You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
@ATP yes. I used to drive a lot and behave like a prize **** on the road. I've since grown up and I also use crooze almost everywhere to keep me in check. Still guilty of the odd infraction on the motorboik but that's mandatory as every policeman knows...
Roter Stern - MemberIsn't it about time that cars were fitted with annoying beep indicators when you´exceed the speed limit?
My Audi does.....
and Mol, you are being trolled here.
Mind you, a moments inattention found me redlining it in 2/3/4 on the way to work this morning. Imagine my surprise when I found I was doing 110mph.....
Oh, and I will say I've just been on a speed awareness course. 61 in a 50. In my defence I can say I saw the van, looked everywhere for speed limit signs, thought 4 lane dual carriageway, heading towards a motorway, no other traffic, sat nav said 60 zone so I went at 60 (ok, I was wrong by 1mph) and I was still speeding. Sometimes shit happens I was being attentive and I risked nobody at all.
For me the issue is partially about 'respect' for the speed limits - especially temporary ones. I think if those bits of motorways that are being worked on had a 40 limit when there were workers there but it rose to 50 or 60 (not the full 70, to take into account the effect of the narrowed carriageways or whatever) when they were not being worked on the general population would find it more reasonable and therefore be happier to accept them. Similarly inconsistencies in urban and semi urban areas (we have a bit of road in town here that is a 40 limit that for the lift of me I can't understand why its not a 30 as it is lined with houses with road junction every couple of hundred yards yet the 1.5miles of totally rural road between my village and the town with no houses on it is a 30 ) don't help.
molgrips - Member
If you aren't capable of keeping to the limit AND watching where you are going, you're not fit to drive.
A simple fact. It's not like your being asked to do brain surgery while discussing the merits of Friday Kylie.
About 1700 people died on the UK's roads in 2012/13
compared with about 700 murders
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Which is a bigger problem
jam bo - Memberit always amazes me driving on motorways with cruise control, how many people i seem pass repeatedly as they seem to rocket past at 90, then ease right off, then a couple of miles down the road do the same again.
Driving a 19yr old car with god knows how many of it's original 75 horses under the bonnet coupled to a CVT gearbox does not make maintaining a constant speed easy, especially if it's hilly.
Having said that I rarely get to a true 70mph (76 indicated).
You don't need to constantly watch it. Just every so often. Can you not control your car's speed properly either?
Gravity has no effect on my speed ? Motor vehicle propulsion is a fixed constant with moderate inclines having no effect?
I check my speedo from time to time to confirm that I am travelling at the speed that my senses tell me I am travelling at. When I do this my eyes are off the road. Some people check more frequently. I can't believe we're arguing when you agree with my point that it's better to have your eyes on the road.
Some people have poorer spatial awareness, it doesn't make them incompetent as you suggest, just less skilled. Not everyone can do everything, but they were obviously assessed as "competent" at some point. I remember during my driving test, I checked the speedo more frequently than I do now as I had less experience to measure my speed through awareness.
Driving a 19yr old car with god knows how many of it's original 75 horses under the bonnet coupled to a CVT gearbox
You must really hate yourself to drive something like that. 😆
About 1700 people died on the UK's roads in 2012/13 compared with about 700 murders
and almost 6,000 suicides.
Which is a bigger problem
Gravity has no effect on my speed ?
It does, but you should be able to deal with that. I manage it.
bigyinn - MemberYou must really hate yourself to drive something like that. 😆
I absolutely love it. 😳
I've had 300kmh super saloons and tuned up sports cars, but the simplicity and reliability of the little Micra is superb.
sbob, so what should the police do?
Enforcing speed is a sensible thing, anyone who is not aware how fast they are going is not in full control of that vehicle. Dismissing road safety as something not worth bothering about is ridiculous. Also the police are probably not the best people to deal with suicide prevention.
Comparing total accident road deaths to murders? Quite astonishing.
Think of the child's face!
Ironically..
Recently I was sat in a bar waiting for my takeaway to be ready- across the cobbled (dead end) street my son was crossing with his mum and two cars went passed at over 40mph before slamming on hard to go down to a underground carpark.
I shudder to think what could have happened. Especially to the driver and his subsequent death by strangulation.
Which is a bigger problem
Put the speed cameras in town then, not stretches of dual carriageway. My kids cross an A-road near the edge of the village to get to school it's about 200 metres from a national speed limit to 30mph change as you enter the village. Significant numbers of motorists don't slow down adequately, they used to run a speed trap there, but realised that it was too close to the transition point and as a result they no longer monitor it as it's not as lucrative. It was there at least once a week before they realised their error. They're now [s]generating revenue[/s] monitoring the traffic on the dual carriageway instead. Where's the improvement in road safety there??
tinybits - Member
Comparing total accident road deaths to murders? Quite astonishing.
To the point where people were saying that enforcing traffic rules was a waste of police time and not worth it. When more people die on roads than from murder it's a serious issue. People thinking that they can speed or break traffic laws with just a fine/slap on the wrist is half the problem. Driving a couple of tons of metal around is a privilege and something granted after training, it is in no way a right that you can do this.
It does, but you should be able to deal with that. I manage it.
With skills like that why aren't you driving F1? Those micro-adjustments at almost instantaneous speed would be highly regarded in any [s]self-abusing[/s] self-respecting F1 driver.
"[i]Comparing total accident road deaths to murders? Quite astonishing.[/i]"
Not astonishing at all really. They're all people dying, it's just that the causes are different. I've got more chance of premature death through someone's incompetence or negligence on the road than I have through someone's malicious homicide.
"[i]With skills like that why aren't you driving F1? Those micro-adjustments at almost instantaneous speed would be highly regarded in any self-respecting F1 driver.[/i]"
Really, it's not that hard. Road goes down, lift foot; road goes up, press foot; listen to road noise, use eyes, and check speedo after a few seconds.
The problem is that some people think the threshold of ability to drive a car should be somewhere around the level of being able to look at the pictures in the Highway Code without soaking it in drool.
Unfortunately, as a nation we've based the vast majority of our transport policy around building roads for drooling picture-gazers to drive cars on, rather than offering sufficient valid alternatives that the genuinely incompetent minority can get by fine without being charged with a ton of metal and a hundred or so horses - which is why the driving test isn't particularly challenging, we almost never retest anyone ever, we're very relaxed about reporting medical ineligibility, and we're very reluctant to ban any truly dangerous driver for any length of time or to use bans as a punishment for demonstrable violations of safe practices regardless of whether they cause death or injury on any given occasion.
mikewsmith - Membersbob, so what should the police do?
Prosecute people for shit driving.
I still find it amazing that someone can drive into the back of my stationary car and not get done, yet I could *theoretically get a conviction for driving at 71mph on a deserted motorway at 4am without causing any accidents or inconveniences.
*As smug sbob has always had a clean licence.
I never said it was a waste of police time, I said that the Police are not fit for purpose. Enforce the rules yes, but do it where it counts not just in a cynical attempt to generate revenue. I know the police don't receive the revenue, but I'm sure that it must help when "negotiating" budgets to show how much they're worth to the exchequer...
Bez, I'm all for improving public transport. I used to enjoy driving I hate it now, there are too many idiots on the road (and speed cameras!)
😉
With skills like that why aren't you driving F1?
Because I'm not a good enough driver. That skill's nothing to write home about. Just takes a bit of attention and practice. Really not difficult.
I still find it amazing that someone can drive into the back of my stationary car and not get done, yet I could *theoretically get a conviction for driving at 71mph on a deserted motorway at 4am without causing any accidents or inconveniences.
That would take time and effort. Police might actually have to attend.
"[i]Bez, I'm all for improving public transport. I used to enjoy driving I hate it now, there are too many idiots on the road (and speed cameras!)[/i]"
With you all the way there (except I'd be fine with more speed cameras) 🙂
except I'd be fine with more speed cameras
Yep, if they were a bit cheaper I'd offer to fund one near where I live.
Some interesting comments here, so I think I will add my 2p.... I am a cop, (awaits pitchforks/donut jokes) advanced driver and all that stuff, I have been caught speeding too, again just a drop in concentration (just the once in 25+ years of driving mind) . MTFU and take your punishment, you broke the law so deal with the consequences. Simple.
Driving and owning a licence is a privilage not a right, in my 17+ years I have dealt with some horrendous stuff that came as a result of a minor lapse in concentration, I have dealt with people who should not be put in charge of a TV remote, never mind a motor vehicle.
Most mobile speed cameras are a joint local authority/police initiative, and often the locations are advertised on local websites many weeks in advance!
Example.....
http://www.gosafe.org/
So do we have any excuses for being caught?
footflaps - MemberYep, if they were a bit cheaper I'd offer to fund one near where I live.
Wouldn't you be better off trying to improve road safety by concentrating on one of the many more serious causes of KSIs?
4% footflaps, 4%.
So do we have any excuses for being caught?
I was late for a round of golf with inspector Ballesteros. 😉
No problem sir, just follow my blue lights through the traffic!
Bez - (except I'd be fine with more speed cameras)
In places where they make a difference, I'm 100%. As revenue generation, they can keep them.
If my village was such an accident blackspot, why hasn't the speed limit transition been moved so that they can enforce it? There are houses at the side of the road in the national speed limit zone. Why don't my local authority install a pedestrian crossing, or employ a crossing patrol. They simply stopped detecting the crime because they couldn't make the penalties stick.
As said before, go to court and plead you need licence for your livelihood. The fine will go up but you'll keep your licence. It's up to you to make the financial cost/benefit analysis. When I had to do that it cost 60% of a month's take home, but I kept my job.
Wouldn't you be better off trying to improve road safety by concentrating on one of the many more serious causes of KSIs?
How do you know that speeding isn't one of the biggest risk factors where I live?
footflaps - MemberHow do you know that speeding isn't one of the biggest risk factors where I live?
Because I know where you live, I was born there and I take a great interest in road safety. 😀
The fine will go up but you'll keep your licence. It's up to you to make the financial cost/benefit analysis.
You don't get an idea of context with our current system of speeding related offences.
Compare two drivers. Over a 1 year period, driver 1 picks up 9 points having done 5,000 miles in his/her local area, which mainly consists of doing the school run and shopping. Driver 2 also picks up 9 points, but having done 50,000 miles all over the UK.
I don't want to suggest that either is acceptable, they both break the law while driving, but if you had the choice of sharing a road with one or the other, which would it be? ie, is there a difference of what is in the public interest?
"[I]As revenue generation, they can keep them.[/I]"
To my mind they're absolutely fine as revenue generators. The more revenue that's generated by people too inattentive to see road signs or too arrogant to observe the instructions they give, the less has to be generated by those of us who can keep an eye out and obey the law. More taxes on stupidity and disdain, please.
To my mind they're absolutely fine as revenue generators.
The fines are still pathetically small, often less the cost of a tank of fuel - hardly a deterrent.
Would speed cameras not be far more effective if they were hidden and random?
£100 these days isn't it?
So do we have any excuses for being caught?
being caught?
I didnt realise the traffic light cameras had been converted to speed cameras in plymouth.
speeding?
I didnt think i'd get caught.
Quote from the ROSP website:
Introduction
January 2011Inappropriate speed contributes to around 14% of all injury collisions, 15% of crashes resulting in a serious injury and 24% of collisions which result in a death and are recorded by the police.1 This includes both 'excessive speed', when the speed limit is exceeded but also driving or riding within the speed limit when this is too fast for the conditions at the time (for example, in poor weather, poor visibility or high pedestrian activity).
In 2010, 241 people were killed in crashes involving someone exceeding the speed limit and a further 180 people died when someone was travelling too fast for the conditions.1
Drivers and riders who are travelling at inappropriate speeds are more likely to crash and their higher speed means that the crash will cause more severe injuries, to themselves and/or to other road users. Inappropriate speed also magnifies other driver errors, such as driving too close or driving when tired or distracted, multiplying the chances of these types of driving causing an accident.
So, if assuming there are the same number of deaths in the last couple of years (although I think they are decreasing), and also assuming the figure of 700 murders are correct (edit it's 640 so adjusted the 2.9 to 2.65) then I'm [b]1.52[/b] times more likely to be murdered than die in a crash involving excessive speed.
So it utter **** to compare those statistics in any way to point out the police should put their resources against speeders before murders.
Further edit - I've now recalculated and it's still in favour of catching murderers!
Would speed cameras not be far more effective if they were hidden and random?
Not really, they are normally intelligently placed at places where accidents are likely, as are most speed traps. It would be a waste of resource having a camera in the middle of nowhere just because a random number generator picked that site...
But, if drivers knew they might be around any corner, they'd have no choice but to obey the limit no?
jonba - Member
Easiest way to cause a traffic jam? Drive at 30 in a 30 zone and watch the cars line up behind you.
