A philosophical question....or is it?
Discussion
For the entirety of my driving career, I have driven according to the conditions of the road and the environment and with due respect for everyone else on the road. However, by the wonders of mobile speed camera technology, this sort of driving has been shown to be unacceptable, and I have paid the price. I am therefore in a position where, to safeguard my licence, I cannot fall foul of being trapped again.
So I decided that I should at all times travel exactly at the speed limit so that no-one could ever accuse me of speeding. This method of driving has had some startling results. There are some advantages: improved fuel consumption, lower blood pressure on the commute(!), but there are some down-sides. I have pondered the question I am about to ask for some time, but my journey back from the Lake District this weekend has crystallized my thoughts. Since travelling spot on the speed limit, I have been flashed, hooted at, undertaken and dangerously overtaken more times than the many years I drove "to the conditions". I have never had an accident, be it with another car or a person, and have never caused an accident. But with people taking risks to get round me on a road that could safely be driven at greater speed, I feel I may one day be a "legal" cause of an accident. The question is this: "Am I a safer driver now, when travelling dot on the limit, or before, when travelling at the speed suitable for the conditions and environment?" Now, the easy answer is, "yes, you are doing no wrong, you are not speeding, therefore you are safer". But the deeper part of this is: "if you are responsible for the safety of those around you and for years your method of driving has never caused any bother, but since the change, an accident is a distict possibility because you are now a rolling roadblock", am I really safer???? Hmmm, that was cathartic in a strange sort of way...........
So I decided that I should at all times travel exactly at the speed limit so that no-one could ever accuse me of speeding. This method of driving has had some startling results. There are some advantages: improved fuel consumption, lower blood pressure on the commute(!), but there are some down-sides. I have pondered the question I am about to ask for some time, but my journey back from the Lake District this weekend has crystallized my thoughts. Since travelling spot on the speed limit, I have been flashed, hooted at, undertaken and dangerously overtaken more times than the many years I drove "to the conditions". I have never had an accident, be it with another car or a person, and have never caused an accident. But with people taking risks to get round me on a road that could safely be driven at greater speed, I feel I may one day be a "legal" cause of an accident. The question is this: "Am I a safer driver now, when travelling dot on the limit, or before, when travelling at the speed suitable for the conditions and environment?" Now, the easy answer is, "yes, you are doing no wrong, you are not speeding, therefore you are safer". But the deeper part of this is: "if you are responsible for the safety of those around you and for years your method of driving has never caused any bother, but since the change, an accident is a distict possibility because you are now a rolling roadblock", am I really safer???? Hmmm, that was cathartic in a strange sort of way...........
Excellent question Dr T. Like you, I have pondered the possibility of driving as you suggest, but we were thinking of doing it as part of a planned protest, trying to get thousands doing it at the same time. However, the principles are the same.
Re the question, you are not responsible for other's safety, surely they are. So if you are driving at the limit, other drivers shouldn't be overtaking, undertaking, etc.,etc.,etc (in general, I know there are exceptions). So if they do, and have an accident, the fault is all theirs.
You carry on.
Re the question, you are not responsible for other's safety, surely they are. So if you are driving at the limit, other drivers shouldn't be overtaking, undertaking, etc.,etc.,etc (in general, I know there are exceptions). So if they do, and have an accident, the fault is all theirs.
You carry on.
Big Fat F'er said:
Excellent question Dr T. Like you, I have pondered the possibility of driving as you suggest, but we were thinking of doing it as part of a planned protest, trying to get thousands doing it at the same time. However, the principles are the same.
Re the question, you are not responsible for other's safety, surely they are. So if you are driving at the limit, other drivers shouldn't be overtaking, undertaking, etc.,etc.,etc (in general, I know there are exceptions). So if they do, and have an accident, the fault is all theirs.
You carry on.
When I learned how to drive car und went out on practice with Papa...I remember him saying to me that my driving plan will affect another's driving plan und I had to consider und be aware of how my decision will affect another. Ist part of the COAST principles
Dr T said:
Cheers Leo, that is rather an amusing interpretation of my admittedly unclear statement!!! To clarify, if a child jumps in front of my car whilst I am travelling at 30mph on a 30mph road, I will slow down. Nice one!!
dont slow down unless they are on a pedestrian crossing, thats what the horn's for
seriously though lots of roundabouts are pretty good fun at nsl although i've noticed they are now putting up chevron boards to prevent you seeing oncomming traffic and force you to stop.
You clearly are a less safe driver for a three reasons which come immediately to mind:
(1) You are focussing more on your speed than ever before, therefore less attention is being given over to other aspects of car control and navigation.
(2) Because you are adhering to every speed limit, many of which are way too low, you are driving at a speed and with a "flow" out of sync with what would be your natural rhythm for any particular piece of road. One main problem with this is that your concentration on the important aspects of driving will thus suffer.
