RE: Survey finds most of us speed
Friday 5th August 2005
Motive: money not safetyA survey by Direct Line released today reveals that 94 per cent of motorists admit to breaking speed limits. A third of young drivers aged 18 to 29 said they regularly broke the speed limit, while most drivers (60 per cent) see speeding as acceptable on empty roads. Sensibly they also think it's OK in an emergency (33 per cent), if the limit is too low for the conditions (24 per cent) or if there's less traffic about (21 per cent).
Survey finds most of us speed
And most do it only when sensible
Motive: money not safety
Safe Speed road safety campaign founder Paul Smith said: "After 12 years of speed cameras, drivers' speeding behaviour is unchanged. Far from being a problem, drivers selecting an appropriate speed according to the conditions is of fundamental importance to road safety.
"Sometimes they set safe and appropriate speeds above the speed limit. To do so isn't reckless, careless or irresponsible -- they are just fulfilling their fundamental duty to road safety by setting a speed that's safe and appropriate for the conditions.
"We have speeding magistrates, speeding off-duty senior police officers, speeding senior politicians and speeding royals. To suggest that exceeding a speed limit in itself is irresponsible is completely absurd -- the competent and careful actions of a majority of responsible people should obviously be considered legal.
"Speed limit enforcement is way out of line with practical reality - far from blaming the public, we must blame the government for obsessive and destructive enforcement of a arbitrary law."
"I blame cameras - we're obsessed with the wrong safety factor."
Discussion
I drive to the conditions of the road, my skills and the cars ability. Most of the time i potter around about the speed limit. Other times i drive with verve :D. I never put other road users, pedestrians, bikes, bikers at risk. Its all about awarness of what's around you, not speed.
All i have to show for it is 6 points on my license another 3 points have gone and no accidents. Mind you only been driving 15 Years.
All i have to show for it is 6 points on my license another 3 points have gone and no accidents. Mind you only been driving 15 Years.
chris_crossley said:
I drive to the conditions of the road, my skills and the cars ability. Most of the time i potter around about the speed limit. Other times i drive with verve . I never put other road users, pedestrians, bikes, bikers at risk. Its all about awarness of what's around you, not speed.
All i have to show for it is 6 points on my license another 3 points have gone and no accidents. Mind you only been driving 15 Years.
I m8 that would be the correct way but they dont want you to drive that way, you see money can now be made from motoring it had jack **** do do with safety that why they have got away with poor safety figures for so long
Good stuff by SafeSpeed as usual. I don't think it's all about money though. Well it is for the scamera partnerships no doubt, but I think for the government the underlying goal is political: they want to drive the public away from private transport.
They're increasing traffic congestion, deliberately restricting the provision of parking places, restricting road developments, and using (imo flawed) environmental and safety arguments to justify increasingly harsh measures against drivers. They don't want the money, they want us out of our cars. The fact that there's money to be made from us just makes it esaier for them to achieve their goals. What I haven't figured out yet is whether they want us packed in sardine-like on slow unreliable inefficient inconvenient public transport, or just to sit at home on the dole?
They're increasing traffic congestion, deliberately restricting the provision of parking places, restricting road developments, and using (imo flawed) environmental and safety arguments to justify increasingly harsh measures against drivers. They don't want the money, they want us out of our cars. The fact that there's money to be made from us just makes it esaier for them to achieve their goals. What I haven't figured out yet is whether they want us packed in sardine-like on slow unreliable inefficient inconvenient public transport, or just to sit at home on the dole?
Survey finds most of us speed said:
enforcement of a arbitrary law
AN arbitrary law, not A arbitrary law
Yup, agree with it all, but it's been said a million times before on here.
I see the tide is turning. All we need is more proof that they don't work, and put it across to "average joe" that basically it's a legally justified SCAM, the better.
I'm all for safer roads, but ignoring 90% of accident causes to focus on ONE minor problem that can generate massive revenue is clearly telling of why they are focusing on it!
Down with scamera's, and backi nwith more discretionary TrafPol who use their noggins. Cost, well us drivers have generated enough these last few years in road fines to pay for 1000's of them!
Might not do any harm to use some of the 36 billion we have left over from our fuel duty and road tax to make OUR roads safer too, by investing in more policing!
Dave
'King Deadly said:
They don't want the money, they want us out of our cars.
Any idea why, though?
They know we need our cars to live. Like any market force you then screw it for anything and everyting you can get.
Just you wait till we get GPS tracking, then we will pay.
If they could charge for air they would.
'King Deadly said:
They don't want the money, they want us out of our cars.
Any idea why, though?
If only I had that much faith in them, let's face it if we all stopped driving tomorrow they'd have lost alot of their income. It's far easier to justify taxation by blaiming it on bad habits, such as drink, cigarettes, cars etc and that's why they can make so much dough out of it. Once the car has gone they'll come up with another bad habit tax such as drinking too much water.
One for the lawyers on here, I posted the below on a thread which ended (not because of this argument) soon after. I wondered if in light of this survey it would be a valid defence?
Jinx said:
I believe that in a court of law that any act is deemed legal if it can been proven that you acted in a way that any resonable person would have acted given the circumstances.
Given this premise; if we assume that the majority of people are by definition reasonable and given the assumption that the majority of drivers speed at some point surely then speeding is a reasonable act (dependent on the circumstances). Hence speeding should be legal?
the only other crime I can think of at present where a two millimetre movement of part of ones body can result in prosecution is pulling the trigger of a gun. I think that soon there will only be two types of driver in this country. Those who have been caught by a speeding camera and those who are about to be. As the article highlighted members of the government/royalty/police/judiciary have all been caught on camera. Concentrating on speed is like locking up an innocent but possibly dubious looking man for a murder, when we all know the real killers, bad driving, poor road education for all road users especially children, and poor road design are all still out there waiting for their next victim.
'King Deadly said:I agree with GreenV8S. For why, you could do worse than to read Tafia's post on this thread
They don't want the money, they want us out of our cars.
Any idea why, though?
groucho said:
If they could charge for air they would.
Maybe they will. They know how many litres of air is breathed in.
I heard it said somewhere that it has been mentioned by some government body that we all should have personal carbon limits to counter global warming.
Andy_L said:
I heard it said somewhere that it has been mentioned by some government body that we all should have personal carbon limits to counter global warming.
I've heared this suggestion before, based on some sort of 'carbon exchange' where you had to buy the right to use energy (not the energy itself) for all sorts of activities.
IF global warming was occuring, and IF it was a man-made phenomenom, and IF the activities of the people covered by this ridiculous f
ing stupid scheme made the slightest difference to global warming, then I might give it serious consideration. As it is, I think it's the result of somebody doing fashionable research looking for ways that mankind is damaging the planet and coming up with hair-brained schemes to stop the damage. The answer is that it's the fault of western civilisation, now what's the question?Andy L said
"I heard it said somewhere that it has been mentioned by some government body that we all should have personal carbon limits to counter global warming."
Can we try it on Prescott....starting with...say...5ltrs a day and see how he gets on ?....when he starts going blue we'll know that should be about the amount the rest of us will need for a whole day
>> Edited by huge on Friday 5th August 16:29
"I heard it said somewhere that it has been mentioned by some government body that we all should have personal carbon limits to counter global warming."
Can we try it on Prescott....starting with...say...5ltrs a day and see how he gets on ?....when he starts going blue we'll know that should be about the amount the rest of us will need for a whole day
>> Edited by huge on Friday 5th August 16:29
on gmtv this morning and thought how long is it going to bve before they mention a child , low and behold under a minuate , not bad brake well done 
you wasted a whole 2 -3 mins of mmy electric and mine and my tv's life blathering on talking shiteGreenv8S said:Peter, you missed out "unsafe". Terrorists don't get much publicity out of blowing up an Audi on the M6, but herd us together on public transport and all of a sudden you're an innocent victim in waiting.
they want us packed in sardine-like on slow unreliable inefficient inconvenient public transport
If there is ANY alternative to public transport I'll use it, and it'll be a cold day in hell before I give up the freedom of my car. I'll use one uninsured, unregistered, unlicenced and on false plate if that's what they drive me to, but they won't drive me to getting blown up while sniffing some mad tube passengers smelly armpit.
Actually, I'm pretty p**sed off at the moment. I had the annual NIP drop through the letterbox yesterday.
I was expecting it, I was "bang to rights" I suppose as I was accelerating hard out of a 30mph before the NSL signs. I'd just turned onto the road 200yds earlier, and only a few houses on one side of the road between me and the NSL. As it happens I had just driven a very precarious couple of miles on a trail of split diesel, and was keen to burn it off my tyres, but I somehow don't see that standing up as any form of defence
I have now come to accept that the occasional NIP is pretty much inevitable. What has got my goat is the pamphlet enclosed with the NIP from the Bedford Scameraship. Condescending, patronising, self righteous drivel. I'm tempted to wipe my arse with it and send it back.
I even looked on their website - I should know better, my blood pressure won't stand it. They spouted some hocum about drivers in the early morning being tired so it was no safer to "speed" at this time than any other. Since I was passing through Befordshire at that time having already crossed three counties, and having been driving for over an hour already, I suspect I was actually already awake. Not quite awake enough to spot vans hiding in bushes though apparently.
So, six points now. Can't even buy a laser detector now to defend myself.
I was expecting it, I was "bang to rights" I suppose as I was accelerating hard out of a 30mph before the NSL signs. I'd just turned onto the road 200yds earlier, and only a few houses on one side of the road between me and the NSL. As it happens I had just driven a very precarious couple of miles on a trail of split diesel, and was keen to burn it off my tyres, but I somehow don't see that standing up as any form of defence
I have now come to accept that the occasional NIP is pretty much inevitable. What has got my goat is the pamphlet enclosed with the NIP from the Bedford Scameraship. Condescending, patronising, self righteous drivel. I'm tempted to wipe my arse with it and send it back.
I even looked on their website - I should know better, my blood pressure won't stand it. They spouted some hocum about drivers in the early morning being tired so it was no safer to "speed" at this time than any other. Since I was passing through Befordshire at that time having already crossed three counties, and having been driving for over an hour already, I suspect I was actually already awake. Not quite awake enough to spot vans hiding in bushes though apparently.
So, six points now. Can't even buy a laser detector now to defend myself.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff