RE: Dangerous Driving Reviewed

[ca2]

quote:
so xylophone, do you practice your archery every Sunday? If not you are breaking the law, (ancient law states that every englishman has to practice archery every sunday to prepare for the defence of the realm). I'm not making this up, I have a friend who is into archery.

Smeagol,

I have been looking for such a ridiculous law that I can throw back at the 'must obey the speed limit at all costs' brigage in the letters page of our local paper.

I wonder if you or your mate couldshed any light on which act of parliament refers to this, just so that I can quote chapter and verse the next time I need to.

Cheers,

Ca

[MattC]

quote:
...
He is a Class 1 Traffic Officer who specialises in Fatal Road Traffic Accidents.
...

Now THERE'S a quote that could be misinterpreted....

[smeagol]

Ca2 I'll try and email him and see what he says. I know that parlement have recently abolished some ancient laws so it might now no longer be a requirement (this was only last year though). Another example was King Charles spaniels were actually classed as a royal personage (law passed by King Charles) and were exempt from the "no dogs" rules ie a King Charles could enter resturants, kitchens etc. That was revoked when someone actually did it. (sad things you read occasionaly )

Anyway I'll see what my friend says. Are there any laws people know of which are rediculous but still going (don't say speed limits, cos we know that one already)

[smeagol]

Look at this the power of the internet. He believes the Archery law was repealed (by Chairman Thatcher). He also reminded me of another law (unfortunately also repealed)was that Hackney cabs had to carry hay.

Sorry Ca but I'm certain that there are other laws out there.

[JMGS4]

Another unrepealed law; the Peelers must walk in the street as the pavement was always the property of the house owner thus lowlife cannot use "their" pavement!

[mattjbatch]

There is a law on the books of Tennesse that says a man must run in front of a vehicle that a woman is driving, and, that the car may not go faster than five miles an hour

[mattjbatch]

Check out

www.dumblaws.com

for some comic reading.

[hertsbiker]

quote:
Being in a stream of traffic with at least a 2 second gap between cars is safe at 70 80 or 90 mph (in good conditions) when all the cars are going the same way.

Actually recent journo-research by PB magazine has shown that a 2 second gap is vastly too big. A one second gap is perfectly adequate PROVIDED people are paying attention ! (who, me? crash...!)

Not that I am casting doubt on the skill of my car driving brothers at PH, but the majority of car drivers are complete morons - arseing around with stereo's, heaters, talking to passengers. Doing makeup.

This is the only reason for a 2 second gap - caters for inattention to the task in hand ! the vehicle and tyre technology is good enough for much reduced gaps.

We humans are the weakest link. Goodbye - if trends carry on, we will be made obsolete. Think on that.

Carl

[mattjbatch]

It is legal for a male to urinate in public, as long it is on the rear wheel of his motor vehicle and his right hand is on the vehicle.

I haven't made that up, honest!

[hertsbiker]

quote:
I see the danger with the current proposal being that the Govt will introduce a guideline like '30mph over the limit' will be considered dangerous driving. Fine in a 30/40/50/60 limit, but on a motorway in the right conditions...? And isn't dangerous driving a criminal offence - huge implications.

Oh. And how many of us "occasionally" take a trip up to 90+ on NSL road? when it is SAFE of course !

I can predict a trend towards acceleration biased machines, specifically limited to 80-90 top speed. This will give most people a huge thrill, without drastically exceeding the speed limit.

rgds.

[CarZee]

quote:It is legal for a male to urinate in public, as long it is on the rear wheel of his motor vehicle and his right hand is on the vehicle.

Been doing that for years - just have to keep rotating my tyres so that the discoloration is the same on all four alloys

[deanb]

Just a thought......

c60m population in UK

Let´s say we spend an average of 20 mins / person / day in the car.

Now let´s suppose we all stuck rigidly to the speed limit & added 10% to our journey times. (abject guesses rather than hard data I admit)

i.e. 2 mins * 60m extra travel time / day

(don't have calculator on me, so forgive crude approximations)

= 120 m minutes = 2m hours = about 100,000 days = 300 yrs

i.e. slowing down enough to increase journey times by 2 mins per person per day is equivalent to about 4 average human lifetimes or 8 "life expectations"

ie equivalent to killing 8 people per day, or roughly the same number that die on the roads at present.

