The harsh truth about Tory policies

MiserlyMartin

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Pedestrians shouldn't be in the road to begin with......

That's what pavements are for.;)

And if you really insist on crossing a busy A-Road or the like at a blind bend instead of a nice long clearly visible straight, which is really the only time you could concievably have a grudge against speeders, then you probably deserve a Darwin Award anyway....

For once I agree with Hamish. Roads are for cars. Speed is not the primary cause of crashes, bad driving and inappropriate use of speed is.

leveller2911

Off subject , but for my peneth worth The government justified speed cameras by saying they were positioned at accident hotspots and in keeping speeds down they were a safety device.

Where they completely lost the arguement and also the moral high ground was when they introduce them onto "new" roads(which didnt have any cars on previously,let alone any accidents and therefore lost yet again the publics trust.

MiserlyMartin

BACKFRMTHEEDGE wrote: »

....enjoy what's left of the Labour Government. We're in for one horrible ride.

If these last years of Labour reign has been enjoyment god knows what your idea of hell is.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

baileysbattlebus wrote: »

Here is a link that contradicts Hamish's 5%

I quoted Police accident statistics, a Chief Constable, and a broadsheet newspapers independant investigation of the speed camera scam.

You quoted an anti speed campaign, re-quoting a Dept for Transport press release, contradicting the results of their own studies, which they had to re-do to save face for the government's huge stealth tax.

I'm pretty sure I know which one I'll believe.;)

Where I do hate speeding is in built up areas - housing estates etc. I would never speed. You just never know what or who is going step out in front of you.

Absolutely.

I always obey the speed limit in built up areas, around schools, etc. In fact I find nothing more infuriating than the morons who sit at 45 mph on a country A-road obstructing traffic and causing dangerous tail-backs, but then speed through a village at 35 or 40 mph.

But on clear, empty, wide country roads or dual carriageways and motorways, in good visibility and weather, and with little to no traffic around, exceeding the speed limit is simply not unsafe.

However, on some roads, at some times, in poor weather, with poor visibility, etc, even driving at the speed limit is too fast to be safe.

The key is not to drive too fast for conditions. And that's something no speed camera can ever prevent.

michaels

Comment on the speed debate - when quoting 'excessive speed' as a contributory factor does this necessarily mean 'speeding' (which a camera might pick up) or just excessive speed for the situation (30 outside a school, 70 on the motorway in fog, neither of which speed cameras would pick up)?

shuze

MiserlyMartin wrote: »

For once I agree with Hamish. Roads are for cars. Speed is not the primary cause of crashes, bad driving and inappropriate use of speed is.

So, roads are for cars are they? Bikes, horses, pedestrians?? You should check your highway code.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

ess0two wrote: »

As of yet i aint had a ticket,being a biker,cameras have resulted in some great roads being destroyed.

I'm also a biker. Drive about 30,000 miles a year, and ride another 5,000 or so.

Have a clean UK license, and haven't had a ticket in over a decade. (and never from a speed camera)

Drive faster than the speed limit on an almost daily basis though, and have done for over two decades. Never had an accident either, despite driving more miles so far than most people would in two lifetimes.

shuze

ess0two wrote: »

As of yet i aint had a ticket,being a biker,cameras have resulted in some great roads being destroyed.

"Destroyed" = I can't speed any more. Well, boo hoo. Roads are for getting from A to B, not your personal thrills.

shuze

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

I'm also a biker. Drive about 30,000 miles a year, and ride another 5,000 or so.

Have a clean UK license, and haven't had a ticket in over a decade. (and never from a speed camera)

Drive faster than the speed limit on an almost daily basis though, and have done for over two decades. Never had an accident either, despite driving more miles so far than most people would in two lifetimes.

My grandad smoked 20 a day for 30 years, never got cancer....

Emy1501

LizEstelle wrote: »

Do the 'chancers' have to be lazy to earn our scorn and contempt?

Am just wondering about the (hundreds of) thousands of middle class gentlefolk, usually self-employed, who casually underdeclare their earnings to the taxman.

Similarly, the thousands of red-bracered financeniks in the City who think that what they do for a living is actually important.

Oh yes, not forgetting:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/7921778.stm

Let's keep a sense of balance here, eh, you frothing tory trolls..?

I do not vote Tory and have not actually voted in the last 2 elections. Did you actually read my comment about closing off tax loopholes for the rich? As for Fred Goodwin wasn't he knighted by GB and didn't all RBS's problems happen on his watch? It seems like the present government do not tax the rich properly and neither do they make any effort to make sure the lazy work maybe thats why we are in the mess we are in?