(3) You are causing other road users to be out of their natural rhythm also, with the same adverse effects on their concentration.
(1) You are focussing more on your speed than ever before, therefore less attention is being given over to other aspects of car control and navigation.
(2) Because you are adhering to every speed limit, many of which are way too low, you are driving at a speed and with a "flow" out of sync with what would be your natural rhythm for any particular piece of road. One main problem with this is that your concentration on the important aspects of driving will thus suffer.
(3) You are causing other road users to be out of their natural rhythm also, with the same adverse effects on their concentration.
7db said:
Notice that a roundabout is a divided road, so it is a dual carriageway. That's 70 - quite an achievement to do safely if you uare turning right...
haha. i hadn't thought about that. is it be right that a 60mph single carriage nsl, turns into a 70mph if the roundabout has 2 lanes? don't see why not. excellent
After a scare 16 days ago (no NIP so hopefully.....) I too have not broken a speed limit, as I had been chancing my arm a bit (mostly on motorways in good conditions).
I find I am spending far too much time checking the speedo which means less concentration on the road - not good at all. But with the sneaky places they are hiding these days, what chance do you have to keep your licence?
But, I suppose the sillier it gets, the sooner we get back to normal? We can but hope....
I find I am spending far too much time checking the speedo which means less concentration on the road - not good at all. But with the sneaky places they are hiding these days, what chance do you have to keep your licence?
But, I suppose the sillier it gets, the sooner we get back to normal? We can but hope....
Are you a safer driver?
No. Of course not.
Are you more dangerous?
No. Of course not.
Are you less likely to pick up a ticket?
Yes.
If others decide to drive like t
ts around you that's their problem. Chances are they'd drive like tts anyway. Its perfectly possible to overtake without driving like a tt.
I'll be one of the ones overtaking you...
But:
NO ONE has the right to expect you to break the law for their convenience. Similarly - if you decide to obey the speed limit - you should allow others to overtake safely wherever possible - if *they* wish to break the law that's their problem.
In short. Keep it up if you wish to.
No. Of course not.
Are you more dangerous?
No. Of course not.
Are you less likely to pick up a ticket?
Yes.
If others decide to drive like t
ts around you that's their problem. Chances are they'd drive like tts anyway. Its perfectly possible to overtake without driving like a tt. I'll be one of the ones overtaking you...
But:
NO ONE has the right to expect you to break the law for their convenience. Similarly - if you decide to obey the speed limit - you should allow others to overtake safely wherever possible - if *they* wish to break the law that's their problem.
In short. Keep it up if you wish to.
Don said:
Are you a safer driver?
No. Of course not.
Are you more dangerous?
No. Of course not.
Are you less likely to pick up a ticket?
Yes.
If others decide to drive like t
I'll be one of the ones overtaking you...
But:
NO ONE has the right to expect you to break the law for their convenience. Similarly - if you decide to obey the speed limit - you should allow others to overtake safely wherever possible - if *they* wish to break the law that's their problem.
In short. Keep it up if you wish to.
Nail on head there and FWIW I would do exactly the same if I was in a position where my licence was in peril.
When I was in Sheffield a while ago a chap had a note in his back window explaining that he had 9 points and would always stick religiously to the speed limit. p
People will understand and you may have less of a problem with idiots if they can see that you aren't necessarily a doddery old fool who is holding them up out of choice?
Indeed a good question I too have pondered.
My conclusion is definitely to drive appropriately for the situation and not heed the limit.
Reasoning : not fighting your environment is generally endorsed by society (and mother nature to some extent). Society relies upon a fairly large measure of conformity. However when conforming to the Law (as the enforcement device of society) causes one to be at odds with the rest of society then, it is clear to me that, the Law is non-representative and hence wrong.
What is safe about 71 mph that is not safe about 69 mph ? Circumstances are everything to do with assessing that question. My answer is absolutely sod all safe about the one speed that is not true of the other. That also features in my position. I am the person in charge of what makes me dangerous - period. An alert driver in a good car, with good tyres, driving at 120mph on an empty motorway is no more dangerous than a tired, confused OPA at 69 mph on a busy dual carriage way in the wet. Surely that counts for something ?
Definitions of Law abound. Personally I see law as codification of behaviour for control lead by the common good. In that endeavour it is largely successful. Where it fails (and is constantly miss-invested in as a device) is control against individual will or positions that publicly can be seen as a nonsense. It de-values the whole purpose of the Law and ultimate common sense and liberty prevail. History contains a million lessons on that – speed limits will adapt too… one day.
Having said that I never speed in built up areas but on the open road I set my own limit (with some controls). I have never been done for speeding in nearly 20 years in the UK. Only ever on motorways or deserted roads abroad. I see being snapped by a camera in the UK as just deserts since they are so God damn obvious you aren’t paying attention if you get photographed. Obviously the sneaky hidden / mobile ones are a different kettle of fish.
My conclusion is definitely to drive appropriately for the situation and not heed the limit.
Reasoning : not fighting your environment is generally endorsed by society (and mother nature to some extent). Society relies upon a fairly large measure of conformity. However when conforming to the Law (as the enforcement device of society) causes one to be at odds with the rest of society then, it is clear to me that, the Law is non-representative and hence wrong.
What is safe about 71 mph that is not safe about 69 mph ? Circumstances are everything to do with assessing that question. My answer is absolutely sod all safe about the one speed that is not true of the other. That also features in my position. I am the person in charge of what makes me dangerous - period. An alert driver in a good car, with good tyres, driving at 120mph on an empty motorway is no more dangerous than a tired, confused OPA at 69 mph on a busy dual carriage way in the wet. Surely that counts for something ?
Definitions of Law abound. Personally I see law as codification of behaviour for control lead by the common good. In that endeavour it is largely successful. Where it fails (and is constantly miss-invested in as a device) is control against individual will or positions that publicly can be seen as a nonsense. It de-values the whole purpose of the Law and ultimate common sense and liberty prevail. History contains a million lessons on that – speed limits will adapt too… one day.
Having said that I never speed in built up areas but on the open road I set my own limit (with some controls). I have never been done for speeding in nearly 20 years in the UK. Only ever on motorways or deserted roads abroad. I see being snapped by a camera in the UK as just deserts since they are so God damn obvious you aren’t paying attention if you get photographed. Obviously the sneaky hidden / mobile ones are a different kettle of fish.
above question difference between 71 and 69... well your 14% less likely to cause an accident at 69 - better listen up and change your ways, or the Voter Colonel will have you sent to the Ministry of Alteration.
have to say - i too have been staying around the limits - flicking the cruise control on motorways to 70/71 - 30s in around towns...
have to say am suffering from an increase in the amount of folk tailgating (even tho i'm following a line of traffic and no where to go...)
still with a revvy 1.4 - i can have fun on the A road commute without too much worry of breaking the 60 limit.
point to consider - even tho your speedo is reading the limit - it might no tally with the guy behind you - say your tyres are worn down and corrispondingly your speedo is overreading slightly...
or at 70 - at 10% accuracy - you could have a speed differencal of 7mph - with both cars showing they are travelling at 70
or i could be speaking donkeys queir things...
have to say - i too have been staying around the limits - flicking the cruise control on motorways to 70/71 - 30s in around towns...
have to say am suffering from an increase in the amount of folk tailgating (even tho i'm following a line of traffic and no where to go...)
still with a revvy 1.4 - i can have fun on the A road commute without too much worry of breaking the 60 limit.
point to consider - even tho your speedo is reading the limit - it might no tally with the guy behind you - say your tyres are worn down and corrispondingly your speedo is overreading slightly...
or at 70 - at 10% accuracy - you could have a speed differencal of 7mph - with both cars showing they are travelling at 70
or i could be speaking donkeys queir things...
Stretch of single carriage way road leading up to a roundabout on the A65 into Leeds. Solid white line on near side. Road suddenly widens to left but white line persists in middle, so tarmac to left isn't road. He undertook me on this bit and pulled back in front before the roundabout.
Some interesting thoughts posted.
This sums it up in my view.
Some interesting thoughts posted.
Don said:
Are you a safer driver?
No. Of course not.
Are you more dangerous?
No. Of course not.
Are you less likely to pick up a ticket?
Yes.
This sums it up in my view.
My Daily commute sees me travelling on good, fairly quiet roads, resulting in me becoming used to driving at high speed. I too find sticking to the limit, my concentration drops, however I have discovered that by setting myself "challenges" I am able to keep my speed down and concentration up. Trying not to use my brakes on a journey leaves me looking out trying to be aware of everything around me, as I should (and N.S.L. roundabouts are fun in a quattro). Simlar results watching my MPG.
Dr T said:
Stretch of single carriage way road leading up to a roundabout on the A65 into Leeds. Solid white line on near side. Road suddenly widens to left but white line persists in middle, so tarmac to left isn't road. He undertook me on this bit and pulled back in front before the roundabout.
Some interesting thoughts posted.
Don said:
Are you a safer driver?
No. Of course not.
Are you more dangerous?
No. Of course not.
Are you less likely to pick up a ticket?
Yes.
This sums it up in my view.
If you are seeing more "near misses" and generally more "danger scenarios" (involving you) coinciding with a change in your driving could it not be argued that you are now "more dangerous"?
You may not consider yourself to be driving dangerously from your point-of-view, however, when looking at the situation from a bystander's viewpoint, you could be seen as the catalyst. (As I said above, driving outside the natural "flow" of the road and other traffic can be dangerous.)
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff