[Closed] Well it went a bit quiet in here when I watched this...

These same old "I'm a good driver so I can go fast" arguments often leave me wondering who they're trying to convince. Do you think the people who crash, considered themselves to not be good enough to drive. No, they think they're up to it.

People have accidents, make mistakes, me, you, everyone. Roads are bloody dangerous full of big things going fast. Why not leave yourself room for error/manoeuvre/reaction on the basis of just incase?

Reaction time does not decrease much with skill and training. Your kinetic energy and damage on impact increases with speed however skilled you are.

In off-piste skiing and avalanche awareness we have a saying "the mountain does not know you are an expert"

In road safety perhaps people ought to say "the muppet whose car you are about to hit does not know you are a self-deluding over-confident cockwomble who thinks basic physics doesn't apply to him..." 😉

Ro5ey - Member

I'm not surprised he didnt see the the car either... it was probably 1/2 a mile away !!

And yet the Police investigator says there's "no reason" why he didn't see the bike. Going in circles a little bit but this is important, people really seem to be going away from this with the idea that what happened here is somehow OK, and that's the sort of attitude that lets it happen again. You should be surprised that he didn't see the bike. And if you think it's OK that he didn't, it could be you next.

[img] [/img]

These same old "I'm a good driver so I can go fast" arguments often leave me wondering who they're trying to convince. Do you think the people who crash, considered themselves to not be good enough to drive. No, they think they're up to it.

90% of people think they're better than average drivers.

I think you'll find that those people who like driving fast are also normally interested in improving their driving skills, maintaining their vehicle to high standards, and normally genuinely care about the standard of their driving.

Nope. Government stats don't support you with that assertion I'm afraid. Pretty much everyone likes to drive fast.

A staggering 70% of drivers admit to speeding, which is especially dangerous in busy and built-up areas. Think! Dept of Transport

[url= http://www.theaa.com/aattitude/driving-truths/safety/what-causes-accidents.jsp ]From the AA - hardly an anti-driving organisation[/url]

Probably right about speed not being the main contributor though - from the same source:

Speeding is a contributory factor in over 30% of accidents.3

Agree on the focus by government and police on speed being so wrong not being very helpful too - aggression, poor attentiveness and general lack of respect for the rules are the main risks in my experience as a cyclist

it could be you next.

How's it going to be me or you ?

I don't ride a motorbike

I don't drive at 100 mile an hour

And I don't treat a public highway as a personnal playground.

How about you ?

In off-piste skiing and avalanche awareness we have a saying "the mountain does not know you are an expert"

No but as a knowledgeable expert you can quite safely ski faster, with more awareness, and a greater margin of safety in a dangerous mountain environment than someone with far less training. You have an awareness of where it's safe to push yourself and where you need to back off because the risks are greater.

I'm sorry you think I'm a cockwomble, but the likelyhood is at any given speed, because of my extra training, and to some extent the vehicle I drive then I'm probably a safer driver than you. Let me guess, did you pass your test quite a few years ago and then haven't bothered to do anything to improve your driving skills since? Same probably applies to most others on here who are so high and mighty about speeding.

.

Ro5ey - Member

How's it going to be me or you ?

You're saying that you're not surprised by a dangerous lack of observation which lead to a man's death. If you think it's OK, then yes, it could be you next time, guilty of causing death by careless driving.

I think you'll find that lack of concentration or observation is a far bigger cause of accidents than speed.

Yes, that will be why the motorbike death rate is higher than the bicycle death rate - cyclists just pay more attention.

because of my extra training, and to some extent the vehicle I drive then I'm probably a safer driver than you.

[img] [/img]

I don't work for the Police so poor troll.

White van man?

Why are people replying to this rebel guy,he's clearly an idiot who is just posting to wind you up.leave the driving god to his delusions and go and make a sandwich or something 🙂

Rebel, you talk some shit. I've done plenty of advanced driving courses whilst in my previous career included with the police here and the RUC, as was. Your view of what makes a good driver appears to be your ego and what car you own. Try doing a course were they just don't take your money off you, play in car and give you nice certificate to remember the day but require you to achieve the required standard to become a member.

Try doing a course were they just don't take your money off you, play in car and give you nice certificate to remember the day but require you to achieve the required standard to become a member.

Like, the IAM advanced course perhaps? Done that, passed thank you.

Ro5ey

Really don't know some are making this the car drivers fault

Sorry, but it is the drivers fault primarily for the following reasons:

1) The only single element that we can remove, that with ABSOLUTE CERTAINTY would have prevented an collision between the car and the bike, is the cars move across the bikers path. Any other option (biker going slower or whatever only MIGHT reduce the probability of the collision occurring.

2) The highway code is quite clear. It is the responsibility of the driver of the vehicle crossing the opposing carriage way to ensure it is "safe" for them to do so. No Caveats are attached regarding the possible speed of approaching traffic or the time you have available to look etc. You must be 100% sure the road is clear and it is safe for you to start your maneuver.

In this case, the driver has admitted to "not seeing" either the bike or the following car, and so the bikes speed is irrelevant in terms of preventing the collision from occurring. We don't know if they simply failed to look, or didn't give themselves enough time to look properly.

IMO, it's 75:25 to the car driver, something the courts seem to have agreed with.

(I'm not disputing the fact that the bikers speed was excessive and inappropriate in the moments before the collisions occurred, but that simply "going slower" would not guarantee the collision couldn't have occurred.)

Nw

At what point does someone take responsibility for their own actions?

The car driver never meant to have an accident... but the biker did mean to be going that speed

You certainly aren't applying the skills as it is about making progress when safe to do so. Not speeding for the sake of it because you are better than other drivers... in your head.

Some amount of willy waving on here, both from car drivers and motorbike riders. I wish speed awareness courses were compulsory for all road licence holders every 3 or 5 yrs. Most useful driver training I've seen in yrs and I've done quite a few varied courses over the 30 plus yrs of my own driving.

The video, tragic, for both families, biker and car driver.

The car driver never meant to have an accident... but the biker did mean to be going that speed

The car driver meant to turn across the road. He therefore had a responsibility to do it safely.

+1 for the last part of maxtorque's post

The car driver never meant to have an accident... but the biker did mean to be going that speed

Indeed.

Just because you have a certificate doesn't make it right that you can drive like a prick.
Treat other people with respect and slow the **** down. It ain't rocket science.

You certainly aren't applying the skills as it is about making progress when safe to do so. Not speeding for the sake of it because you are better than other drivers... in your head.

No I'd be exceeding posted speed limits anyway (like probably 99% of the other people who drive), it's just that I've taken a decision to improve my skills so that when I do exceed the limit (sometimes because I enjoy it) I'll be safer doing this. The IAM, whilst providing excellent training, does not condone breaking speed limits. I've not kept my membership up.

Well I'm signing out of this discussion. It's going a little of topic, partly my fault, and I don't see what further can be gained from discussing road safety issues with some people on here seemingly so concerned about road safety and the speed of others, yet who can't themselves see the value in extra driver training and who haven't even been bothered to further their own driving skills since passing their test. As they say, "you can't educate pork".

And if it all goes wrong someone still has to come and scoop you up and bag all the bits.

I think the costs should be passed on to those who are at fault, why should I have to pay for other people who choose to pay for their training, pay out for a performance vehicle and still drive like a ****er.

Rebel, you are on a planet of your own. Shame that's not true as our world would be a safer place without your driving skills.

Well whatever your views

Stay safe out there and remember what your mother said.

Don't play in the road

Sad ending, no question.

However: the motorcyclist was riding too fast for the road, I think.

It happens - I was lucky enough to get away with some (seriously) crazy shit 30 years ago when I rode a motorbike, but I don't think I'd get away with it now and I wouldn't want even to try. And there are so many more people on the roads it's not worth it.

Most of us on here know what Drac does for a living (hopefully) and I for one respect his point of view (thanks to one of his colleagues my wife is still alive - I don't know which one, but thanks very much anyway).

I think the point is that speed is something that we should all think about when we are on the road. It's made me think, anyway, I hope.

100 mph on an empty motorway is very different to the same speed on a crowded A road.

I hope that all of us on this thread, and anyone watching that video takes the time to think a little more about how we/they drive/ride next time they go out...

The car driver never meant to have an accident... but the biker did mean to be going that speed

The biker never meant to have an accident... but the driver did mean to turn across a road which he hadn't checked properly to be clear.

I'm really not sure why deliberately driving fast is worse than deliberately driving into a space with traffic coming which you haven't spotted.

As I wrote above, the biker was riding way too fast, but it was the driver who most directly caused the collision - for those who've missed the point, this video points out that both parties did something wrong.

I'm not surprised he didnt see the the car either... it was probably 1/2 a mile away !!

Rubbish. From when he passed the car to the collision is 4s. Less than 200m at 97mph. I think it's already been pointed out, but if the car is doing 60mph then the turn is far too tight in front of that even if the bike hadn't been there - at the point he started the turn it would have been only about 60 or 70m away.

I don't see what further can be gained from discussing road safety issues with some people on here seemingly so concerned about road safety and the speed of others, yet who can't themselves see the value in extra driver training and who haven't even been bothered to further their own driving skills since passing their test.

What about those of us that have, and still think you're talking a load of twaddle?

You seem to have amazing awareness of everything except your own fallibility, one day it may be your undoing, I just hope that you don't have the misfortune to harm someone else if it does come to that.

Since I still wouldn't wish any harm upon you, and you don't seem likely to have an epiphany any time soon then I will at least hope you stay lucky.

Tough viewing, speaking having recently passed DAS but having been riding for some years. 100% the drivers fault, they will - quite rightly - live with that til they die. However the rider gave himself 0% chance, overtaking in that way into a junction like that at such a speed was complacent and reckless. Where was the margin for error? Maybe it as the only time he'd done it, but I doubt that.

Similar thing has happened to me without the overtake and at 30mph instead of almost 100. As a consequence I walked away, and the driver got a mild beating before we exchanged insurance details. As it should be.

Mike P is spot on, the rider took away his own options by going so fast at that point. The accident is 100% down to the car driver's inattention, but the outcome may have been less severe had the rider been doing 60 or less mph.
The fact that the Police successfully prosecuted the driver, despite the evidence of the video, which they had in full and would have looked at extremely carefully is proof enough of that.

Jen.

Credit to the driver for admitting his deadly mistake.If he'd pleaded not guilty and gone to trial then he more than likely would have got off if this other story and associated thread is anything to go by,oh and the numerous other such tragic events which crop up with alarming irregularity.
http://road.cc/content/news/95681-pharmaceutical-consultant-who-killed-cyclist-while-driving-wrong-side-road

Where was the margin for error?

I think some people are missing the point of the video. It's telling you that this can happen and somebody is dead. It's something the driving gods and the rest need to think about. Both people involved could and would have done something different given the chance. If the driver had looked properly or the bike was travelling at a sensible speed for the road it could have had a very different outcome. Partly forget blame and look at what makes sure you get home rather than being put in a body bag. No matter how good you are you are just 1 in a million others out there on the road.

Having read the first few and last pages this best sums up my feelings:

amedias - Member

^ you paying more attention with your heightened awareness and such is all very well and good, but that wont stop someone else doing something stupid, and if you happen to hit them because of their mistake the outcome for both of you will be a lot worse due to you 'pressing on'.

In my experience people who think they have superior skills are either deluding themselves, or in the rare cases when they do have the skills, forget that those around them do not.

Throw in a bit of your version of appropriate (because you have superior skills of course ;-)) being different to someone elses and it's a recipe for trouble.

I'm all for appropriate speed for conditions and not just blindly following limits, but you need to remember that the 'appropriate' bit isn't just about your skills, your vehicle, and the road/weather/visibility, it's about the other people you are sharing that road with, the least predictable and most variable element of the whole thing.

The biker should not have been speeding (especially at a junction like that) and the car driver should have seen him. In 30yrs+ of accident free driving I've never exceeded the speed limit by 35+mph but I have misjudged the time I have to complete a manoeuvre; in such cases I've no doubt things might have been much worse had the other driver been doing 97mph. I make judgements based on the initial assumption other road users are within the reasonable bounds of legal speed, if they're doing very high speeds then I'm more likely to misjudge a situation. The more excessive the speed, the more likely a misjudgement by other road users. Tragedy for everyone involved.

Agree with that pretty much word for word.

97mph, especially approaching a junction is a massive assumption that no one makes a bad decision.

It was SMIDSY, not a misjudgment.

Deepreddave is spot on there..

My little bro only ever had a motorcycle license (and a succession of awesome bikes) but he took his car test and sold his bikes in his early 30s as he considered that biking wasn't safe or enjoyable at any speed any more due to ever increasing volumes of traffic, which in turn means ever more chance of encountering bad drivers

Not seeing something that is there is not checking properly. That's a misjudgement.

^ yes, but a lot of people are implying that the biker's speed led the car driver to think he had more time to make the turn than he had. He may have made a bad decision to turn without looking properly, but that isn't the same as misjudging the speed.

The speed thing was kicked off (and on and on) when some thought that the speed was fine, and in fact probably a bit slow and the 100mph was fine on public roads (or maybe a little pedestrian)

The speed thing was kicked off (and on and on) when some thought that the speed was fine, and in fact probably a bit slow and the 100mph was fine on public roads (or maybe a little pedestrian)

Thw driver probably didn't see the rider due to your brain creating images by piecing together images called saccades.

We are only human

Read this http://www.londoncyclist.co.uk/raf-pilot-teach-cyclists/

Did put it up earlier but dont think anyone read the link.

They did, and it was commented on. That's more common when you're scanning from left to right, such as at a t-junction, it doesn't happen when you look straight ahead.

Not seeing something that is there is not checking properly. That's a misjudgement.

The video is sobering.

I detest all this talk about 'appropriate speeds' and 'blindly following speed limits'. It's a bloody road, not a race track. Those limits are there to keep all users safe. You don't have to drive on the Snake or Woodhead passes for very long to realise that solid white lines and speed limits don't mean a thing to those with greater skills and more heightened senses than your average driver. A guy I knew was a great rider. Lost control of his GSXR 750 whilst exceeding the speed limit on the Mt Lofty Road, slid into on coming traffic and was killed. I would put my mortgage on that other driver never feeling the same again.

I am aware that there is no point in having an opinion on the internet because there is always someone who has read more, done more, knows more, and I'm sure someone will be along to critique my opinion, bang on about semantics and tell me they have done their Pass Plus but here's what I think about this whole video and topic:

The video shows how quickly the lights can be turned out. He probably did that loads of times but that one time the factors came against him and he never went home.

Lastly, a license is not a right, it's a privilege. If you're so brilliant and want to go faster than deemed legal (safe in the knowledge you'll never screw up because you're so aware and trained), frig off to a track day. I don't trust you or your brilliant skills.

But you get more bragging rights driving idiot speeds on the road, if the cocks take it to the track there will always be somebody with a faster lap time and the ego isn't boosted as much and your mates propping up the bar will turn away, take another sip of mass produced piss lager and change the subject to football.

Well put phunkmaster

+1 what phunkmaster said! Sickening video and easily avoided. Whilst cycling around the roads of North Wales I see many motorcycles going far to fast and taking unnecessary risks the fatalities in the last year are testament to that, you can never prejudge what another road user will do.

Haha! MrSmith

Both parties at fault, however the biker would still be alive if he wasn't speeding.

It was one of the reasons I got rid of my bike this year as I had that constant nagging feeling that one day my luck would run out despite riding very defensively. It's been pointed out already that a quick blat on the throttle can take you to very high speed and on public roads it's only a matter of time before the inevitable happens.

FWIW there is no way would I have been doing that speed at that point on a bike.

[i]Both parties at fault, however the biker would still be alive if he wasn't speeding.[/i]

I think he would have been alive if he wasn't doing over 90mph for the simple reason that if he'd been doing 60 or maybe even 70 for the length of time he was on that stretch the car that turned into his path would've been & gone & that particular episode would never have happened. (Haven't read every post so don't know if this has been mentioned)

Naughty riding but also a misjudgement by the car driver.

Yeah, but that's pretty tenuous. By that argument he'd have been alive if he was going faster, and still have had an accident if he'd been doing 40 all day but taken bad for a crap before he left the garage. Or he might've missed that car and been taken out by the next one down the road.

"What if" isn't really all that helpful here I don't think. You can habitually ride it like you've stolen it, or just have a momentary lapse one day, and either way you can get caught if the chips fall badly. See Molgrips and his speeding ticket.

reviewed the footage again and yes I think speed played a significant part in the accident. ( esp. from the cars POV ) - i am not a biker though. When the car first started to turn he was quite some distance away and didn't really have any options at that speed. (imho) seeing an object in the distance (the bike) and guaging it's rate coming at you are two different things and speed limits ideally help determine this as well as the other more obvious safety factors.

What you say is very true Cougar & if he'd been doing 120 it probably wouldn't have happened but we are talking mainly about the speed he was doing in a 60 zone aren't we?
Anyway, I'm not a biker & I don't do that type of speed in the car where there's junctions.

Phunkmaster +1

My brother in law had his brand new Ducati written off when someone pulled out on him who claimed they had not seen him and he must off been speeding. His insurance company decided on 50/50 and the police at the scene had little sympathy as they took the view people on huge sports bikes out for a weekend ride did not stick to the speed limits.

In the original thread the driver made a mistake (drivers(people)do). The motorcyclist took a deliberate calculated risk that backfired resulting in his death.
Tragic.

I'm sorry, but this makes it sound like pulling out without looking properly is just something that happens, as if it is an inevitable fact of driving. It isn't. it doesn't take much care to pay attention to what you are doing when you drive. People choose not to because they are complacent. That is what this driver did and that is why he was convicted.
Of course the guy on the bike was going too fast. It is pretty bleedin' obvious (well to all but a tiny few). That does not excuse what the driver did.

I'm sorry, but this makes it sound like pulling out without looking properly is just something that happens, as if it is an inevitable fact of driving.

The point is you have no control over other people. Do what you can to look after yourself. Dead and right is still Dead. The car should have looked, at 50/60mph the rider would have had more time to react. He would also have still been behind the other cars not at the front of the line.

I couldn't agree more. But I still think people are using this to absolve the driver, and more to the point, this means they are not learning anything about their own driving.

Doesn't excuse no. I don't imagine for a moment the driver will ever get over it or forgive themselves. The point is we are all capable of making mistakes, as is everyone else out on the road. Some more than others, maybe through natural acuity, or lack of, or extended training, or lack of it. The risk is always there, and even the naturally gifted highly trained, some days through natural variables that risk will be greater, and some day a numpty up the road will turn without looking properly. I've had it, I sure many people out there have, I've also misjudged a timing before (fortunately not much, slight clenching only). I am not perfect. So I don't drive like it.

The driver was convicted for his part of the accident, if the motorcyclist had lived he would have been prosecuted for his part too .

Complacency vs flagrant disregard for the law.

Complacency when behind the wheel in this context = driving without due care and attention. That is a blatant disregard of the law. This is what I think you are missing. The lack of care is something you can do something about, it is something you can consciously change by recognising your responsibilities as a driver and paying attention to what you are doing. It is just as bad, and as fatal, as exceeding the speed limit. This is the point of the video.

I don't imagine for a moment the driver will ever get over it or forgive themselves.

But we don't know that, that is making assumptions on what you feel is correct, the same as other people judging what is an appropriate speed and that other drivers will not make mistakes.

I'm not judging the driver as one of those people, but we often see reoffending on the road, whether speeding, drink driving or driving without due care and attention.

Complacency can result in a small fender bender in a supermarket carpark.
Using public roads like your own personal race track often has greater consequences .

It can do of course. But it can also result in someone's death...

Or contribute , in this case.

And the motorcyclists behaviour was selfish as when he choose to take his deliberate calculated risk he would have known that if it had gone tits up there would be a real chance that the result of his behaviour would put not just himself but others at risk .

If you deliberately drive like a cock and come unstuck my sympathies are with your family not you .

phunkmaster

I detest all this talk about 'appropriate speeds' and 'blindly following speed limits'. It's a bloody road, not a race track. Those limits are there to keep all users safe.

Except the very thing the speed limit CAN'T do is keep you safe. The appropriate speed for any particular section of road is defined by a set of variables so complex that the simple, blanket, speed limit is woefully inadequate.

Lets be quite clear here: The LEGAL LIMIT is an average, and entirely arbitary speed limit, set a long time ago, based on no, or little science whatso ever. It exists to help motorists travel at an average speed that is, broadly speaking, safe enough. It is not 100% safe, nor by the same token is exceeding it, even by 0.1mph, 100% unsafe. As a legal limit it cannot have a "grayscale" to it, it has to be black and white i.e. You are either exceeding it, or you aren't.
Unfortunately, driving is very grayscale, and hence the simple "legal limit" is generally a very poor indicator of the speed you should be travelling down any particular road at any particular time.

Now, i am not saying you should ignore the limit and drive like a lunatic, quite the opposite, and in fact, often the appropriate speed is much much lower than the legal limit.

What i am advocating this that as a driver you take both control and responsibility for your choice of speed. You make conscious, informed decisions on how fast you are travelling at all times, and you modify that speed based on all the information and experience you can gather.

If we teach drivers proper roadcraft when they learn, and ensure they are regularly refreshed in those skills, then whatever situation they come upon, they will be capable of deciding a sensible and appropriate speed. They won't just have to look at a sign to decide how fast to drive.

If we keep going with this current policy of ever lower speed limits to cater for the lowest common denominator (which is extremely low, lets say drunk drivers, or drivers on their phone), all that achieves is to convince the larger proportion of drivers who's brain says "I can do 50 down here, why is the limit 40?" that limits are silly and hence it becomes "normal" to exceed them on a regular basis. Then, when their skills let them down at a crucial moment, there is a good chance they WILL be travelling excessively fast!

Also excessively low speed limits also tends to mean that people become "sheep" and switch off. They just follow the car ahead and pay very little attention to the road. If this occurs, the only speed limit which is safe is zero mph. We've all followed one of the "roaring40s" as i call them, who simply go 40mph everywhere, no matter what the road type or conditions are like (or what the speed limit is).

Unfortunately, as i mentioned in an earlier post, the social and political will to properly revamp our system of driver licencing is simply not there. It would lead to less social mobility, especially for the poorer/less educated user, which wouldn't be a "vote winner" so no party is going to do it.

It's not just road conditions it's also a roads situation .

My local busy high street 20mph, residential road just outside 30 mph ,country lane of that 50mph.
Motorway 70 mph.

The road conditions are better on my high street than the country lane yet 30 mph slower.

It's about consideration and consequences.

Maxtorque, completely agree with you. What's needed is a complete revamp of driver education and training, not lower speed limits. I'd say that a good, well trained and observant driver is safer driving at above the limit than a poorly trained driver driving at well below the limit. Sure a crash at a higher speed could have a worse result than a crash at a lower speed, but surely the emphasis should be more on not having that crash in the first place.

The other thing that's needed is more police patrol cars on the road targeting bad driving and inapropriate speed for the conditions, rather than just enforcing a blanket limit. Clearly 100mph on an empty motorway (given the right conditions) is perfectly safe, but 35-40mph down a high street would be idiotic, yet the police have no discresion here and the driver on the motorway could easily end up loosing his licence.

A guy I had the misfortune of knowing once used to regularly drink and drive. His misguided theory was that the police were so obsessed with speeders and relying on speed cameras these days that provided he didn't exceed the speed limit then he'd not get caught. Crazy, guy was an idiot, but so far as I'm aware during the time I knew him, he didn't get caught. Was seriously tempted to dob him in though.

I heard a theory once that if the limit on motorways and NSL roads was removed, empowering drivers to select their own speed according to conditions, but that all drivers had to undertake further training, and perhaps re-sit a test every 10 years or so then despite higher speeds of some vehicles, road safety as a whole would be much improved. Would that work? Sounds reasonable to me.

Clearly in this case both parties are at fault. The car driver didn't look, but the speed of the motorbike passing a busy junction was very reckless. So very bad judgement from both sides I'd say. That bad judgement won't be removed by lowering the speed limit, only by making sure that drivers are better trained in the first place.

That bad judgement won't be removed by lowering the speed limit, only by making sure that drivers are [s]better trained in the first place[/s].

People driving for thrills on public roads is not due to poor driver training , in fact people taking advanced driving courses then given free reign of the roads without speed limits may even encourage thrill seeking drivers.

That bad judgement won't be removed by lowering the speed limit, only by making sure that drivers are better trained in the first place.

removed from the decision making process.

Exactly, but having that decision making process, however fallible, is what makes it nice to be alive as a human. Remove that and we'll all become vegetables? We can't engineer all risk out of life, if we're all wrapped up in cotton wool for fear of an accident then life will simply become not worth living.

agent007

The other thing that's needed is more police patrol cars on the road

This^^^ x100.

Currently, if you speed past a speed camera, you just get a letter in the post and a fine. For most drivers that simply makes them even more "anti establishment" and most will completely fail to connect their excess speed with a failure to control their speed at critical moments.

The "historical" option of getting pulled over by a real human being however, and getting both a telling off and a fine is soo much better. Often, drivers are simply not skilled enough to recognise their excessive speed, and having it explained to you by a human is many many more times more likely to result in both remembering that advice and acting in a different manner next time!

Also, those extra police personal can do other stuff when they are not catching people speeding, unlike the expensive cameras that are a total one trick pony.........

Expensive cameras, they are little gold mines .

Expensive cameras indeed .

chip
People driving for thrills on public roads is not due to poor driver training

Er, it kinda is. Proper training and applying the methodolgy of "Roadcraft" means than even people going out for "thrills" will do so in a significantly safer fashion. In this case, after overtaking that car, the bike should have realised the threat from the car "waiting" to turn, reduced his speed and taken up a much more defensive road position. Then when the car had pulled out he could have braked, avoided the car, and gone back to "hooning" again, rather than the horrible events that actually occurred.

Once again, this brings us back to appropriate speed for a given scenario NOT being a fixed arbitrary limit. Every 10sec or so, you need to ask yourself "Is the speed i am currently doing appropriate?".

In highly complex situations, you may need to be continuously modifying your speed as the situation unfolds.

This brings us to the key skill of observation, which is at the absolute root of Roadcraft. Looking far down the road, using multiple observations to form a mental picture of the scenario, and even doing mental "what if" estimations in your head. Do this, and you'll find you are not "surprised" when the unexpected occurs!

People driving for thrills on public roads is not due to poor driver training , in fact people taking advanced driving courses then given free reign of the roads without speed limits may even encourage thrill seeking drivers.

Would be interesting to see the stats on this. Can't find any but the fact that most insurance companies offer you an extra discount on your car insurance premium if you've passed an advanced driving test would imply (from whatever stats the insurance companies have) that you're a lower risk and safer driver than someone whose not had the extra training.