Discussion
Regards the 318,323 (or whatever) post regarding speed limits (noticed post seems to have disappeared), whilst I can see the juvenile style posting being binned fairly quickly (again), it is an interesting question with regards speed limits.
The Pher’s of the world enjoy their driving and as such I would suggest spend a bit more time a) doing it and b) enjoying it (I mean driving, Podie). As such we are more aware of the rules and the limits of the road and perhaps can enjoy them “at the limit” more than Doris in her Yaris.
Could it be that the government, councils, BiB etc setting limits based on the lowest common denominator (the numpty)? That would explain the frustration here, and the outrage at numptyville (speedcamerasarebrill.com or such like), and rather than remove them (numpties) from the road (lower tax revenue from new car tax, fuel tax, ongoing fleecing tax, camera tax etc) just lower the standards for everyone and continue to generate income.
There some arguments against this, such as not many rules changing on the road, and the driving test getting harder (apparently, I took mine in Germany 15 years ago so can’t judge), but cars are so much safer to drive and crash year on year in but the KSI figures appear to be getting worse.
What do you think?
The Pher’s of the world enjoy their driving and as such I would suggest spend a bit more time a) doing it and b) enjoying it (I mean driving, Podie). As such we are more aware of the rules and the limits of the road and perhaps can enjoy them “at the limit” more than Doris in her Yaris.
Could it be that the government, councils, BiB etc setting limits based on the lowest common denominator (the numpty)? That would explain the frustration here, and the outrage at numptyville (speedcamerasarebrill.com or such like), and rather than remove them (numpties) from the road (lower tax revenue from new car tax, fuel tax, ongoing fleecing tax, camera tax etc) just lower the standards for everyone and continue to generate income.
There some arguments against this, such as not many rules changing on the road, and the driving test getting harder (apparently, I took mine in Germany 15 years ago so can’t judge), but cars are so much safer to drive and crash year on year in but the KSI figures appear to be getting worse.
What do you think?
I agree a lot of drivers are not as good as they would like to think they are (the 2 that caused the death of the truck driver on the a40 are probably not feeling too smart at the mo') but the push for better education and more stringent testing could help resolve that a lot more than revenue generating cameras, and then we could have more realistic speed limits (or only advisory ones which would be a massive improvement imo).
Mg/11 said:
I think you at least out of all the posts I have read on this site have some understanding of why!
Makes sense really. The fast ones are only as good as the rest of the population allow them to be. A lot of people think they are better than this and they are in fact not!
How's about speed camera revenue gets put directly into driver education only.
Eventually our drivers would be somewhere near the Euroland level of education. We could raise speed limits above the current numpty factor just like they're doing on several Euroland Autoroutes.
You know about this I presume?
Education is the key, at least many here are probably far more aware than the average driver.
Speed cameras will not improve driver skill - a more thorough and better focussed test is the answer.
After all, if higher speeds were so dangerous, why are the BIB allowed to exceed speed limits?
The BIB will tell you it's because they are trained to a higher standard.
Generally it's the statistically safer driver that is getting done for speeding, the younger male, statistically more likely to have an accident, is not for some reason. Where's the sense / focus on safety in that?
After all, if higher speeds were so dangerous, why are the BIB allowed to exceed speed limits?
The BIB will tell you it's because they are trained to a higher standard.
Generally it's the statistically safer driver that is getting done for speeding, the younger male, statistically more likely to have an accident, is not for some reason. Where's the sense / focus on safety in that?
I agree that it looks like speed limits are being set at the lowest common denominator, effectively worst-case level.
In the past people would take account of conditions and slow down below NSL where appropriate. Now the limits force everyone down to the lower speeds all the time irrespective of conditions, just in case.
Part of a global trend towards risk assessment? Consider GM foods, MMR immunisation, "ghost ships". Don't take any risks at all, ever, just in case. That way you'll never die....
In the past people would take account of conditions and slow down below NSL where appropriate. Now the limits force everyone down to the lower speeds all the time irrespective of conditions, just in case.
Part of a global trend towards risk assessment? Consider GM foods, MMR immunisation, "ghost ships". Don't take any risks at all, ever, just in case. That way you'll never die....
It's just part of the general trend to move things away from shades of grey and into a simple world of black and white. If you admit that a combination of driver, conditions and manoeuvre will change the safe speed anywhere from 0mph to 60+mph, then how do you "know" that a driver's speed is safe? You don't, of course. But before you can prove that a driver is going too fast you have to determine what "too fast" means.
Speed is about safety. It changes reaction distance, and it changes the outcome of any impact. But at the moment we're becoming more focused on proving that someone is going too fast than on making people travel at a safe speed. Just my tuppence worth.
Speed is about safety. It changes reaction distance, and it changes the outcome of any impact. But at the moment we're becoming more focused on proving that someone is going too fast than on making people travel at a safe speed. Just my tuppence worth.
I'm going to post my opinion on speed cameras and then shut up. 
1. In some areas, speed limits save lives.
2. "Accident black spots" that result in camera placement should only be designated as such if the accident was caused by excessive speed.
3. Placing a mobile camera at the side of the road causes a greater hazard than having nothing there at all. How does hiding a small balck box slow people down? It doesn't, it catches people unawares and makes them pay money. The Government need money to run United Kingdom PLC and they will raise it any way they can.
4. If the government wanted to raise public awareness at cetrain sites thay would be better served placing HUGE signs at the side of the road rather than hiding a black box in a bush. Take the New Forest for example. A sign saying "20 Ponies have died on this road since 2002" makes me drive more carefully, especially when the number keeps going up (What?! I like ponies!).
cont'd...
1. In some areas, speed limits save lives.
2. "Accident black spots" that result in camera placement should only be designated as such if the accident was caused by excessive speed.
3. Placing a mobile camera at the side of the road causes a greater hazard than having nothing there at all. How does hiding a small balck box slow people down? It doesn't, it catches people unawares and makes them pay money. The Government need money to run United Kingdom PLC and they will raise it any way they can.
4. If the government wanted to raise public awareness at cetrain sites thay would be better served placing HUGE signs at the side of the road rather than hiding a black box in a bush. Take the New Forest for example. A sign saying "20 Ponies have died on this road since 2002" makes me drive more carefully, especially when the number keeps going up (What?! I like ponies!).
cont'd...
5. Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, speed limits are part of road traffic law. Some are odd, some are plain crazy, but they are there. If you want to change them, you need to form a pressure group of like minded souls to get it changed. The problem is, people who actually DRIVE their cars are a minority of 1% and everyone else thinks we're hoons.
6. The only way to guarantee never to get a ticket is to drive at or under the limits. If we are caught, then we are to blame, because we're driving. This fact has no arguement to it. I hate driving at 60, or 70. I want to drive at 140 because I know I gots the skills and I know my car wants to. If I choose to do this and get caught, it's my fault.
I'll get off my box now.
Flame on fellas, you KNOW I can hack it
said:
Could it be that the government, councils, BiB etc setting limits based on the lowest common denominator (the numpty)?
Numpties seem to set the limits now - Numpties are incapable of comprehending that others have greater skill levels than the minimum.
Madant69 - have to agree with your view there
hertsbiker said:
Do you really reckon the general population see us that way? ooops. That's worrying.
Absolutely. One example: How many times have you guys performed a safe, progressive overtake, only to be flashed/beeped at by Eric (random name) in an oncoming car 1/4 mile up the road?
You've been safe, driven within the limits of you and your car and put no-one at risk, yet Eric STLL thinks you're a hoon cause he doesn't know how to drive!
He can make a car leave A and arrive at B but that's not driving
Nice one Madant - sensible view sensibly put and one I happen to agree with.
Hoons is putting it mildly - when was the last time you overtook someone without them looking at you like you'd just run over their dog?
