RE: Dutch hide sneaky m'way cameras
Discussion
Hi guys, wife is dutch so I will tell you how it really is. Firstly dont speed in holland, they have secret cameras ervery where!
secondly the dutch police have it right. people who hog the middle lane because they think its right get fined up to 300 euros for not moving over. They also have an over taking sign with a picture of a zip on ( like a pair of jeans) with words to the effect zipping is good. What they mean is over take then get in and move forward like a ZIP! we need to learn from that and our roads would have half the stop starts and traffic jams. Lastly if you want to speed go over the bortder into germany as it will cot you a lot less. regards steve
secondly the dutch police have it right. people who hog the middle lane because they think its right get fined up to 300 euros for not moving over. They also have an over taking sign with a picture of a zip on ( like a pair of jeans) with words to the effect zipping is good. What they mean is over take then get in and move forward like a ZIP! we need to learn from that and our roads would have half the stop starts and traffic jams. Lastly if you want to speed go over the bortder into germany as it will cot you a lot less. regards steve
DoctorD said:
tr3a said:
I get the impression that speeders are trying to 'obfuscate' or 'blur' the limits to which they are held
Precisely. Whilst speed limits make a great deal of sense in towns and built up areas, they make little sense as a precise quotient on open roads or motorways. Let's face it, driving at anything above 30mph has deadly consequences for yourself or other road users, so it's disingenous to suggest there is a 'safe' speed. Therefore its also disingenous to label drivers as 'speeders'. We all speed. We all drive at speeds that could be dangerous. So which speed is the right speed? That limit changes for different drivers, in different cars and different road conditions.
The limits we currently have were not decided by some higher intelligence, they were set almost by accident and now 'someone' decides there is some logic behind them.
Clearly there needs to be a guideline for speeds, particularly on certain roads and in certain conditions, but setting an absolute level on a motorway where a driver is punished financially for a 5mph discretion is just foolish.
Fair points, although I don't think drawing a firm line and enforcing it is 'foolish'.
But how do you propose to keep roads safe if everyone is allowed to decide for themselves how fast they can go? You may have a lot of driving experience, you may have yourself under control at all times and have a pretty good judgment of things. So from your point of reference, it's a good idea. But not everybody on our roads is like you.
How about the 17-year old, testosterone filled yobbo who believes he's Michael Schumacher's cousin and feels he has to prove himself? How about the stressed, adrenalin filled salesman who is behind on his schedule and is anxious to take risks? Do you think they should also be allowed to drive at any speed they think appropriate for them?
Even the Autobahn model in Germany doesn't work this way, because the driving culture there is completely different. Yes, there are stretches of Autobahn where you are - in principle - allowed to drive as fast as your car will take you. But there are also large parts where there are speed limits and they are rigorously enforced. If you f*ck up on an unlimited part, you will be held responsible and the consequences will be dire if it was your fault. That's why the majority of experienced Autobahn drivers do about 80Mph on unlimited stretches, no more. Most Germans are almost as disciplined as the cartoons portray them to be and in any case they're very aware of their responsibilities. Preciously few of them abuse the freedom they have when it comes to speed on the road. And Germans in general are much better drivers than other Europeans. Frankly, I don't see the Dutch or the British behaving like that.
The most responsible, most highly educated drivers in the world are pilots. They have all this sky to play around in and still, much of the time, not even they are allowed to fly at the speed and altitude they deem most appropriate themselves. That should tell you something.
There was a time when I believed there would be some merit in variable speed limits, where you are allowed to drive faster at night, or on straight, empty roads. But it would require a whole new, expensive, adaptive signposting infrastructure and those who want to go still faster would still be complaining. It wouldn't be a solution to the 'problem' we are discussing here.
DoctorD said:
There are far more important factors to be addressed in dealing with safety on our roads.
True. But there are also many more things important than arriving at your destination a few seconds or minutes earlier. And again, there being more important factors in dealing with road safety is in itself no reason to speed or rile against the enforcement of speed limits.
People want to go faster, faster than the often arbitrarily imposed speed limits. I know and accept that. It's human nature, but it's no excuse. The thing I don't get is why they want to do that on the open road, in spite of democratic rules against it, in spite of the fact that they know there is a chance they will be held responsible. And what I really don't get is that they get all indignant and upset after they voluntarily step over the clearly drawn line. Not when the line is drawn, but only when they're held accountable for stepping over it. Not very mature and very opportunistic, if you ask me.
Just my two penneth, but speed limits are not set democratically, I am sure most/all of us come across speed limits that are not keeping with the road conditions (especially after the recent spate of speed limit reductions that almost seem random) but have none the less been set by due process
As for democracy in the UK, we currently have a gov't with a majority in parliament, that only got mid 30%ish of the electoral vote!! AND seem to pay little regard to the views of the people that they are supposed to serve.
And if we are talking of limits being set democratically, if a majority of drivers went faster than a speed limit (for example car drivers travelling at more than 70 mph on a motorway) does that not suggest that the limit should be raised?
The fact is that speed limits can be enforced by machine, and the vast majority of people caught are generally law abiding and pay up. It is a shame that as much effort doesn't go into dealing with other law breakers.
As for democracy in the UK, we currently have a gov't with a majority in parliament, that only got mid 30%ish of the electoral vote!! AND seem to pay little regard to the views of the people that they are supposed to serve.
And if we are talking of limits being set democratically, if a majority of drivers went faster than a speed limit (for example car drivers travelling at more than 70 mph on a motorway) does that not suggest that the limit should be raised?
The fact is that speed limits can be enforced by machine, and the vast majority of people caught are generally law abiding and pay up. It is a shame that as much effort doesn't go into dealing with other law breakers.
I realise you're not talking to me but...
The simple fact is, whether there is a speed limit or not, if someone is driving poorly they are a higher risk. There are many collisions involving inexperienced drivers, but how can this possibly happen in a society where we have speed limits? If the speed limit and it's enforcement is the answer to preventing poor driving and collisions surely we wouldn't be seeing so many fatalities year upon year? Could it be that speed isn't actually the problem, and focusing relentlessly on it will never cure anything?
The thing I don't get is why they want to do that on the open road, in spite of democratic rules against it, in spite of the fact that they know there is a chance they will be held responsible.
Very simple answer to this; drivers break the limits on every journey because they are too low and to go faster is perfectly safe and reasonable. To not do so is illogical.
And what I really don't get is that they get all indignant and upset after they voluntarily step over the clearly drawn line. Not when the line is drawn, but only when they're held accountable for stepping over it. Not very mature and very opportunistic, if you ask me.
Simple again. If they had done something worthy of punishment you would see no fuss being made. But catching someone doing 80 perfectly safely on a motorway is nothing short of lunacy, and the clearly drawn line can go to hell as far as they're concerned.
May I ask how your opinions on limits became so black and white? Have you lost your licence in the past and now are scared stiff of exceeding any limit?
tr3a said:
How about the 17-year old, testosterone filled yobbo who believes he's Michael Schumacher's cousin and feels he has to prove himself? How about the stressed, adrenalin filled salesman who is behind on his schedule and is anxious to take risks? Do you think they should also be allowed to drive at any speed they think appropriate for them?
The simple fact is, whether there is a speed limit or not, if someone is driving poorly they are a higher risk. There are many collisions involving inexperienced drivers, but how can this possibly happen in a society where we have speed limits? If the speed limit and it's enforcement is the answer to preventing poor driving and collisions surely we wouldn't be seeing so many fatalities year upon year? Could it be that speed isn't actually the problem, and focusing relentlessly on it will never cure anything?
tr3a said:
The thing I don't get is why they want to do that on the open road, in spite of democratic rules against it, in spite of the fact that they know there is a chance they will be held responsible.
Very simple answer to this; drivers break the limits on every journey because they are too low and to go faster is perfectly safe and reasonable. To not do so is illogical.
tr3a said:
And what I really don't get is that they get all indignant and upset after they voluntarily step over the clearly drawn line. Not when the line is drawn, but only when they're held accountable for stepping over it. Not very mature and very opportunistic, if you ask me.
Simple again. If they had done something worthy of punishment you would see no fuss being made. But catching someone doing 80 perfectly safely on a motorway is nothing short of lunacy, and the clearly drawn line can go to hell as far as they're concerned.
May I ask how your opinions on limits became so black and white? Have you lost your licence in the past and now are scared stiff of exceeding any limit?
Edited by deeps on Monday 5th February 00:23
digga951 said:
cloggy said:
If you're not Dutch you can't be much.
Edited by cloggy on Saturday 3rd February 01:03
As a finishing touch, god created the Dutch! Think I saw that on a tshirt once... Along with "Not everything in Holland is flat", written across the upper half of a girls tshirt...
Seen that last quote too... but it was on the belly of one of my ex-GF father's t-shirts...
tr3a said:
flemke said:
And then when the 49.9% go on a procreative spree and get to 50.0001%, do the views of the former minority suddenly become right whereas before they were wrong?
It's not a matter of right or wrong. It's a matter of majority. If a subject is important enough for enough people, it gets tackled. If not, some people don't get their way. That's how it works.
So you've got no problem if a majority votes to forbid women from having a job outside the home, or mandates a single form of dress?
How about if a majority votes to make it illegal to practise a certain religion?
flemke said:
tr3a said:
flemke said:
And then when the 49.9% go on a procreative spree and get to 50.0001%, do the views of the former minority suddenly become right whereas before they were wrong?
It's not a matter of right or wrong. It's a matter of majority. If a subject is important enough for enough people, it gets tackled. If not, some people don't get their way. That's how it works.
So you've got no problem if a majority votes to forbid women from having a job outside the home, or mandates a single form of dress?
How about if a majority votes to make it illegal to practise a certain religion?
Agreed...
Similarly, I guess we also now have conservative government now - as they got more total votes in the last general election.....
Its not always how it works - it rather depends on how these opinions and majorities were handed the information they used to make an informed decision too.
The reality is that most people decide what speed to drive at - and there's no such thing as a 'safe' speed, so we're all kidding ourselves if we believe keeping to a speed limit is inherently safer than not.
There are more important factors such as driving at the right speed for the right conditions (which may be considerably lower than the posted speed limit) and driving at a closer speed 'relative' to other road users.
It's clear that there should be speed limits, that need enforced in built up residential areas, particularly near schools, shops etc, but that logic diminishes rapidly on motorways, dual carraigeways and quicker a-roads. The 17 yr old who thinks he is Miki Schumacher will do so regardless of a speed limit.
The trouble is we are increasingly educating drivers that as long as they stay within the speed limit, then they are inherently safe (and safer than the driver who does not). That is a gross perversion of the truth and a very dangerouse precedent.
I'm sure it's not my imagination that the standards of driving on our roads seems to diminish year by year, as drivers 'switch off' and abdicate responsibility for their actions provided they drive within the rules...
Anyway, I'm sure the egg-timer has long since finished.
There are more important factors such as driving at the right speed for the right conditions (which may be considerably lower than the posted speed limit) and driving at a closer speed 'relative' to other road users.
It's clear that there should be speed limits, that need enforced in built up residential areas, particularly near schools, shops etc, but that logic diminishes rapidly on motorways, dual carraigeways and quicker a-roads. The 17 yr old who thinks he is Miki Schumacher will do so regardless of a speed limit.
The trouble is we are increasingly educating drivers that as long as they stay within the speed limit, then they are inherently safe (and safer than the driver who does not). That is a gross perversion of the truth and a very dangerouse precedent.
I'm sure it's not my imagination that the standards of driving on our roads seems to diminish year by year, as drivers 'switch off' and abdicate responsibility for their actions provided they drive within the rules...
Anyway, I'm sure the egg-timer has long since finished.
JMGS4 said:
mcjohn said:
mcjohn
Thanks for that, seems I've (and you through me) been had....
not seen this one although I'm regularly there, only the pole ones!! Perhaps that was an experimental one? and not in use???
This is on a stretch of motorway between Geneva (bottom left), Lausanne (about middle of the map) and Yverdon (heading North). Every paire of blue arrows shows the position of a speed camera and they are now all in place and working... This stretch of M-way was a terrible accident black spot with accidents almost dayly. They seem to have been greatly reduced since the cameras came into play...
swisschris.
900T-R said:
JMGS4 said:
I was the one who received this and passed it on to PH.
The cameras are NOT the swiss ones, I see those every day, the so-called telephone lines are NOT tel lines they are train overhead power lines in the photos...
All I can say at this stage.... but checking again.....
The cameras are NOT the swiss ones, I see those every day, the so-called telephone lines are NOT tel lines they are train overhead power lines in the photos...
All I can say at this stage.... but checking again.....
It's not a Dutch motorway for sure, although the railway catenary looks similar to what the Dutch railways use it's more likely Swiss...
The pics with the armco are the same as in this presentation from Switzerland
www.police.vd.ch/communique_presse
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff