Jacob
What goes around comes around.
....to deter them from becoming criminals?
Speed Limit
- Thread starter Vulcan
- Start date
Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:
I suspect the reality is that these idiots will have no problem continuing to kill people even within the speed limit. They will still drive like complete t**ts. What is needed is more traffic police to monitor our roads, and stiffer sentences for those who do behave in this way.
Ask yourself when did you last see a traffic car, as distinct from the Highways Agency ones, on patrol on our major roads? They used to be everywhere but are now quite a rare sight.
So yes I agree that there is no valid reason for anyone to have a road car capable of 100+, but I doubt banning them would make much difference.
I think something more radical would be called for.
Most of the really bad driving I have seen is at much lower speed, around town.
I am guessing it would be relatively simple on a modern car to have it automatically comply with posted speed limits. Of course those who want to, or are stupid will still overtake when it is unsafe, drive too fast in poor conditions and so forth.
Exactly the point I was going to make. The excessive nanny state regulation is why we have instructions on bottles of bleach saying 'do not drink'. Many people seem to have lost the ability to think for themselves.
I see a significant difference between preventing individual stupidity and protecting others from that stupidity. I’m all for letting people do whatever they want to as long as it does not present a risk to others. Let people drink bleach, but prevent them from inadvertently turning a mode of transport in to a weapon of mass distraction.
Last edited:
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
Trump suggested injecting bleach to counter the covid virus!
"Nanny state" is a tired old cliche coming from the right. They say it about so many things - safety belts, crash helmets, etc.
What about parachutes?
Personally I'm all for it.
Last edited:
Pedestrians have been killed by collisions with bicycles. Do you propose banning those as well? You're just as dead at 10mph as 100mph. The loss of responsibility and common sense seems to more of the problem, together with the loss of any ability to risk assess.
Jacob
What goes around comes around.
You've been reading the Daily Mail! I wondered when cycling would get drawn in to this thread, it's a bit of an obsession with the road ragers!
Who said anything about banning? I am advocating preventing things being used inappropriately. If it’s possible to make a bicycle inoperable on a pavement I’m all for it.
And no you are not just as dead at 10mph as 100mph.
About 20 years ago my friend's nine year old son was killed by a cyclist riding on the pavement. I've stopped reading newspapers.You've been reading the Daily Mail! I wondered when cycling would get drawn in to this thread, it's a bit of an obsession with the road ragers!
How does one prevent a knife or a chainsaw or any number of things with potential to do harm being used inappropriately? Trust me, a broken neck or fractured skull at 10mph kills you just as well as a broken neck or fractured skull at 100mph.
Blackswanwood
Still Learning
Is there anything that you don’t agree with that you don’t ascribe to the right Jacob? You do seem to bring politics into every discussion.
stuart little
Established Member
The car is only the 'weapon', it's the nut holding the steering wheel that's the killer!
Probably from the left as well, but yes I agree with you."Nanny state" is a tired old cliche coming from the right. They say it about so many things - safety belts, crash helmets, etc.
What about parachutes?
Personally I'm all for it.
stuart little
Established Member
I've just bought a new Michelin road atlas of France (to follow cycle racing), it contains a list of offences & penalties. The penalties can be very harsh, even not using one's indicator (as in USA), is an offence with a fine if witnessed by the Gendarmerie.
But how much more likely is a vulnerable road user to get a broken neck when hit by a car doing 10mph vs 100mph?
Speeding apologists tend to be very self centred.
Bob Chapman
Established Member
In 50+ years of driving I've never needed to accelerate 'out of a dangerous situation'. Is it really as common as seems to be implied by those who give it as reason for excess power?
jim1950
Established Member
speed limiters, in car tracking for pay per mile all very 1984, in the 1970s I had a ford 100e was lucky to get to 70mph down hill the firms van was faster I got done for speeding many times move on a few years I've had fast cars my car now over 170mph,( don't mean I try to do it,) not had a speeding fine since the 80s
I do think if you kill with a car or a motor/ pedal bike you should face all the law can give you
I do think if you kill with a car or a motor/ pedal bike you should face all the law can give you
Lons
Established Member
A horrific incident caused by a stupid irresponsible individual who should have been given a far heavier sentence and banned from ever driving in future but suggesting the car manufacturer is to blame is just a bit stupid. The guy's father shouldn't have loaned him the car so should he be jailed? He presumably made the decision to hand over his keys. Perhaps the phone manufacturer / seller shouldn't have made / sold him the 'phone he was using?
There are very few modern vehicles that aren't capable of reaching well over the speed limits and in fact electric cars with their incredible instant accelleration invite misuse, in any case you're never going to stop di**heads breaking the law.
What about the number of accidents caused by drink or drug fuelled drivers every year? Should every manufacturer and retailer of alcohol be prosecuted? Or should we have prohibition and alcohol sales be banned totally in the UK. As someone who never drinks and drives and in fact partakes little and infrequently it wouldn't bother me and I think there should be zero limit when driving anyway.
The real issue is general attitude and far too lenient punishment for offenders. This guy who's just had his sentence increased to 15 years will now apparently be required to serve only 6 years (40%) if new legislation is passed. What sort of punishment is that FFS?
There are very few modern vehicles that aren't capable of reaching well over the speed limits and in fact electric cars with their incredible instant accelleration invite misuse, in any case you're never going to stop di**heads breaking the law.
What about the number of accidents caused by drink or drug fuelled drivers every year? Should every manufacturer and retailer of alcohol be prosecuted? Or should we have prohibition and alcohol sales be banned totally in the UK. As someone who never drinks and drives and in fact partakes little and infrequently it wouldn't bother me and I think there should be zero limit when driving anyway.
The real issue is general attitude and far too lenient punishment for offenders. This guy who's just had his sentence increased to 15 years will now apparently be required to serve only 6 years (40%) if new legislation is passed. What sort of punishment is that FFS?
We have regulation on electrical equipment so it doesn’t electrocute us.
I agree with your argument in many ways but I don’t see how regulating dangerous objects from making them more dangerous, as we would with your electric tooth brush, curbs innovation and or is unfair to manufacturers.
It’s unfair to sports car manufacturers but there are regulations and guide rails to almost everything. Banning asbestos was unfair to asbestos manufacturers.
A free spirit attitude is always the right one but look around you, we don’t live in that world at all.
