Zero tolerance proposals for UK roads...

[irocfan]

Mr2Mike said:

oyster said:

Whilst I tend to agree with you, both parts of your reply miss a critical point - that the general driving public just don’t have the talent or the inclination to apply the same sort of logic that you and I may do to driving.

99% of people on the road are not driving gods. They won’t improve their driving because they’re not interested. So the only way to protect them (and others) is to slow them down.

What makes you think that dropping the prosecution threshold by a few mph will actually slow people down? Will "zero tolerance" guarantee the availability of police resources required to enforce it? Will people already significantly exceeding the limit suddenly stop this behaviour?

indeed. The answer to rampant speed limit breaking is to lower a limit that's already being surpassed On the other hand the answer to rampant illegal 'soft' drug taking is to decriminalise small amounts of possession.... hmmmmm

[oyster]

irocfan said:

Mr2Mike said:

oyster said:

Whilst I tend to agree with you, both parts of your reply miss a critical point - that the general driving public just don’t have the talent or the inclination to apply the same sort of logic that you and I may do to driving.

99% of people on the road are not driving gods. They won’t improve their driving because they’re not interested. So the only way to protect them (and others) is to slow them down.

What makes you think that dropping the prosecution threshold by a few mph will actually slow people down? Will "zero tolerance" guarantee the availability of police resources required to enforce it? Will people already significantly exceeding the limit suddenly stop this behaviour?

indeed. The answer to rampant speed limit breaking is to lower a limit that's already being surpassed On the other hand the answer to rampant illegal 'soft' drug taking is to decriminalise small amounts of possession.... hmmmmm

We’re not talking of reducing limits, this is all about reducing the tolerance before a prosecution is made. I think zero tolerance is impossible, but I also think we should all get used to the idea that the 10% +2mph will likely get squeezed. And we can have no complaints, as it’s simple enforcement of an existing law.

As to cost of tighter enforcement, as a previous post pointed out, it would only be some reconfiguring of cameras.

[oyster]

gazapc said:

oyster said:

There's not much evidence that shows reduced speed causes more accidents is there? Can anyone find it? It feels like a PH myth.

There was this article last year refering to a study done around Bath, it also refers to another instance in Portsmouth.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/12/17/20mph-...

That’s interesting. Be good to see longer term outcomes.

[Pothole]

Calorus said:

Agreed, I know 4 people who've been in serious car accidents including two deaths, but none who've been burgled and two who've been assaulted.

The anecdata lever lies!!

[Previous]

Persnally, and subjectively, I do think the cameras have a role to play in the general publics perception of policing - as already highlighted on here it contributes to the feeling that the authorities won't go after the difficult issues (drug dealing gypsies to paraphrase another poster) but will happily screw the majority of those broadly speaking 'good eggs' for seemingly ever more tedious minor infractions.

Without trying to get into an internet argument about use of police resources and the effects of 31mph vs 33 mph in event of an accident, as another poster pointed out, sooner or later it'll likely all become monitored centrally by black boxes or reduced by autonomous vehicle control anyway.

A2/M2 Connected Vehicle Corridor (not sure how to paste link, but widely available on Google) is a concept study into digital services that can be provided wirelessly and continuously to vehicles - other countries are doing similar stuff. It'd be easy to add speed data to the service...

Edited by Previous on Tuesday 21st August 22:15