Fed up with whinging speeders ?

conradmum

daleyd wrote: »

I didn't say all, I said any.

And you did.

Let me refer you to the post I was responding to:

gazhawkins wrote: »

Folks,

re: Speeding

Check out the annual road fatality stats since the early nineties.

I reckon you'll discover than UK road deaths per annum have been held at a roughly constant 3200 to 3500 per annum - year in, year out.

The mass introduction of speed cameras in the late nineties has not made a scrap of difference to these figures.

Again, roughly speaking, in the mid eighties the annual fatality figures were around 5000 per annum. The reduction in fatalities per annum were mainly due to improvements in vehicle safety (eg side impact bars in doors, air bags and crumple zones) and road improvements (more roundabouts, use of armcos etc.).

This is why I said 'speed cameras etc.'
I've pointed out very clearly why this is erroneous thinking.
Now if you want to try to digress into petty bickering over semantics to distract from the fact that the poster's conclusions are seriously wrong, go ahead. My post was not ever trying to say the relative increase in road safety was down to speed cameras. I was showing that his statistics did not prove that speed cameras were ineffective, which was his conclusion. And in fact that they proved that road safety had increased substantially.
Still, why don't you just ignore that and make something up that you wish I had said instead?

Chas

I don't think you get a true idea of just how fast 30mph is until you are trying to cross a road with a pram & a toddler.

When you are driving 30mph seems to be so slow it almost feels like you are barely moving.

When you are trying to cross a road & a car goes by at 30mph it seems to fly by.

I make a huge effort to stick to the speed limit in built up areas, I usually drop down a gear to keep my speed low. I speed regularly on motorways.

If I get caught speeding (I haven't yet!) then I'll have a little moan about having to pay a fine, another little moan about the points on my license, then just accept that I was speeding, I was breaking the law, I got caught.

oldbill1969

daleyd wrote: »

It seems to me there are a lot of people on here talking a lot of sense about the relevance of speed limits, and how the police force (Who never of course do anything to break the law. Like speeding. At 140 MPH. On the M54. Oh no.) seem to have jumped onto this cash cow and are now milking it for all it's worth.

Whatever your point, the fact is that people will continue to speed. Whether it is because they feel the need to break the law, or whether they are using their in built common sense and travelling at a speed which they think is appropriate for the situation, they will do it. As long as they do it, they will continue to look for ways to evade punishment.

I just hope for your own sake that you never get caught doing 32 in a 30 or end up getting done for a bulb out or something.

But then you probably wouldn't, would you.

As your user name suggests.

Why don't you read my original post, where I clearly state its about speeders who whinge about being caught. In the unfortunate event that I lapse and get caught driving at 32mph in a 30mph zone, I will hold my hands up and pay my dues, as I have been caught fair and square, I certainly wouldn'nt try to justify breaking the law.

scheming_gypsy

conradmum wrote: »

It's really worrying the amount of people who have no idea when it's safe to overtake. You DO know 'what's going to happen' if you can see far enough ahead to be sure no one will 'come screaming out of nowhere'. Please define 'nowhere'. I can usually see the road ahead of me.

And if you break the speed limit to overtake then YOU are the person on the wrong side of the road and YOU are the person putting others at risk.
It's completely unnecessary to speed in order to overtake safely. If you think it is necessary, then you're overtaking when you can't see far enough ahead.

Why would I overtake anything at 30 mph? Why would I be overtaking in a residential area? By your logic it would be okay to do 40 to overtake in a 30mph zone. Have you seen the statistics on the difference in survival rates between people hit at 40 as opposed to 30 mph? Why would you risk someone's life for the sake of arriving at your destination 2 minutes earlier?

I regularly drive the A43 from Northampton to Kettering. It's the road with the most fatalities in the county. In the 7 years I've driven this road ALL of the near misses I've seen (and some of them have been terrifying) have been caused by drivers overtaking when it wasn't safe to do so. It doesn't matter how fast they're going, it just wasn't safe in the first place. And the irony is that at peak periods it's impossible to do more than 50 on that road anyway. They overtake in order to catch up with the next line of traffic that's travelling at 50 mph.

Please have more patience.

now i'm sorry contradmum but your petiness is beginning to become annoying and i'm starting to believe you don't actually drive you're just intent on causing arguments.
30mph was just a speed limit, it would have been polite to answer the main question regarding overtaking a 40ft lorry, which would actually be longer than 40ft as the trailer is 40ft alone.
Lets change that to 50mph and the lorry is going up hill, the road seems clear ahead and there is a bend in the distance, there is plenty of room to overtake and the lorry cannot make the 50mph limit. You begin to over take and a young lad comes flying round the bend ahead 'out of nowhere'. Do you continue to travel at 50mph to overtake it hoping that all will be ok or safe in the knowledge that even though you're on the wrong side of the road, if anything happens he'll be prosecuted for speeding? or do you speed up to ensure your safetly? slowing down and going back in behind the lorry isn't an option as the lorry was causing a tailback and the car behind you also pulled out to overtake.
Who do you care about in this situation? yourself or the other drivers on the road? if you continue at the speed you're travelling at you may get past in time but what about the car behind you? would you still consider yourself a safe driver by putting him, his wife and young children at danger?

scheming_gypsy

Chas wrote: »

I don't think you get a true idea of just how fast 30mph is until you are trying to cross a road with a pram & a toddler.

When you are driving 30mph seems to be so slow it almost feels like you are barely moving.

When you are trying to cross a road & a car goes by at 30mph it seems to fly by.

I make a huge effort to stick to the speed limit in built up areas, I usually drop down a gear to keep my speed low. I speed regularly on motorways.

If I get caught speeding (I haven't yet!) then I'll have a little moan about having to pay a fine, another little moan about the points on my license, then just accept that I was speeding, I was breaking the law, I got caught.

that's probably the same as most people. Although as you said, 30mph seems like you're barely moving so it's not hard to go over 30 without realising.

I don't see why people complain that we complain about being caught and trying get out of paying. At the end of the day the government decided to put speed cameras up with many being hidden and out of sight. If the government and police start to use underhanded tactics to take our money for speeding then we're entitled to try not to pay it.
If there is a sign stating there's a spee camera ahead then we've no right to complain.

oldbill1969

Mark7799 wrote: »

As usual, these threads then move into different arguments which people forget aren't the same thing.

1. The enforcement policy of the current limits (surely not a point for discussion - the Law is the Law, regardless of what any individual thinks of it)
2. The relevance of speed limits, many of which were set in the 1960's, to today's driving.
3. That accidents ARE caused by factors other than inappropriate speed (not the same as speeding).

Is the OP only looking at point 1 above?

You are quite correct my original post was regarding point 1, nowhere does it mention points 2 and 3.
The only thing that I would add regarding modern day cars which are safer and have ventilated disk brakes all round, ABS, brake assist, traction control etc, we all drive those cars don't we ?, perhaps we should set speed limits according to the cars that we drive beacause apparently there are lots of cars on the road that don't have all the aforementioned safety features.

daleyd

oldbill1969 wrote: »

Why don't you read my original post, where I clearly state its about speeders who whinge about being caught. In the unfortunate event that I lapse and get caught driving at 32mph in a 30mph zone, I will hold my hands up and pay my dues, as I have been caught fair and square, I certainly wouldn'nt try to justify breaking the law.

I read your original post and was giving you an answer as to why it doesn't bother me about people "whingeing" about being caught, i.e the way that the police, rightly or wrongly, have been percieved as taking motorists for a ride.

oldbill1969

scheming_gypsy wrote: »

that's probably the same as most people. Although as you said, 30mph seems like you're barely moving so it's not hard to go over 30 without realising.

I don't see why people complain that we complain about being caught and trying get out of paying. At the end of the day the government decided to put speed cameras up with many being hidden and out of sight. If the government and police start to use underhanded tactics to take our money for speeding then we're entitled to try not to pay it.
If there is a sign stating there's a spee camera ahead then we've no right to complain.

Again we come back to my point, does it matter if the Cameras are hidden if we are travelling within the limits ?

daleyd

Again, in reply to your original post - no.

Are you really so far up your own @ss that you feel the need to constantly remind us that, yes, when we speed we break the law? I think most people are aware of that. Do I agree with the laws as they stand - no

Do I think that the police force in this country are making easy money from motorists - yes. Do I agree with this - no.

I am sure all your children and family are ever so proud of you for never having broken the speed limit.

You must be a real inspiration, and I'm sure a bundle of laughs too.

scheming_gypsy

it does yeah to a point, if like you said you get caught doing 32mph you'll hold your hand up and accept you were in the wrong but it's only 2 mph over the limit and it'd be pretty obvious you weren't hell bent on breaking any laws at the time.
If it was a copper with a speed gun he'd more than likely ignore it. The other week i got stopped at 38 in a 30 zone by a copper with a speed gun. It was a quiet street and *insert excuse here*, he pulled me over and i just admitted he'd caught me and i was in the wrong expecting my 3 points and £60 fine. He just told me to be careful as there was a school round the corner and sent me on my way with no fine or points.
So even if you were exceeding the speed limit at 32mph the hidden camera would have you bang to rights for a tiny bit of misjudgement. Or even possibly the fact that your speedometer is a tad out and showed you were doing 30.

There's a lot of arguments for and against but the main one is that the camera can't think for itself or make a decision, it's down to the control room when they go through the pictures. The copper who let me off was a decent bloke (obviously cos he let me off) and he realised that even though i was exceeding the limit there were no houses that lead onto the stretch of road i was on. There was a junction 10 yards ahead (that road is about 30 - 40 yards long) so i wasn't just screaming about the place and that it was after 4pm so the school kids had already gone home.