It's surprisingly difficult to grasp just how differently the vast majority view driving and how appalled they are by the things we 'enthusiasts' routinely do on the roads.
madant69 said:
5. Unfortunately, whether we like it or not, speed limits are part of road traffic law. Some are odd, some are plain crazy, but they are there. If you want to change them, you need to form a pressure group of like minded souls to get it changed. The problem is, people who actually DRIVE their cars are a minority of 1% and everyone else thinks we're hoons.
Hoons is putting it mildly - when was the last time you overtook someone without them looking at you like you'd just run over their dog?
It's surprisingly difficult to grasp just how differently the vast majority view driving and how appalled they are by the things we 'enthusiasts' routinely do on the roads.
madant69 said:
Absolutely. One example: How many times have you guys performed a safe, progressive overtake, only to be flashed/beeped at by Eric (random name) in an oncoming car 1/4 mile up the road?
Never. My overtakes are always so tight the oncoming driver hasn't got time to get to his horn or lights as I graze his offside bumper.
>> Edited by toad_oftoadhall on Friday 14th November 13:40
I agree think the speed limits on all our roads need a thorough overhaul.
I think some need raising ( a dual carrigeway near me has a 30 mph limit!) and some perhaps need lowering (id be happy to see 20mph limit outside schools maybe limited to school times?)
I see the problem with speed limits is that some people seem determined to drive at these speeds even in atrocious conditions. How many times do you see someone in their rep-mobile driving on a motorway at over 80mph in thick fog or torrential rain usually long after i've slowed to a safer speed.
I think some need raising ( a dual carrigeway near me has a 30 mph limit!) and some perhaps need lowering (id be happy to see 20mph limit outside schools maybe limited to school times?)
I see the problem with speed limits is that some people seem determined to drive at these speeds even in atrocious conditions. How many times do you see someone in their rep-mobile driving on a motorway at over 80mph in thick fog or torrential rain usually long after i've slowed to a safer speed.
Agree with Madant....(im losing it)..
On the other point, the lowering of limits so that nobheads and numpties can "hack it": This is the very same approach being used in the police force regarding the physical training aspect.
Not enough wanna be cops were passing the test, so they made it easier.
If i remember correctly, they also did this with the entrance exam........ so we get left with people of a substandard ability. Not that im suggesting the guys we have on here are, i hasten to add......(que the sounds of batons being hastily drawn and impinging on bone... ).
You can see where this gets us though, it gets us numpties in all walks of life, because the standards are lower than they should be.
On the other point, the lowering of limits so that nobheads and numpties can "hack it": This is the very same approach being used in the police force regarding the physical training aspect.
Not enough wanna be cops were passing the test, so they made it easier.
If i remember correctly, they also did this with the entrance exam........ so we get left with people of a substandard ability. Not that im suggesting the guys we have on here are, i hasten to add......(que the sounds of batons being hastily drawn and impinging on bone...
). You can see where this gets us though, it gets us numpties in all walks of life, because the standards are lower than they should be.
I must be getting old, as I support 100% madant's outburst.
What I would add more is that a lot of the signals I was taught to use to identify hazardous areas are being degraded.
By this I mean, for example, lots of white paint and signs generally used to mean "watch out!" The logic being councils don't waste money unless it's really necessary.
Now there's more paint on the roads in a typical journey than in the whole of B&Q. Hence degradation to some extent of hazard obeservation links. You might not agree but that is what I feel.
Likewise speed limits, they used to be fairly intuitive but now you really do need to read the signs very carefully to stay legal.
And legal I do stay , :touchwood: because frankly I don't want the points, and quite honestly on most single carriageway NSL 9 times out of 10 it frustrates like hell. Yes I do sometimes go illegal, well illegal but if caught it would have to be hands up guvnor!.
Question: If I can be trusted to drive appropriately down a little nadgery single track lane, with grass in the middle, banks & hedges both sides, hidden entrances, lousy sight lines, mud and cow muck all over, yet a set limit of 60 applies, then why can I not be trusted to drive appropriately down the nearby rural dual carriageway which has a set limit of 50 now being lowered to 40?
Stand for parliament anyone?
What I would add more is that a lot of the signals I was taught to use to identify hazardous areas are being degraded.
By this I mean, for example, lots of white paint and signs generally used to mean "watch out!" The logic being councils don't waste money unless it's really necessary.
Now there's more paint on the roads in a typical journey than in the whole of B&Q. Hence degradation to some extent of hazard obeservation links. You might not agree but that is what I feel.
Likewise speed limits, they used to be fairly intuitive but now you really do need to read the signs very carefully to stay legal.
And legal I do stay , :touchwood: because frankly I don't want the points, and quite honestly on most single carriageway NSL 9 times out of 10 it frustrates like hell. Yes I do sometimes go illegal, well illegal but if caught it would have to be hands up guvnor!.
Question: If I can be trusted to drive appropriately down a little nadgery single track lane, with grass in the middle, banks & hedges both sides, hidden entrances, lousy sight lines, mud and cow muck all over, yet a set limit of 60 applies, then why can I not be trusted to drive appropriately down the nearby rural dual carriageway which has a set limit of 50 now being lowered to 40?
Stand for parliament anyone?
Agree 100%.
40mph dual carriageways are a real pain in the arse, and utterly contradictory. The whole point of a DC is to have an OVERTAKING lane, yet setting such a low limit totally undermines the whole point of the road and causes all sorts of awful driving. How often have you been on a 40/50 DC (assuming non urban road with recently reduced limit here) with some dickhead sat in lane two at 35mph because they're turning right at the roundabout a mile up the road?
Classic example, for those who know it, is the A4008 (M1 link road) out of Watford. The first part is a 40mph as it goes round a fairly sharp bend, then it goes NSL for the 1/2 mile or so up to J5 of the M1. Mr Numpty is trundling along at 35mph, and wants to turn right at the J5 roundabout, so rather than waiting until nearer the junction, he just plonks himself in lane two for 1/2 mile. There's me coming out of the 40 limit, accelerating up to 65 and overtaking slower stuff in lane one, when I'm confronted with this
wit in the way, totally oblivious to the prospect of anyone approaching behind at nearly double his speed, bumbling along like a mobile speed bump, lane one totally empty. I back of a bit, give him a chance to see me and move left, but he's not looking in his mirrors and is staying planted in the right hand lane. In the end I get hacked off and undertake...for which I'd get done if witnessed by the BiB, whilst Mr Rolling Roadblock carries on oblivious. All these stupidly reduced limits are doing is creating a driving population with no observation or road sense. After all, speed kills, so anybody overtaking is a lunatic etc etc.
40mph dual carriageways are a real pain in the arse, and utterly contradictory. The whole point of a DC is to have an OVERTAKING lane, yet setting such a low limit totally undermines the whole point of the road and causes all sorts of awful driving. How often have you been on a 40/50 DC (assuming non urban road with recently reduced limit here) with some dickhead sat in lane two at 35mph because they're turning right at the roundabout a mile up the road?
Classic example, for those who know it, is the A4008 (M1 link road) out of Watford. The first part is a 40mph as it goes round a fairly sharp bend, then it goes NSL for the 1/2 mile or so up to J5 of the M1. Mr Numpty is trundling along at 35mph, and wants to turn right at the J5 roundabout, so rather than waiting until nearer the junction, he just plonks himself in lane two for 1/2 mile. There's me coming out of the 40 limit, accelerating up to 65 and overtaking slower stuff in lane one, when I'm confronted with this
wit in the way, totally oblivious to the prospect of anyone approaching behind at nearly double his speed, bumbling along like a mobile speed bump, lane one totally empty. I back of a bit, give him a chance to see me and move left, but he's not looking in his mirrors and is staying planted in the right hand lane. In the end I get hacked off and undertake...for which I'd get done if witnessed by the BiB, whilst Mr Rolling Roadblock carries on oblivious. All these stupidly reduced limits are doing is creating a driving population with no observation or road sense. After all, speed kills, so anybody overtaking is a lunatic etc etc. Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff