Speed Cameras ... ::sigh::

alastairq

All you can do is look on it as yet another form of indirect taxation.

but...taxation is mandatory.....flouting the law isn't.


we as drivers have a choice.

we either drive within the law....or we do as we please.

for the latter, expect to have to pay for the privilege?

but per-lease, folks, stop all this petulance over speed detectors and fines?

or would you all rather anarchy reigned on the roads?

Strider590

With increased speed, comes increased adrenaline and increased reaction speeds.....

It's amazing how so many people rant on about people speeding!!!!
I drive at the speed limit, pretty much constantly and I VERY RARELY get overtaken or even tailgated.... So I think speeding is such a minor issue that we need some focus on other issues!

I think the local councils need to stop trying to p1ss off drivers!
Locally to me they've broken up a dual carriageway with pointless merges every few hundreds yards, what effect does this have?? You guessed it.... Drivers competing and blocking eachother!!! which in turn causes road rage, followed by speeding and finally people racing eachother!!!

alastairq

I can count on one finger the number of vehicles I have seen travelling without lights on unlit single carriageways*. It happens so rarely it just isn't something you would normally take into consideration. Unlit vehicles on lit single carriageways is a different matter, but these are much easier to spot.

a very valid point......certainly compared to those who overtake, and exceed the posted limit in dong so........and.......think that action is totally justifiable to boot.

alastairq

Strider590 wrote: »

With increased speed, comes increased adrenaline and increased reaction speeds.....

It's amazing how so many people rant on about people speeding!!!!
I drive at the speed limit, pretty much constantly and I VERY RARELY get overtaken or even tailgated.... So I think speeding is such a minor issue that we need some focus on other issues!

don't forget, road users come in all shapes, sizes, ages, and levels of competence.

I have the re-action speeds of a tortoise.

I also frequently drive up to the speed limit.

I haven't hit anybody or anything since sometime last century....despite everybody else's best efforts to encourage me.


then think about the re-action itself?

It's all very well wearing one's underpants outside one's trousers, and having the re-action time of a rabbit down a hole, but......

One's vehicle has to be able to comply with that re-action....as well...and that may take time [ for example, a car may be 'easier' to stop than a bus?]..and of course, one's re-action time is further extended by the initial stage of re-action... the 'what the f###' stage?


adrenalin probably doesn't exist any more in my body......

not every driver is a young, fit slip of a thing.


and the law has to allow for all.

alastairq

I think the local councils need to stop trying to p1ss off drivers!
Locally to me they've broken up a dual carriageway with pointless merges every few hundreds yards, what effect does this have?? You guessed it.... Drivers competing and blocking eachother!!! which in turn causes road rage, followed by speeding and finally people racing eachother!!!

so, what you're saying is, roads policies should be about us saving ourselves from ourselves?

what's needed is much more effective and increased traffic law enforcement. Is that it?

[road rage is unlawful...so is 'racing'...what really needs changing is driver attitudes]

Lum

Strict speed enforcement can make driver attitudes worse in many ways. Since they is no way you can make up for any lost time, many driver will not want to, for example, let a potentially slower driver out in front of them because every time you do that, that's a few minutes off your journey that you will never get back. Multiplied by the number of times it can happen on a long distance trip and you're looking at a difference of several hours. This could make the difference between getting home before your children's bedtime, for example.

This is also true for the repmobiles doing "100" in the outside lane. In reality they're only doing speeds in the low 90s because the threshold speed between a fixed penalty and a court summons is 96mph. They're treating 96mph as the speed limit but otherwise behaving exactly the same as I've described above. Only difference is they lose even more time by letting someone out.

Not condoning this driving style, just saying I can understand it. Most of them don't get overtime for travelling, and there's no HGV-style regulations for company car and van drivers so plenty of companies expect you to work on-site until 5PM and your 3 hour drive home is unpaid.

Strider590

alastairq wrote: »

so, what you're saying is, roads policies should be about us saving ourselves from ourselves?

what's needed is much more effective and increased traffic law enforcement. Is that it?

[road rage is unlawful...so is 'racing'...what really needs changing is driver attitudes]

Driver "attitude" is human nature, you can't change human nature but you CAN stop designing roads that cause drivers to be penned in, driving excessively slowly with no chance of getting ahead to their destinations.... Something has to give and all too often it's in the form of road rage.

The more you restrict people, the more you p1ss them off... So my suggestion is to spend money on effectively Policing the roads rather than trying to turn them into obstacle courses for cars.

jase1

> many driver will not want to, for example, let a potentially slower driver out in front of them because every time you do that, that's a few minutes off your journey that you will never get back.

And this has a further knock-on effect in that the "potentially slower driver" learns that he won't be shown any courtesy by faster drivers, so is more likely to take matters into his own hands and push his way in. Thereby increasing the risk of forcing the faster driver to slam on the anchors when this does happen and potentially causing a pile-up further back depending on conditions.

Open roads are safest when all the vehicles on them are travelling at much the same speed -- whatever that speed may be. It makes the journey more predictable for everyone. Therefore I do not like the mantra that the speed limits are "limits not targets". Actually I feel that limits on open roads *are* targets, where the limit is safe for the conditions. Obviously there are exceptions -- trucks limited to 40mph on single carriageways for instance -- but these are predictable aspects of driving.

The driver travelling at 30% below the speed limit is causing a comparable amount of potential for trouble as the driver travelling 10% above. Especially on two-lane motorways where there is no release valve (the third lane) for an overtaking vehicle confronted by a slow vehicle pulling out in front of them.

I am going off-track now. Suffice to say that we all need to use a bit of common sense, and stop assuming that just because a driver is in his comfort zone plodding along at 30 in a 60 doesn't mean he's driving "safely". There are many other parameters at play.

heretolearn_2

I nearly had an accident yesterday with a motorbike. It would have been my fault of course but...sometimes people are their worst enemies.

Waiting to turn right, ahead is a bend in the road with traffic coming from left. I saw a black van approach but had time to get into my right turn so started crossing the oncoming side, double checked the approaching van before committing. Well blow me there was a black motorbike with a rider all in black leathers and black helmet in front of him. Me and bike both slammed on the brakes. I mouthed a 'sorry' and let him go first.

Scared the wotsit out of me. I looked but I literally did NOT see him the first time, he blended into the van behind him. Thank goodness I always look twice. But WHY won't people wear high-vis! I know it doesn't look cool but without it you have a death wish. I used to ride a bike myself so I always try to do that 'think bike' thing, but it was scary the way that I just didn't register him at all. He was camoflaged into the background.

alastairq

So my suggestion is to spend money on effectively Policing the roads rather than trying to turn them into obstacle courses for cars.

which is where I totally agree with you.....perhaps even creating a 'specific' enforcement agency [CHIPS?] to do so?

I suspect the ratios of road users to traffic police is widening year on year....gone are the days when any thinking driver kept a weather eye on the rear mirror, for that Granada jam sandwich?

Of course, that will also include automated enforcement [speed cameras..which free's up trafpols to enforce other aspects of the law?}


The question of driver attitude[ and the excuse of, oh well, it's human nature?] is rather an abstention of responsibility.

I suspect LA road policies are as much are-action to the developing situation.....[of course, not forgetting that the power behind LA's is voted in by the local population..so it also follows, other [road users, for example] have hilited a situation which needs addressing...and so it goes on??].....whereby driver attitude has drifted too far from any sense of driver responsibility?

Chicken and egg thing?

drivers have become too self-centred.....driving is an act which is now taken for granted.

I liken the driving licence to a rail pass....it tends to be treated by 'drivers' with much the same disdain..

The landfill sites are full of discarded Highway Codes..simply because drivers no longer think they need it to drive..think 'they know better?'

Then..when a driver falls foul of the law..it's always an 'us versus them' situation...and 'it's not fair!'

Driver attitude can be changed...through education at the right points of a driving career.

I find that a ''you shouldn't do this'', or ''you mustn't do that approach'' actually doesn't yield lasting results with driver education. People don't 'like being told'...

driving is viewed much like parenting and sex.....

A technique I do use,however, is to ask...'do you really want to be doing that?'

'Think about it?'