Discussion
vonhosen said:
That's your opinion of what's right though, others have different ideas.
What you have to be is safe & legal with driving.
What you have to be is safe & legal with driving.
Ideally legal and safe should be the same thing, when it comes to laws concerning driving? That's where the problem lies IMHO. They do not equate, and the gap between the seems to be widening. The only ways I can see of improving safety are things like good driver training, improvements to car design (though this can have a reverse effect), improvements to roads and signage, and proper traffic police. Cameras just don't do it.
I won't deny that speed limits are useful for various reasons - some of which require enforcement to be fully effective (eg for young inexperienced drivers who otherwise would flaunt the limits in, say, town centres). But this national campaign of reducing speed limits on decent uninhabited stretches of road and then sticking a camera on them is either misguided, or designed purely to raise revenue.
Nobody here is arguing with the legality or "rightness" of MOTs, driving tests or car insurance. These are seen as sensible measures to minimise the likelihood of accidents, or to mitigate the financial impact of an accident.
I also think it is a valid connection to link the speed camera situation with other aspects of life in England these days. There is a completely misguided belief that you can create and maintain a good society through legislation and law enforcement alone, instead of by educating people to understand what is right and what is wrong. We need a lot less legislation and a lot more common sense. How get there from here is beyond me; I think things have gone too far now. Fewer and fewer people understand what is "right" and proper these days. Legislate too much, and you remove responsibility and the ability of people to make sensible judgements.
Going back to speeding once more - we are training drivers to stare at their speedometers constantly and to worry about them more than what's going on outside the car. It doesn't take a crystal ball to see what that's going to do for safety over the next few years.
gregwatson said:
Going back to speeding once more - we are training drivers to stare at their speedometers constantly and to worry about them more than what's going on outside the car. It doesn't take a crystal ball to see what that's going to do for safety over the next few years.
That's not what I train drivers to do.
We have had speed limits for 100 years & we are not likely to lose them.
They are a necessary tool, although in an ideal world we wouldn't need them (Infact in an ideal world we wouldn't need any laws).
We can't have everyone on the roads determining what is a safe speed for the circumstances without some upper limits, there just isn't a high enough standard skill base level to safely have that on our roads IMHO.
I don't advocate prosecutions for the smallest margins over the limit, but where someone's speed is a sizeable margin over the limit they have got to expect that they may be brought to task over it, even if circumstances were favourable at the time. In short it doesn't matter what the circumstances, you should still be attempting to stick to the limit & where you have shown a reasonable attempt to you should be OK. If you show no attempt to then, well you've left yourself wide open. Of course the best thing is remain safe & don't break the limit at all, because you'll always be OK.
I would support more variable limits on motorways & the infrastructure that currently exists could be reasonably adapted to accomodate that, but I don't think it's viable for other roads.
I can't say that every limit is set correctly because I don't have intimate knowledge of every road or area, but somebody has to be entrusted to set them. As with any public service or policy you have the power ultimately to encourage change through representation.
vonhosen said:
I can't say that every limit is set correctly because I don't have intimate knowledge of every road or area, but somebody has to be entrusted to set them. As with any public service or policy you have the power ultimately to encourage change through representation.
And therein lies the problem. This is an area where the lack of local accountability prevents sane decision making. Barring revolution its just not possible to address issues like this through representation.
Something went badly wrong a decade or two ago. Prior to that, best practice was used (normally the 85% rule unless there were obvious reasons not to). Now it seems to be based on the opinion of relatively ignorant and unintelligent muppets.
Von said:
That's not what I train drivers to do
Maybe not, but that's what speed cameras train them to do. What do you think most young drivers are looking out for? Children running out from ice cream vans? Shady patches underneath trees that could conceal ice? Or speed cameras?
Von said:
We have had speed limits for 100 years & we are not likely to lose them.
Luckily the same argument isn't used with polio, malaria, slavery, racism etc etc
Von said:
I don't advocate prosecutions for the smallest margins over the limit, but where someone's speed is a sizeable margin over the limit they have got to expect that they may be brought to task over it, even if circumstances were favourable at the time.
My point exactly; you feel that it is appropriate for you to exercise some judgement, something which speed cameras cannot do. We agree on that. Exactly where the line should be drawn is a separate matter.
Von said:
Of course the best thing is remain safe & don't break the limit at all, because you'll always be OK.
Depends what you mean by "OK". You won't get any points, maybe, but what about the restrictions on your freedom that might impose? What about losing the ability to enjoy driving? What about being forced to comply with restrictions you don't agree with, dreamt up by people who live in another world where traffic and trains and diverted if they're late for a meeting, and enforced by people who break the rules themselves? These are not healthy things. These are not "OK"...
gregwatson said:
Von said:
That's not what I train drivers to do
Maybe not, but that's what speed cameras train them to do. What do you think most young drivers are looking out for? Children running out from ice cream vans? Shady patches underneath trees that could conceal ice? Or speed cameras?
Cameras don't train people to do that. Do cameras make you look at your speedo too much & not the road ? I know that the speedo doesn't take an inordinate amount of my resources & it shouldn't do with any competent driver. It is only a basic skill. If it is making you spend too mcuh time looking at the speedo or you find it is compromising your safety, then perhaps you might consider some additional training.
gregwatson said:
Von said:
We have had speed limits for 100 years & we are not likely to lose them.
Luckily the same argument isn't used with polio, malaria, slavery, racism etc etc
Speed limits have positive benefits, unlike some other things. That's why most of the countries in the world have them.
gregwatson said:
Von said:
I don't advocate prosecutions for the smallest margins over the limit, but where someone's speed is a sizeable margin over the limit they have got to expect that they may be brought to task over it, even if circumstances were favourable at the time.
My point exactly; you feel that it is appropriate for you to exercise some judgement, something which speed cameras cannot do. We agree on that. Exactly where the line should be drawn is a separate matter.
My line drawn in the sand can well be a margin over the limit as well, just like the camera does. The line may not be drawn at the same place as all of them, but it's still a line in teh sand. Circumstances may be very favourable, but the mere fact you were flagrantly disregarding the limit means you'll get reported. Your pleading that you were safe won't prevent you being reported, because there is no requirement for actual danger to be present with speed enforcement. It is written as preventative legislation & that is how it should be used. If you don't attempt to keep to the limit & instead think that as long as you drive to what you "perceive" to be safe, then you will be safe from prosecution, you are mistaken.
gregwatson said:
Von said:
Of course the best thing is remain safe & don't break the limit at all, because you'll always be OK.
Depends what you mean by "OK". You won't get any points, maybe, but what about the restrictions on your freedom that might impose? What about losing the ability to enjoy driving? What about being forced to comply with restrictions you don't agree with, dreamt up by people who live in another world where traffic and trains and diverted if they're late for a meeting, and enforced by people who break the rules themselves? These are not healthy things. These are not "OK"...
We have rules over a lot of our interactions with each other. What about the rights of other road users who may not want you driving in a spirited manner along roads that they will cycle with their children etc ? If you want to have the thrill of driving faster, go to a place where graeter control can be exercised over the environment, where people won't be cycling etc. Go to a track. There will be rules there for everyone's safety as well, but they will be more geared towards your needs.
vonhosen said:
We have rules over a lot of our interactions with each other. What about the rights of other road users who may not want you driving in a spirited manner along roads that they will cycle with their children etc ? If you want to have the thrill of driving faster, go to a place where graeter control can be exercised over the environment, where people won't be cycling etc. Go to a track. There will be rules there for everyone's safety as well, but they will be more geared towards your needs.
Give me a break. Nobody is talking about driving dangerously. And you were too selective in addressing the points in the previous post.
vonhosen said:
Do cameras make you look at your speedo too much & not the road ? I know that the speedo doesn't take an inordinate amount of my resources & it shouldn't do with any competent driver. It is only a basic skill. If it is making you spend too mcuh time looking at the speedo or you find it is compromising your safety, then perhaps you might consider some additional training.
Oh I've no doubt you can easily make periodic checks of your speedometer Von, and I imagine good drivers can generally do that without neglecting other aspects of their driving.
The problem may be that with so much attention being focussed on speed, lots of normal or poorish drivers may be speedo watching excessively and at the wrong times, thus making them less safe than if they concentrated more attention on the hazard situation. It is this second category we should perhaps worry about, and getting most of them to sign up for extra training is a tough job.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
TripleS said:
vonhosen said:
Do cameras make you look at your speedo too much & not the road ? I know that the speedo doesn't take an inordinate amount of my resources & it shouldn't do with any competent driver. It is only a basic skill. If it is making you spend too mcuh time looking at the speedo or you find it is compromising your safety, then perhaps you might consider some additional training.
Oh I've no doubt you can easily make periodic checks of your speedometer Von, and I imagine good drivers can generally do that without neglecting other aspects of their driving.
The problem may be that with so much attention being focussed on speed, lots of normal or poorish drivers may be speedo watching excessively and at the wrong times, thus making them less safe than if they concentrated more attention on the hazard situation. It is this second category we should perhaps worry about, and getting most of them to sign up for extra training is a tough job.
Best wishes all,
Dave.
Another way of looking at it is to consider that the drivers you mention do their risk assessment according to the following program:
10 CHECK SPEEDO
20 IF SPEED < SPEED LIMIT THEN PRINT "I'm Safe"
30 GOTO 10
Von said:
Cameras don't train people to do that. Do cameras make you look at your speedo too much & not the road ? I know that the speedo doesn't take an inordinate amount of my resources & it shouldn't do with any competent driver. It is only a basic skill. If it is making you spend too mcuh time looking at the speedo or you find it is compromising your safety, then perhaps you might consider some additional training.
I was talking about young, inexperienced drivers being brought up to watch the speedo too much because they are concerned about losing their license. I wasn't talking about myself. I'm also a little surprised by your last sentence - I didn't think you were the type to make comments like that. But you're human so I forgive you
Having said that, even with several decades of experience and the benefit of things such as cruise control, I DO find myself checking the speedo frequently when I get near a camera. It's natural when you're scared of getting points on your license. Additional training won't fix that. This is not a healthy way for drivers to feel. Nor is the complacency one feels when driving WITHIN the limit. A few weeks ago as I joined a motorway, I set cruise control for a nice legal speed and then caught myself thinking "OK, that's the speed sorted - I can just relax now". Great state of mind to be in when travelling at motorway speeds.... NOT.
Von said:
My line drawn in the sand can well be a margin over the limit as well, just like the camera does. The line may not be drawn at the same place as all of them, but it's still a line in teh sand. Circumstances may be very favourable, but the mere fact you were flagrantly disregarding the limit means you'll get reported.
But you're using words like "sizeable margin", "favourable" and "flagrantly" - these are all subjective terms! That's my point. The fact that you use terms like that show that even someone with your particular experience and knowledge still thinks in a "subjective" way. Which imho is appropriate, because we are humans, and we don't live in a black and white world. We now have people not letting police cars and ambulances through red lights (or speeding up through road works) for fear of prosecution. That, in my opinion, is wrong. Not to mention costly for someone who dies as a result of the delay.
Von said:
We have rules over a lot of our interactions with each other. What about the rights of other road users who may not want you driving in a spirited manner along roads that they will cycle with their children etc ? If you want to have the thrill of driving faster, go to a place where graeter control can be exercised over the environment, where people won't be cycling etc. Go to a track. There will be rules there for everyone's safety as well, but they will be more geared towards your needs.
I wondered when racretracks would come up! There's a big difference between enjoying your daily commute and wanting to hit 150 on the back straight at Bedford. Fortunately I can afford to attend the occasional trackday; many people can't. And - as it happens - I don't enjoy trackdays as much as I enjoying driving well (I said well, not fast) on normal roads. Attending the occasional trackday is no compensation for every piece of road in the country being dropped to a 30 or 40. There are an awful lot of people who used to enjoy their drive to and from work who are now finding that pleasure being taken away.
As for other people - I completely agree with you about factoring non-motorists in. I don't enjoy hurtling down country roads narrowly missing cyclists. I don't enjoy blasting through residential areas and scaring the elderly. I would be devastated if I ran over someone's pet. I do however enjoy driving at "decent" speeds where conditions permit and there are no childern / cyclists / elderly to worry about.
I think you're misinterpreting "enjoyment of driving" as "enjoyment of driving FAST". I enjoy changing gear well, anticipating hazards well, taking corners well, adapting to the conditions, spotting supercars etc. I also can't deny that driving is less fun at 30mph than at 60mph (conditions permitting). On the other hand - let's get real here - would you feel comfortable doing 140mph along an A-road, if you were immune to prosecution? I assume not. Nor would I. That's because we understand that it's not a case of "faster is more fun"; driving beyond your limits or the limits afforded by the conditions is not fun, it's terrifying and dangerous. However, 90mph or possibly 100mph on a motorway are speeds which are not NECESSARILY dangerous. A traffice police officer following you would soon be abe to form an opinion as to your driving ability and whether or not you were driving safely in the conditions. Cameras can't.
I don't believe that public roads are a racetrack. I believe that safety should be paramount. But I also believe that you should be able to enjoy driving on public roads without being dangerous to other road users. And yes, I believe that under certain conditions one can exceed the speed limit whilst still being safe.
gregwatson said:
Von said:
Cameras don't train people to do that. Do cameras make you look at your speedo too much & not the road ? I know that the speedo doesn't take an inordinate amount of my resources & it shouldn't do with any competent driver. It is only a basic skill. If it is making you spend too mcuh time looking at the speedo or you find it is compromising your safety, then perhaps you might consider some additional training.
I was talking about young, inexperienced drivers being brought up to watch the speedo too much because they are concerned about losing their license. I wasn't talking about myself. I'm also a little surprised by your last sentence - I didn't think you were the type to make comments like that. But you're human so I forgive you
Having said that, even with several decades of experience and the benefit of things such as cruise control, I DO find myself checking the speedo frequently when I get near a camera. It's natural when you're scared of getting points on your license. Additional training won't fix that. This is not a healthy way for drivers to feel. Nor is the complacency one feels when driving WITHIN the limit. A few weeks ago as I joined a motorway, I set cruise control for a nice legal speed and then caught myself thinking "OK, that's the speed sorted - I can just relax now". Great state of mind to be in when travelling at motorway speeds.... NOT.
Whether it be young or old that I teach, I don't teach them that need to be watching the speedo all the time. If any instructor is teaching that is all that is important, then they would be wise to go elsewhere for lessons. If you are doing it right, a periodic glance at safe appropriate moments (& it must be safe if by definition you are traveling close to the speed limit) is all that is required.
Adhering to the spend limit doesn't make me suffer the same complacency you describe on motorways I must say.
gregwatson said:
Von said:
My line drawn in the sand can well be a margin over the limit as well, just like the camera does. The line may not be drawn at the same place as all of them, but it's still a line in teh sand. Circumstances may be very favourable, but the mere fact you were flagrantly disregarding the limit means you'll get reported.
But you're using words like "sizeable margin", "favourable" and "flagrantly" - these are all subjective terms! That's my point. The fact that you use terms like that show that even someone with your particular experience and knowledge still thinks in a "subjective" way. Which imho is appropriate, because we are humans, and we don't live in a black and white world. We now have people not letting police cars and ambulances through red lights (or speeding up through road works) for fear of prosecution. That, in my opinion, is wrong. Not to mention costly for someone who dies as a result of the delay.
I don't expect or put pressure on anyone to put themselves in danger, to facilitate my progress.
There are a lot of things I won't do to get to a call quicker, not because they may be unsafe, but simply because I may be prosecuted if I do so as I have no exemption.
gregwatson said:
Von said:
We have rules over a lot of our interactions with each other. What about the rights of other road users who may not want you driving in a spirited manner along roads that they will cycle with their children etc ? If you want to have the thrill of driving faster, go to a place where graeter control can be exercised over the environment, where people won't be cycling etc. Go to a track. There will be rules there for everyone's safety as well, but they will be more geared towards your needs.
I wondered when racretracks would come up! There's a big difference between enjoying your daily commute and wanting to hit 150 on the back straight at Bedford. Fortunately I can afford to attend the occasional trackday; many people can't. And - as it happens - I don't enjoy trackdays as much as I enjoying driving well (I said well, not fast) on normal roads. Attending the occasional trackday is no compensation for every piece of road in the country being dropped to a 30 or 40. There are an awful lot of people who used to enjoy their drive to and from work who are now finding that pleasure being taken away.
As for other people - I completely agree with you about factoring non-motorists in. I don't enjoy hurtling down country roads narrowly missing cyclists. I don't enjoy blasting through residential areas and scaring the elderly. I would be devastated if I ran over someone's pet. I do however enjoy driving at "decent" speeds where conditions permit and there are no childern / cyclists / elderly to worry about.
I think you're misinterpreting "enjoyment of driving" as "enjoyment of driving FAST". I enjoy changing gear well, anticipating hazards well, taking corners well, adapting to the conditions, spotting supercars etc. I also can't deny that driving is less fun at 30mph than at 60mph (conditions permitting). On the other hand - let's get real here - would you feel comfortable doing 140mph along an A-road, if you were immune to prosecution? I assume not. Nor would I. That's because we understand that it's not a case of "faster is more fun"; driving beyond your limits or the limits afforded by the conditions is not fun, it's terrifying and dangerous. However, 90mph or possibly 100mph on a motorway are speeds which are not NECESSARILY dangerous. A traffice police officer following you would soon be abe to form an opinion as to your driving ability and whether or not you were driving safely in the conditions. Cameras can't.
I don't believe that public roads are a racetrack. I believe that safety should be paramount. But I also believe that you should be able to enjoy driving on public roads without being dangerous to other road users. And yes, I believe that under certain conditions one can exceed the speed limit whilst still being safe.
Oh I believe that it's safe to exceed speed limits at times & the speed limit will hardly ever match exactly what is the maximum safe speed for the circumstances. It's only a compromise.
You probably find the track boring after a while, as it doesn't offer the dynamic variation of the road. The exposure to risk that has to be managed. You probably find it a bit sterile. As you've highlighted though, you don't have to be traveling above the speed limit to enjoy your driving & you can instead gain that enjoyment through concentration on your accuracy, displaying good observation, anticipation & planning.
I understand that you may be an enthuasiastic driver but the majority aren't. You may see driving as more than a simple way of getting from A to B, but the majority don't. You may well check the condition of your tyres before driving at speed on our roads, the majority don't. You may well have taken extra handling tuition etc, but the majority haven't. The majority don't see the roads as a hobby playground.
There were a number of people who were very pro hunt (it was an important part of their lives), there were a number of people who were very anti hunt (the issues were a very dear to their heart), vast swathes lay in the middle with no strong views, but they can be moved one way or the other by strong arguments.
So it is with speed limits.
Soem want far greater flexibility, some want far greater restriction, vast swathes are out there who don't such strong views or are undecided. They hold the balance of power & could shape the direction we may take in future.
I wasnt even after sympathy, i'll freely admit it was no ones fault but my own. Quinny said:
How could I guess that by clicking on this thread I'd get to see a post from Vonhosen saying "well the law's the law" etc etc add nausium
And another one from 7db with some sarcy remark about how stupid people are to get caught by cameras
Well done chaps, just what we all want to hear,
again.
And another one from 7db with some sarcy remark about how stupid people are to get caught by cameras
Well done chaps, just what we all want to hear,
again.
Well what do you expect in a section called Speed, Plod & the Law
I know we go around & around, but that's what SP&L is about I suppose (it's a rather limited topic heading).
Equally you (or I) could say we see the same people saying scamera this, scamera that, limits should be higher, limits should be abolished, etc etc.
Nature of the beast on a motoring forum, where people have different views.
Or do you pop in just to see everybody cosily slating speed limits ?
If you want to start a topic on something else I'll have a look & express an opinion if I feel a need to.
I don't actually start any threads saying keep to the speed limit after all.
Edited by vonhosen on Sunday 25th June 17:58
Quinny said:
How could I guess that by clicking on this thread I'd get to see a post from Vonhosen saying "well the law's the law" etc etc add nausium
And another one from 7db with some sarcy remark about how stupid people are to get caught by cameras
Well done chaps, just what we all want to hear,
again.
And another one from 7db with some sarcy remark about how stupid people are to get caught by cameras
Well done chaps, just what we all want to hear,
again.
Most people on here (I hope) are probably above average drivers. The problem with many other less interested drivers is that they *need* the speed limit signs to tell them how fast (or slow) to go - they're not capable of judging it on their own.
My issue with fixed cameras is that they don't catch the unlicenced, uninsured etc drivers who can ignore them with impunity.
I do have a problem with mobile cameras which, it seems to me, are frequently sited with the sole aim of revenue raising.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff