people driving sooooo slow cos they dont know the speed limit!

Idiophreak

fivetide wrote: »

idiophreak:

It's still 30 for a reason. What's the point in breaking it to save a few seconds and/or pence?

Totally pointless. No sympathy for anyone getting caught speeding in a 30 limit, simply not worth the risk.

5t.

The law is supposed to protect us, not enslave us.

Speed limits are set based on so many criteria that aren't directly safety related - noise levels, frequency of signing, land development plans...

You say "what's the point in breaking the speed limit". The short answer is I see no reason not to...I just don't believe in the concept of speeding as a crime. "Dangerous driving" is sufficient.

I refuse to have the quality of my life eroded by "the law is the law is the law". If the law isn't serving us, it's wrong. Complying with unreasonable lawmaking is the first step on a very slippery slope.

Lum

jaydeeuk1 wrote: »

This is a BMW/Audi we're talking about, I assume you mean undertake in the 2 extra lanes?

If somebody undertakes you on a motorway and they are two lanes to your left then you are in the wrong lane! unless of course it's a congestion/queue situation.

I have driven down empty motorways only to find some muppet doing 60mph in lane 3. I was in lane 1, I just carried on and undertook them at 70mph. The police car behind me then pulled over the person in L3, or rather they attempted to, the person had not responded to the blue lights by the time both were out of my sight.

mikey72

Idiophreak wrote: »

The law is supposed to protect us, not enslave us.

Speed limits are set based on so many criteria that aren't directly safety related - noise levels, frequency of signing, land development plans...

You say "what's the point in breaking the speed limit". The short answer is I see no reason not to...I just don't believe in the concept of speeding as a crime. "Dangerous driving" is sufficient.

I refuse to have the quality of my life eroded by "the law is the law is the law". If the law isn't serving us, it's wrong. Complying with unreasonable lawmaking is the first step on a very slippery slope.

I agree with that, if I like the look of your car, I would have no problems with nicking it. Far too many laws stoping the wealth being spead about a bit.
It's good to find like minded people that only observe the laws they like.
And believe me, I'd be speeding in it as well.

Idiophreak

mikey72 wrote: »

I agree with that, if I like the look of your car, I would have no problems with nicking it. Far too many laws stoping the wealth being spead about a bit.

Oh yes, because that's exactly the same thing... :j

Lum

Speeding is a victimless crime. Dangerous driving carries a risk of there being a victim.

Some cases of speeding are also dangerous and should rightly be punished. Some, such as going 80mph on the M6 Toll at 2AM, are not dangerous and are not going to create victims unless other offences are involved such as a lack of due care and attention.

It is perfectly reasonable to object to the creation of offences that do not have victims.

fivetide

Lum wrote: »

Speeding is a victimless crime.

Until you kill someone and wish you'd been going a bit slower.

Speeding carries a risk of their being a victim, that's the point entirely. I agree with mikey, I mean idiphreak thinks that laws which mean his quality of life is affected shouldn't apply. Quite how arrivign somewhere twenty seconds later has a major affect on quality of life I don't know. Perhaps it is a problem for the chronically impatient?

In that case, perhaps I should be allowed to kill my neighbour if they are playing loud music at 2am and affecting my quality of life.

Extreme but the point is you can't pick and choose, you either have laws or you don't. I agree, some 30mph limits do seem draconian but if you get done for speeding in one then you deserve everything you get as you are clearly too stupid to be on the road.

5t.

davidlizard

I think a lot of people drive slow because they do not have confidence in their driving abilities or their car. All too often I see a little old pensioner driving along with their nose pressed against the window looking absolutely terrified. They dare not look left or right, or heaven forbid in the rear view mirror.

If someone drove at 40 in a 60 on their test for no apparent reason, they would fail.

How about as part of the driving test, making everyone drive one lap of a racing circuit in a decent spec car - and anyone who does not go round in less than a nominated time fails. That would sort out the confident drivers from the timid ones who are usually seen at the head of a queue of 20 vehicles bimbling along clutching the steering wheel for grim death!!!

Lum

fivetide wrote: »

Until you kill someone and wish you'd been going a bit slower.

Speeding carries a risk of their being a victim, that's the point entirely. I agree with mikey, I mean idiphreak thinks that laws which mean his quality of life is affected shouldn't apply.

If you do hit someone then your speed was dangerous and can/should be prosecuted for dangerous driving.

It is possible to do a dangerous speed while being well below the limit. Look at that dual carriageway picture I posted on the last page. I could do 70mph on that road and I would not be speeding, however it would still be dangerous and if I did this then I should be prosecuted for it.

There are other roads where I could be exceeding the speed limit and not be dangerous..

Quite how arrivign somewhere twenty seconds later has a major affect on quality of life I don't know. Perhaps it is a problem for the chronically impatient?

You've never done any long distance work, have you? For short distance drivers, "it's only a couple of minutes". But over a distance these add up and now it's half an hour. As a result of this you are now hitting the M6 past Birmingham at 3PM instead of 2:30PM, now the delay is an hour and a half and you are hitting the Thelwall viaduct 5PM instead of 3:30PM meaning you will likely get to Manchester by 6:30PM instead of 4PM.

HGV drivers have it worse because their daily limits could mean the difference between getting home that night or spending a night in a layby in the outskirts of the city, at risk of having their truck set on fire by yobbos.

Company car drivers don't have time limits, but their employers often expect them to complete their journey anyway, even if it means driving into the early hours of the morning, then they are still expected to be on-site the next day at 9AM. For these people the risk becomes one of driving whilst tired.

Extreme but the point is you can't pick and choose, you either have laws or you don't. I agree, some 30mph limits do seem draconian but if you get done for speeding in one then you deserve everything you get as you are clearly too stupid to be on the road.

I don't agree with just pick and choosing what laws you obey, however I am within my rights to object to those laws on a public forum and to campaign for their alteration or removal.

Idiophreak

fivetide wrote: »

Until you kill someone and wish you'd been going a bit slower.

If you kill someone as a result of your speed, you are driving dangerously, as Lum suggests.

Speeding isn't dangerous. Speeding is just going faster than an entirely arbitrary speed limit. Inappropriate speed is dangerous, the two things aren't the same.

I think you're missing my point, somewhat...it isn't that I go "woohoo, I'm going to break the speed limit...I'm going to get there 20 seconds earlier...BRING IT!". I just look at the road and think "I could go at 30 for absolutely no reason, or I could go at 40, perfectly safely, and save some fuel and some time. It's a calculation based on probability of getting there faster (100%) vs being caught (0.1%?) and the penalty for being caught. The conclusion is there's just no compelling reason *not* to go faster. I do allow myself to be oppressed by "the man" somewhat, however, because I'd never go fast enough to risk losing my ability to drive etc...

I'd never complain about being caught speeding...if I'm speeding, I'm speeding...But I view it as a tax, nothing more.

[Deleted User]

People that do 40 in a 60 limit then carry on at 40 through the 30 zone.