That's exactly what I do if the speed limit says 30 I will only drive at max 30mph (with occasional lapse to 35mph - sat nav warning) only if I know the stretch of the road well, otherwise slower if I have never been there before.
Yes, there would be long queue of traffic behind me even if the road is clear. Sort them. Common sense does not apply here. Bureaucratic speed cameras do and I am sticking to the limit. Yes, everyone that passes me would give me the look ... bloody zombie maggots!
I would like to drive in front of the police car and stick to the speed limit like a glue because I think some of them do drive faster then the limit.
🙄
Drive at 30 in a 30 zone and watch the cars line up behind you.
Is that an issue?
Would speed cameras not be far more effective if they were hidden and random?
Catch more Politicians wouldn't it.
I'd be happy with this suggestion as long as motorbikes had front and rear plates fitted and all non-standard numberplates were prosecuted vigorously.
So any pretend dub-scene/german pretend plates- the POS would be scrapped on the spot.
The only reason speeding doesnt directly cause more harm is because people have steadily come to consider "outside" as a hazardous place to be avoided if at all possible.
Really? I thought there were far more people and far more cars on the road?
"[I]So it utter **** to compare those statistics in any way to point out the police should put their resources against speeders before murders.[/I]"
The original comparison related to deaths in road collisions, not just those marked as being associated with "excessive speed" or involving breaking a speed limit. What arbitrary subset of murders shall we choose to change the argument at a whim? Just those involving candlesticks in the billiard room?
mikewsmith - Membermolgrips - Member
If you aren't capable of keeping to the limit AND watching where you are going, you're not fit to drive.A simple fact. It's not like your being asked to do brain surgery while discussing the merits of Friday Kylie.
About 1700 people died on the UK's roads in 2012/13
compared with about 700 murders
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
Which is a bigger problem
So in a discussion, no sorry, direct quote (please see the molgrips one about keeping to the speed limit) it was about speeding, not all the reasons behind a fatality, so I think I'll stick to my opinion and call this well, a **** comparison.
That's not to say I agree with speeding or I'm defending it however, I've been caught, I'm not proud but once in 19yrs and possible 500,000 miles, I'll say is a reasonable average.
In the US (specifically New York and New Jersey where I lived) they automatically load your car insurance with each motoring offense. That would really sting as over the 3 (or 5 ?) years you'd be paying $1000 for each offence.
OP depends on how much you want to save your licence, if you hire a lawyer and go to court you probably get a reduced ban or very possibly none at all. You should talk to your insurance company about how much a ban is likely to cost you.
Hidden speed cameras where found to create accidents as motorists slammed their brakes on at the last minute. The ideal of speed cameras being visible is that they get motorists to slow down gradually and in advance and thus reduce speeds overall and over a longer stretch of road. Remember the idea of cameras is not (supposed) to be to catch loads of people and generate revenue, its about road safety.
"[I]it was about speeding[/I]"
Well, no, to continue the regrettable descent into pedantry it was about being able to drive with sufficient care whilst *not* speeding. Either way, I think it was quite clear and at least reasonably pertinent. YMMV.
It is pretty difficult to argue against the logic of average speed cameras, especially in motorway road works etc.
This will all become immaterial in the future when we pay road tolls and have real time in car trackers. Insurance companies already offer these to young drivers. I can see this evolving to the point that insurance will just be prohibitively expensive unless you have a tracker.
Hidden speed cameras where found to create accidents as motorists slammed their brakes on at the last minute.
I meant *completely* invisible. No road markings, nothing. Of course this would present a bit of a technical challenge because the accuracy depends on the road markings.
Remember the idea of cameras is not (supposed) to be to catch loads of people and generate revenue, its about road safety.
If they record safety infringements, then I can agree to them calling them "safety cameras", but up to now that's been a massive brainwashing.
If they record speed infringements, then they are speed cameras. (and similarly for RLJ).
Hidden is fine for revenue raising. All revenue to go to victim support funds and/or to contribute to the fixing of whatever is the underlying cause for that blackspot being a blackspot.
Fines double in construction zones (they do that in US).
I meant *completely* invisible. No road markings, nothing. Of course this would present a bit of a technical challenge because the accuracy depends on the road markings.
Average speed camera don't. 10yrs and they'll be a permanent fixture on all major roads I reckon.
Yeah, a network of average speed cameras would work - on major roads. Or dangerous ones.. or both.