Mobile Speed Cameras......Again

[markturner]

I think you will find that whatever side of the fence you fall on this, no one has altered their stance on this subject despite what any of the other posters say. Most people have their opinions and don't change them. Nothing wrong with that, but don't come here and try and tell me I won't listen to reason when you are just as obstinate in supporting your own views. Or that my view is somehow less important or valid than yours. This is a forum for polite and reasoned debate, I don't see any departure in what I said from that. Why don't we just agree to differ.

I am more than happy to be polite to Steve, and pretty much everyone else here, but I ( and many others here ) have a problem with Jacob. And if you cant see why from the last thread, then I suggest you re read it. If you have a problem with me and what I say, after all that, use the ignore button, unless you want to put some kind of reasoned reply to my perfectly reasonable points.

 

[John Brown]

If you are driving at 45 MPH then you will be long gone by the time the child runs out between the parked cars, so it's obviously safer the faster you drive.

 

[markturner]

Yes, well, you know what they say about sarcasm...........Why would you choose to interpret what I was saying as that? I just re read it and its pretty clear to me what I was saying.

I clearly said that your speed should match conditions. If you were driving in a built up area, along a stretch of road with parked cars, and lots of houses / pedestrians, then that is precisely where you should be driving slowly and taking extra care.....possibly even driving below the limit....

 

[DrPhill]

The problem with allowing drivers discretion about their maximum safe speed is that not all of them are capable of making responsible decisions. While you may have a firm grasp of road conditions and a reasonable competence at assessing risk you are not typical. We all know that there are irresponsible, incompetent idiots out there. The speed limits are there to protect us from the consequence of their actions.

While you may make reasoned and enlightened decisions about safety/speed/acceptable risk, the chap behind or in front of you may be a total wombat. How do I decide, in advance, that you have the right to make your own decision about maximum speed while preventing the wombat behind you from causing an accident? I can't. Not until after an accident has happened. I do not imagine that it will console the parents of the 5 year old to be told 'well, now we know that that guy was a wombat, we will make him stick to the speed limits'.

So what is to be done? The answer for this society (and many others around the world) is to define maximum speeds. The responsible, socially minded people will grudgingly stick to these limits as best as they can. The wombats will break them - thereby defining themselves as such. No amount of linguistic contortion will disguise this.

 

[riclepp]

If we are talking about stopping distances. I think you will find that most modern cars will stop in a shorter distance that shown on the back of the highway code. Modern cars have better breaking systems and tyres than they did when those stopping distances were first advertised. I can't be sure, but I don't think that they have ever been updated to show the incerease in car safety systems either in all the years they have been written. Also these distances were done in scientific conditions and I don't know what the criterions were for the research either (but, sure as day follows night someone will). What does kill and injur other road users, is the lack of competence of some drivers in thier ability to drive safely and by this I mean driving too fast, beyond their capability, beyond a cars capability, without regard to road conditions, inability to interperate weather conditions and their effect on the ability of the car performance, showing off, stupidity, arrogance, lack of spped awareness etc, I could go on and on but I am sure you get the drift. So looking at this, it is obvious why people get speeding tickets. A lot of people I know could'nt even estimate what speed they are doing without looking at the speedo. I do think if you break traffic laws and they highway code then you must accept the consequeces, but I don't agree that the police should use this as a way to make more money, nor do I think you should get points and a fine....it should be one or the other. No, I am not a perfect driver, but I don't sit on peoples tails, I don't have front fog lights on cause it looks cool, I don't have ipod ear plugs in me lugholes, dont drink and drive nor use the phone and have had two speeding tickets in 25+ plus years of driving. I am all for a five yearly driving test for ALL drivers, this migh get rid of some of the more dangerous drivers off the roads. Rant over!!!!!!!

 

[Baldhead]

I cannot comment on Steve's Speed Awareness course, but the course that I did, made no mention whatsoever of the stopping distances in the Highway Code, the stopping distances were measured using an advanced police driver in a new(ish) car, just thought I would clarify that point.

Baldhead

 

[Steve Maskery]

One of the things that surprised me was just how much impact speeds were affected by fairly small changes in original driving speed. Driving at 32 instead of 30 does not increase the impact speed by an extra 2 mph, it increases it by considerably more. I forget the actual figures, I'd have to get them. I'll see the bloke on Tuesday, it's held in the building next to where I do my voluntary work.
But the upshot is, whatever they would have been hit at (which depends on how far in front of you they are when you brake), a small increase in speed results in a big increase in impact speed. This is because most of the braking effect occurs at the end of the braking period, not at the start of it.
When the 10-year-old ran out in front of me there was nowhere to swerve to, even if I had had time to swerve. It all happened so quickly. I was doing, well I don't know what I was doing, but it was only 20 or 25mph. If I had been doing even 30, which was the limit, I would have hit him. As it was he went off laughing and I was a gibbering wreck.

 

[bugbear]

Laws need to be simple enough to be detectable and enforceable.

All the (fascinating) complication of this thread seems to miss this key point.

BugBear

 

[RogerS]

.... The speed limits are there to protect us from the consequence of their actions.

....

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. 'Sorry, officer, but I was driving at the speed limit when that child ran out. Yes, I know that there is a lot of snow on the road but I was driving within the speed limit.

It is the wrong speed and the wrong time in the wrong place. Not driving at 29.5mph with brain in neutral.

 

[n0legs]

Kids/people running out into the road.
Drivers are ruled by laws etc and are expected to be responsible, why should pedestrians be any different.
There's a reason the yanks have the "Jaywalking" laws.
Bring back The Green Cross Code Man and prosecute useless parents.
Accidents I can accept, reckless behaviour is a no no.

 

[DrPhill]

.... The speed limits are there to protect us from the consequence of their actions.

....

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. 'Sorry, officer, but I was driving at the speed limit when that child ran out. Yes, I know that there is a lot of snow on the road but I was driving within the speed limit.

It is the wrong speed and the wrong time in the wrong place. Not driving at 29.5mph with brain in neutral.

It is a LIMIT not a TARGET. Someone driving at 29.5 mph in treacherous conditions would be just as culpable as someone driving at 40mph in perfect conditions. Wrong is defined in two ways: too fast for the conditions, and too fast for the law.

Society has rules. They are there to be obeyed. This is part of the social contract. Attempts by individuals to justify picking and choosing which laws they have to obey seems very selfish and immature. What is it that sets them apart and gives them the privilege of choice?

Remember that more than 95% of drivers rate themselves as 'above average'. So almost half of drivers have a flawed perception of their own capabilities. Do you want them making judgements that could cost your life?

Sorry to the OP - I have been drawn into the bun-fight again. I too dislike confusion of road safety with revenue generation, but if those are the rules I will live with them. There are, for me, far more important abuses of power to get vexed about.

 

[RogerS]

.... The speed limits are there to protect us from the consequence of their actions.

....

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. 'Sorry, officer, but I was driving at the speed limit when that child ran out. Yes, I know that there is a lot of snow on the road but I was driving within the speed limit.

It is the wrong speed and the wrong time in the wrong place. Not driving at 29.5mph with brain in neutral.

It is a LIMIT not a TARGET. Someone driving at 29.5 mph in treacherous conditions would be just as culpable as someone driving at 40mph in perfect conditions. Wrong is defined in two ways: too fast for the conditions, and too fast for the law.

.....

So you accept that a driver's judgement comes into the equation. Therefore where is the difference in a driver deciding that 90 mph down an empty motorway in ideal weather conditions and no-one else on the motorway is the right speed ?

 

[DrPhill]

Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. 'Sorry, officer, but I was driving at the speed limit when that child ran out. Yes, I know that there is a lot of snow on the road but I was driving within the speed limit.

It is the wrong speed and the wrong time in the wrong place. Not driving at 29.5mph with brain in neutral.

It is a LIMIT not a TARGET. Someone driving at 29.5 mph in treacherous conditions would be just as culpable as someone driving at 40mph in perfect conditions. Wrong is defined in two ways: too fast for the conditions, and too fast for the law.

.....

So you accept that a driver's judgement comes into the equation. Therefore where is the difference in a driver deciding that 90 mph down an empty motorway in ideal weather conditions and no-one else on the motorway is the right speed ?

Because the law says that he should not. Is that really so difficult to comprehend? Or if you are saying that people are only obliged to obey laws that they like, then you would agree that it is fine to break your window and steal your telly? Where is the difference?

 

[JustBen]

These discussion will only ever go round and round.

There will always be people who can safely drive above the speed limit without being a danger.
There will always be people who are dangerous even when driving under the limit.

I saw a prime example today.
Car waiting to turn right at T junction pulls right in front of oncoming car. The car had to swerve to avoid him.
This was done right in front of a Traffic Car waiting to turn left.
What good is a camera against him if he is willing to do that in front of a Police car?