Therefore, it's all a complete waste of time.

[m700 tus]

quote:
It is legal for a male to urinate in public, as long it is on the rear wheel of his motor vehicle and his right hand is on the vehicle.

Maybe, but you'll still get nicked. Just because your fine (£260) will have to be repaid to you (several months later) when the loophole is revealed to the Police isn't much of a comfort. Particularly, as you will have to fill in many forms to make the appeal and get the refund.

My advice: find a bush and contribute direct to the environment. Much better than buying a diesel Lotus .

[smeagol]

Of course Ka I forgot the most stupid law. "that a couple aged sizteen are considered mature and responsible enough to have a child, but they can't buy a botle of champaigne to celabrate, neither are they mature and responsible enough to vote for the next government."

I used that once on the "its the law crowd" and they shut right up

[ninja_eli]

m700 tus, personal experience? Could you not explain the loophole to the police at time of arrest?

When I got my Supra from Japan, I personally imported and the number plate had been deleted in Japan. Due to the delay for processing of a reg no, I decided to use the car with some false plates. I looked in the Japanese registration export doc and found some characters that looked like they could be the Jap reg no. I drew these characters on two small whiteboards and attached to the car. Got stopped 4 times in the same day but amount of paperwork I had confused them so much they just agreed everything was okay and said I should get my UK plates as soon as possible.

I found the statement " as you know the law requires..." etc to be very helpful in persuading an officer who knew little about that area of law. I think they get embarressed about seeming dumb.

some nice officers around though, one raced me for a half a mile on an empty stretch late at night, then he said "I think you won, we should stop now, keep the speed down!". nice guy.

Regards

[relaxitscool]

Hi all

Having read the interesting debate going on here I have to jump to xylophone's defence. If we all drove to the standard he was talking about and trained to, there would be no gatso's because there would be hardly any need.

I'm not saying accidents wouldn't happen cause they would. But there would be far less. The reason, if you drive to roadcraft your driving is much improved, smoother and safer, even at speed, which I have the opportunity to transgress now and again (and enjoy)

During a driving course I had the fortune of going on my instructor ingrained two things into me. (no sniggering at the back) 1. stick to posted limits (30,40,50 etc) 2. Maximum progress, 100% safe.

[nonegreen]

quote:
Hi all

Having read the interesting debate going on here I have to jump to xylophone's defence. If we all drove to the standard he was talking about and trained to, there would be no gatso's because there would be hardly any need.

I'm not saying accidents wouldn't happen cause they would. But there would be far less. The reason, if you drive to roadcraft your driving is much improved, smoother and safer, even at speed, which I have the opportunity to transgress now and again (and enjoy)

During a driving course I had the fortune of going on my instructor ingrained two things into me. (no sniggering at the back) 1. stick to posted limits (30,40,50 etc) 2. Maximum progress, 100% safe.

Please don't take this the wrong way. The concept of hardly any need for gatso's is an interesting one. I think most people would agree there is a need for gatsos but not in most of the places where they are currently located. The reasons you have given for there being no need for them is strangely innocent. The only reason to buy loads of gatsos and put them on dual cariagways and NSL roads is to gather revenue. Their installation and the subsequent debate, is about the issue of revenue, not road safety. Conclusion, Gatsos make no contribution to road safety regardless of your stance on speed because they are not located in the places where accidents happen.

Your second hypothesis regarding reduction in accidents if we all drove like xylophone, or you, or plod, clearly misses the fact that most deaths and injuries occur where pedestrians (3mph) collide with cars (30mph), usually the two are travelling perpendicular to each other. If drunks, untrained youngsters and toddlers allowed out by irresponsible parents continue to populate the pavements then deaths and injuries will remain the same. The stats do not show drivers to be predominantly at fault in the majority of cases.

Affirmations from your instructor. Stick to the posted limits! No, very very very dangerous on single lane NSLs when overtaking. Same applies to poor driving conditions whre posted limits are too fast. Limits and rules in general cause more problems than they are worth because people interpret them wrongly and driving conditions change, not just because of weather, but because of culture, volumes and technique. "maximum progress 100% safe" Dangerous arrogant bull. Margine for error, both yours, (because we all make them) and other road users.

It seems to me that the centre of the debate here is that some of us are libertarian enough to regard speed limits as questionable. Some of us are not. We could assign all kinds of reasons for that difference of opinion. It could for example easily be explained by personality type. History, however tells us irrefutably that the only way we make progress as a race is to question all things at all times. If we don't destroy ourselves in the meantime we may one day leave our planet and colonise elswhere, maybe even create a speed limit free society. Again sorry to be so critical but your post oversimplified the issues in my opinion.

[hertsbiker]

quote:
If drunks, untrained youngsters and toddlers allowed out by irresponsible parents continue to populate the pavements then deaths and injuries will remain the same. The stats do not show drivers to be predominantly at fault in the majority of cases.

It makes me sick that due to the stupidity of pedestrians, we the motorists have to go slower. Why isn't there a campaign of pedestrian education, and extra fencing by roadsides to prevent accidents??

How come *we* always pay the price for everyone elses stupidity?

[relaxitscool]

Hello, and no offence taken.

"Conclusion, Gatsos make no contribution to road safety regardless of your stance on speed because they are not located in the places where accidents happen."

I disagree. A Gatso outside a school will dramatically reduce speeding in crowded situations. ie. schools turning out and reduce accidents or the likelihood of accidents. Yes, placed on Nationals they can be an ass and I've seen some unquestionable places. But by and large they are placed approaching or covering junctions where they cause most people to brake. Again, they are doing their job.

"Your second hypothesis regarding reduction in accidents if we all drove like xylophone, or you, or plod, clearly misses the fact that most deaths and injuries occur where pedestrians (3mph) collide with cars (30mph)"

Yes, and drivers like us are trained to extend our observations and look for these hazards, and to look for clues as to what is about to happen. Sticking to the limit just gives a more thinking time.

"The stats do not show drivers to be predominantly at fault in the majority of cases."

I agree, everybody needs educating, what happened to the green cross code ads on TV? However, if drivers showed they were responsible, eventually we might get some slack cut....eventually...

"Affirmations from your instructor. Stick to the posted limits! No, very very very dangerous on single...."

Okay there were three points. Didn't want to say the last one but anyway. Point 3. "If we're in a 30mph limit and its only safe to 19, I want to know why we're doing 20. If we're in a national and it’s safe to 135, I want to know why we are only doing 134."

"Again sorry to be so critical but your post oversimplified the issues in my opinion."

Not at all. I believe what the other guy was saying is that training makes for better driver..which is does. I also said that I enjoy driving, which I do. Think about this, if there were no cars on the road pedestrians wouldn't get run over. However, if there were no pedestrians there would still be accidents.... contentious or what ?

[CarZee]

quote:I disagree. A Gatso outside a school will dramatically reduce speeding in crowded situations. ie. schools turning out and reduce accidents or the likelihood of accidents.

That's balls. How does a Gatso which only enforces a 30mph limit prevent accidents which happen below 30mph? I'd wager that except where a school is right on a major road, most accidents around schools involve much slower moving vehicles - many are caused by parents not paying proper attention when entering and exiting parking spaces - you might prevent 1 in 10 potential accidents with a gatso. So what's the point?

quote:by and large they are placed approaching or covering junctions where they cause most people to brake. Again, they are doing their job.

No they are not - mostly they are on open stretches of road, far away from junctions.

quote:if drivers showed they were responsible, eventually we might get some slack cut....eventually...

No offence intended but I think that's an extremely naive point of view, when the road safety and environmental agendas are set by people who, for the sake of their political credibility, hate cars and drivers.

quote:Think about this, if there were no cars on the road pedestrians wouldn't get run over. However, if there were no pedestrians there would still be accidents.... contentious or what ?

I appreciate that this is intended as a 'thought experiement' but in any real world context, the fact is that the economy relies on personal mobility and yet this is something which the state and it's apparatus are unable to provide for adequately, so we rely on cars etc.

Do we really want a world made of cotton wool and bubble wrap, where risk is the new racism? It's in the interests of humanity to see that this does not become the case.