. But don't get me wrong - I still think a lot of the limits imposed on safe dual carriageways are too low.
I don't think we can take this to the 'logical' conclusion of a 3mph limit. That is no more logical a conclusion than no speed limits whatsoever in built up areas (you and I might well apply common sense to the accelerator, but Mr Nova 1.2SR won't).
We all break the speed limit (it's one of the perks of a TVR), but it's when and where we choose to do it that needs common sense. Have you never watched some idiot roaring through the middle of town and thought 'd!ckh£@d'? For the speed limits to apply to these idiots, they have to apply to everyone.
I don't see why you're arguing, even if it is interesting up to a point.
You're forgetting that the Enemy is at number 10, and lives in every damn grey box that spies on us.
You all have fast motors, and the will to use them. Use your energies in fighting the ever-reducing limits, and stop being bitchy.
As to 3mph limits, don't laugh - we'll soon be forced down to 10mph, in these nauseating "play streets", so don't go thinking for one minute that even lower isn't possible.
Keep it shiney side up people!
Carl
You're forgetting that the Enemy is at number 10, and lives in every damn grey box that spies on us.
You all have fast motors, and the will to use them. Use your energies in fighting the ever-reducing limits, and stop being bitchy.
As to 3mph limits, don't laugh - we'll soon be forced down to 10mph, in these nauseating "play streets", so don't go thinking for one minute that even lower isn't possible.
Keep it shiney side up people!
Carl
quote:
"Taking that to its logical conclusion when the speed limit is 3mph would it be over the top to do 5 mph? If Parliament declared it illegal to breath would Lorus be trying to hold his breath?"
And you think my point is ridiculous?
Ah so there is a point at which you would decalre the law ridiculous then. Good!
That means it is only the degree to which the law is ridiculous left to decide. We might have to agree to differ there!
Edited by nonegreen on Monday 17th December 21:50
quote:
As to 3mph limits, don't laugh - we'll soon be forced down to 10mph, in these nauseating "play streets", so don't go thinking for one minute that even lower isn't possible.
in Germany, we have "play streets" with a speed limit of 5kph=3mph. They even had speed traps in them!!! Have you noticed that of late in german cars the speedos start at 0 kph, instead of 20 kph? People complained to the german car makers that they were getting caught, and didn't know how fast they were travelling because the speedo started at 20 kph.
Rgds WalterU
I just have to make some comments - some of them may raise a few hackles 
there is never any justification for speed cameras - PERIOD. They are revenue generators - PERIOD. Even the biggest accident black spot isn't one at 2 am in the morning when you're the only thing moving.
I think play streets are good. Perhaps kids will then have the same freedom to roam without worrying that I had as a kid. That would be wonderful.
I think that as motorists we "own" motorways. The more residential it gets, the less rights we have. Like it or not, not just cars have the right to use the road.
In think that in the 60s and 70s there was a certain deficit. Everything was too car-centred, pedestrians and cyclists also have rights. However, the balance has been redressed too far. Somehow, pendulums always seem to swing too far. Now motorists are an endangered species just as males are (viz. womens lib, which is another pendulum that has swung way too far).
there is a serious democratic deficit in all modern democracies, on all levels of policymaking. All laws are reduced to the smallest common denominator. Motoring laws, speed limits etc etc seem to be made for the one-in-a-thousand god-awful joe "powermax" micra driver, thereby impeding - and massively curtailing - the rights of the vast majority. The same applies to many other areas. This for me is the Nanny State.
There is a definite, and concerted attempt to get us out of our cars. The powers that be will try anything and tell any amount of lies to achieve this. They have a point. We cannot turn every sqinch of the UK into roads, and ultimately it will end in gridlock. What makes me incandescent with rage is that they fleece us motorists to improve public transport, and then DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WITH THE MONEY to improve public transport.
There are far too many people running around shouting out what their rights are, rather than asking themselves what their duty is to the community. This attititude, and the nanny state, will ultimately lead to disaster.
I don't know what this disaster will be or what it will look like. I don't know how to stop it. I just am bloody sure that its coming.
Rgds WalterU
(puts on his flak jacket and lights up a joint to alleviate onset of severe depression)
Edited by WalterU on Tuesday 18th December 20:13
there is never any justification for speed cameras - PERIOD. They are revenue generators - PERIOD. Even the biggest accident black spot isn't one at 2 am in the morning when you're the only thing moving.
I think play streets are good. Perhaps kids will then have the same freedom to roam without worrying that I had as a kid. That would be wonderful.
I think that as motorists we "own" motorways. The more residential it gets, the less rights we have. Like it or not, not just cars have the right to use the road.
In think that in the 60s and 70s there was a certain deficit. Everything was too car-centred, pedestrians and cyclists also have rights. However, the balance has been redressed too far. Somehow, pendulums always seem to swing too far. Now motorists are an endangered species just as males are (viz. womens lib, which is another pendulum that has swung way too far).
there is a serious democratic deficit in all modern democracies, on all levels of policymaking. All laws are reduced to the smallest common denominator. Motoring laws, speed limits etc etc seem to be made for the one-in-a-thousand god-awful joe "powermax" micra driver, thereby impeding - and massively curtailing - the rights of the vast majority. The same applies to many other areas. This for me is the Nanny State.
There is a definite, and concerted attempt to get us out of our cars. The powers that be will try anything and tell any amount of lies to achieve this. They have a point. We cannot turn every sqinch of the UK into roads, and ultimately it will end in gridlock. What makes me incandescent with rage is that they fleece us motorists to improve public transport, and then DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WITH THE MONEY to improve public transport.
There are far too many people running around shouting out what their rights are, rather than asking themselves what their duty is to the community. This attititude, and the nanny state, will ultimately lead to disaster.
I don't know what this disaster will be or what it will look like. I don't know how to stop it. I just am bloody sure that its coming.
Rgds WalterU
(puts on his flak jacket and lights up a joint to alleviate onset of severe depression)
Edited by WalterU on Tuesday 18th December 20:13
quote:
Walter
I think you and 'nonegreen' should get together in a one on one forum,
it certainly would entertain the hell out of me.
So you want entertainment eh? That takes vast quantiites of wine and spirits. But seriously I agree with everyting Walter has said, can't find a flaw in it so if we were on a one on forum it would get a bit boring.
Just for the sake of the debate what about a minimum motorway speed limit of say 100mph the impounding and subsequent crushing of all vehicles with less than 150bhp / ton. The posting of signs in accident blackspots saying "This area is inhabited by irresponsible parents who are likely to let their offspring run about willy nilly from the age of 2, take care or you might snot the poor little buggers. On second thoughts never mind they are readily reproduced by unskilled labour".
Is that the kind of thing you had in mind? :smile:
in the spirit of maintaining healthy debate. My reactions:
can't agree completely; used to be a farm nearby when I was a kid with an outhouse building just around the corner from a 50 degree bend on a nice stretch of de-restricted A road. Probably saw 5 fatal RTAs over the period of 2 years from cars speeding, losing control and then ploughing into said building. Perfectly happy to accept that speed was not the only contributing factor to the accidents, but I'm pretty confident that a camera 1/2 mile before that bend would have prevented 3 or 4 of those deaths.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that the current implementation of cameras in the UK is almost entirely revenue driven, I just don't accept that they cannot be used in a safety/deterrent capacity.
Agree 100%
I think you are assuming a level of co-ordination and pre-meditation that simply doesn't exist. as a motorist, pedestrian and serious cyclist, I see no balance, nor pendulum. City centres in the UK are rarely configured to make life better for any of these stakeholders. Urban planning is an oxymoron, pure and simple.
More transparency with the government's accounting might help us understand where the money goes, but I suspect that radical ideas to improve public transportation get blunted and compromised as they are pushed through the 'process' of governmental approval and all we see are the limp left-overs of good ideas. As has been said before, the government recognises personal transportation as a soft target (i.e. motorist are easy prey for the revenue side of the equation, and sh*tty public transport is not a significant vote-loser on the cost side of the same equation)
pass the joint will you, I need to cheer myself up again.
quote:
there is never any justification for speed cameras - PERIOD. They are revenue generators - PERIOD. Even the biggest accident black spot isn't one at 2 am in the morning when you're the only thing moving.
can't agree completely; used to be a farm nearby when I was a kid with an outhouse building just around the corner from a 50 degree bend on a nice stretch of de-restricted A road. Probably saw 5 fatal RTAs over the period of 2 years from cars speeding, losing control and then ploughing into said building. Perfectly happy to accept that speed was not the only contributing factor to the accidents, but I'm pretty confident that a camera 1/2 mile before that bend would have prevented 3 or 4 of those deaths.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that the current implementation of cameras in the UK is almost entirely revenue driven, I just don't accept that they cannot be used in a safety/deterrent capacity.
quote:
I think play streets are good. Perhaps kids will then have the same freedom to roam without worrying that I had as a kid. That would be wonderful.
I think that as motorists we "own" motorways. The more residential it gets, the less rights we have. Like it or not, not just cars have the right to use the road.