I see this many, many times a day.
The most common one is grandad doing 55mph in the 3rd lane of an empty motorway.

The choice is the drivers. If you want to speed, then do it. But you have to live with the consequences if the worst was to happen.

 

[DrPhill]

These discussion will only ever go round and round.

There will always be people who can safely drive above the speed limit without being a danger.
There will always be people who are dangerous even when driving under the limit.

I saw a prime example today.
Car waiting to turn right at T junction pulls right in front of oncoming car. The car had to swerve to avoid him.
This was done right in front of a Traffic Car waiting to turn left.
What good is a camera against him if he is willing to do that in front of a Police car?

I see this many, many times a day.
The most common one is grandad doing 55mph in the 3rd lane of an empty motorway.

The choice is the drivers. If you want to speed, then do it. But you have to live with the consequences if the worst was to happen.

I can agree with you entirely with one small modification.

replace "There will always be people who can safely drive above the speed limit without being a danger."

with "There will always be people who would like us to believe that they can safely drive above the speed limit without being a danger."

Those people with their misconceptions are a greater danger even than the people who do not similarly overestimate their abilities.

 

[doorframe]

Remember that more than 95% of drivers rate themselves as 'above average'.

That's hilarious =D> :lol:. The remaining 5% of us (me included, obviously) must be terrible drivers! :shock:

Seriously though, regardless of their imaginary superiority, why do they feel the 'need' to speed anyway?

Just leave home 10 minutes earlier. It's not rocket science.

 

[JustBen]

These discussion will only ever go round and round.

There will always be people who can safely drive above the speed limit without being a danger.
There will always be people who are dangerous even when driving under the limit.

I saw a prime example today.
Car waiting to turn right at T junction pulls right in front of oncoming car. The car had to swerve to avoid him.
This was done right in front of a Traffic Car waiting to turn left.
What good is a camera against him if he is willing to do that in front of a Police car?

I see this many, many times a day.
The most common one is grandad doing 55mph in the 3rd lane of an empty motorway.

The choice is the drivers. If you want to speed, then do it. But you have to live with the consequences if the worst was to happen.

I can agree with you entirely with one small modification.

replace "There will always be people who can safely drive above the speed limit without being a danger."

with "There will always be people who would like us to believe that they can safely drive above the speed limit without being a danger."

Those people with their misconceptions are a greater danger even than the people who do not similarly overestimate their abilities.

So Traffic Officers, Professional Racing Drivers, Stunt Drivers etc.... They are all dangerous and don't have the skill?....

Like I said.... There will always be people who can drive safely above the limit without being a danger. They may be few and far between, but they still exist.

 

[markturner]

Exactly.......So, we are all woodworkers here, many professionals and many more highly skilled amateurs. Many of us cook, or do other hobbies, like cycling, swimming etc.

Following the logic of the assertion that its impossible to tell if you are in fact a good or skilled or above average driver, are you seriously suggesting that we are all unable to judge the level of skill at which we carry on all these other hobbies or occupations?

You know if you are a good swimmer, a good cook or good at your job. Same as you know if you are bad at them.

Why it is then judged impossible to assess your ability as a driver? Would you say that 95% of everyone here rates themselves as being a top notch woodworker? No, of course not - Some would , others would not. But I could pretty much guarantee that most peoples assessment of their skill level was pretty accurate.

The only problem with asking people about their driving skills , is most associate good driving skills with blindly obeying every law to the letter or driving very slowly no matter what the road conditions. Also, there are many who may well indeed have great skills - but may be bad drivers, if they don't apply those skills sensibly.....

It's not simply black and white - a good driver knows when its safe to speed up, required to slow down, required to take extra care, or whether he needs a rest, or whether he should wait before overtaking that slow car. And should also be able to read the road ahead, know what's happening in front and behind him, and be able to handle his car in adverse conditions, like loss of traction, sudden braking, etc.

If you have raced cars, motorcycles etc on tracks, and can do these things and have never had any serious accidents, as well as being able to apply safe techniques on the road, then I would say you could pretty safely call yourself an above average driver.

 

[RogerS]

.... then I would say you could pretty safely call yourself an above average driver.

Provided, of course, that you slavishly follow the speed limit :-"

 

[MIGNAL]

I'm a very safe driver. i can safely drive at 180 MPH in a 30 MPH zone. I don't really care what anyone else thinks, they are wrong - that includes any 'authority'. The important bit is that I believe I'm safe. In fact I don't believe it, I know it. It's up to you to prove otherwise.