Agree 100%
quote:
In think that in the 60s and 70s there was a certain deficit. Everything was too car-centred, pedestrians and cyclists also have rights. However, the balance has been redressed too far. Somehow, pendulums always seem to swing too far. Now motorists are an endangered species just as males are (viz. womens lib, which is another pendulum that has swung way too far).
I think you are assuming a level of co-ordination and pre-meditation that simply doesn't exist. as a motorist, pedestrian and serious cyclist, I see no balance, nor pendulum. City centres in the UK are rarely configured to make life better for any of these stakeholders. Urban planning is an oxymoron, pure and simple.
quote:
There is a definite, and concerted attempt to get us out of our cars. The powers that be will try anything and tell any amount of lies to achieve this. They have a point. We cannot turn every sqinch of the UK into roads, and ultimately it will end in gridlock. What makes me incandescent with rage is that they fleece us motorists to improve public transport, and then DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING WITH THE MONEY to improve public transport.
More transparency with the government's accounting might help us understand where the money goes, but I suspect that radical ideas to improve public transportation get blunted and compromised as they are pushed through the 'process' of governmental approval and all we see are the limp left-overs of good ideas. As has been said before, the government recognises personal transportation as a soft target (i.e. motorist are easy prey for the revenue side of the equation, and sh*tty public transport is not a significant vote-loser on the cost side of the same equation)
pass the joint will you, I need to cheer myself up again.
Paul wrote
quote:
in the spirit of maintaining healthy debate. My reactions:
quote:
there is never any justification for speed cameras - PERIOD. They are revenue generators - PERIOD. Even the biggest accident black spot isn't one at 2 am in the morning when you're the only thing moving.
can't agree completely; used to be a farm nearby when I was a kid with an outhouse building just around the corner from a 50 degree bend on a nice stretch of de-restricted A road. Probably saw 5 fatal RTAs over the period of 2 years from cars speeding, losing control and then ploughing into said building. Perfectly happy to accept that speed was not the only contributing factor to the accidents, but I'm pretty confident that a camera 1/2 mile before that bend would have prevented 3 or 4 of those deaths.
Don't get me wrong, I agree that the current implementation of cameras in the UK is almost entirely revenue driven, I just don't accept that they cannot be used in a safety/deterrent capacity.quote:
fair enough, I too know borderline cases. BUT:
how about a sign dangerous bend? How about a suitable speed limit?
If we then scrapped all the totally superfluous signs and speed limits, then the really necessary ones would be taken seriously again, and you wouldn't have your accident black spot.
Why do so many people speed on a regular basis?!? There are so many ludicrous speed limits at ludicrous places that noone takes them seriously any more. It reminds me of the fairytale "cry wolf".
In Germany the expression "Schilderwald" has gone into colloquial daily use. It means "sign forest" and denotes the constant profileration of superfluous road signs.
Rgds, WalterU
Edited by WalterU on Thursday 20th December 00:57
A camera for a bend still wouldn't work esp 1/2 a mile away as most drivers would slow down for the camera then speed right up again. Signs and recommended speeds are much better as it allows a driver to judge. Lots of roads in my area have national speed and sharp corners. Most locals now will happily belt down the straight but and slow right up for the corner all a traffic camera does is collect revenue from these people.
quote:
A camera for a bend still wouldn't work esp 1/2 a mile away as most drivers would slow down for the camera then speed right up again. Signs and recommended speeds are much better as it allows a driver to judge. Lots of roads in my area have national speed and sharp corners. Most locals now will happily belt down the straight but and slow right up for the corner all a traffic camera does is collect revenue from these people.
the sort of person who fails to judge their speed into a bend sufficiently to plough through a double wall of bricks is unlikely to notice/ pay heed to the sign saying "SLOW DOWN" in my opinion. Whether that same driver is more likely to notice two flashes of a camera behind him/her and then adjust their driving accordingly is another matter. I take your point.
quote:
how about a sign dangerous bend? How about a suitable speed limit?
If we then scrapped all the totally superfluous signs and speed limits, then the really necessary ones would be taken seriously again, and you wouldn't have your accident black spot.
Makes sense - I was reacting to your suggestion (inferred) that all cameras be scrapped.
Thinking further I suppose one of those radar-linked signs (like they often have at the start of contra-flows) with some message flashed up in-front of drivers above a certain speed could be employed in these cases.
quote:As long is the speed indicated was serious. The number of motorway slip roads of the 270-degree variety which have 'Max speed 30' on them when you can take them, in the wet, at 45-50 quite comfortably, lead you to ignore, or at least 'interpret' the speed on such signs.
Thinking further I suppose one of those radar-linked signs (like they often have at the start of contra-flows) with some message flashed up in-front of drivers above a certain speed could be employed in these cases.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff