We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Speeding offence
Comments
-
I would love to see a streetview link of the road in question. I very much doubt the 30mph zone is there for no reason, albeit that perhaps the limit is a shade on the over cautious side.
It concerns me deeply that you regard a section of road with speed and light cameras as 'miserable' - the implication is a disturbingly poor attitude towards driving - essentially you feel you can judge what is safe and to hell with the rules. Well here's the thing - if everyone was good at judging what was safe and what wasn't on the road, there wouldn't be any collisions...
All research shows that the vast majority of ordinary drivers are shockingly bad at judging what is and what is not safe (our brains are not evolved to work effectively at speeds above a fast run after all). That accidents and casualties are limited to current levels is not to do with judgement, but is entirely to do with the implementation of road traffic laws, road design, car design and most importantly is a statistical artefact.
I assume the road in question is one your father is very familiar with as he was going to a doctor's appointment. In which case doing 51 in a 30 zone is not a momentary lapse in attention, it isn't due to unfamiliarity with the road and missing a change in limit, it was a conscious decision to breach the limit by a substantial degree. I hope he comes across in court better than you are suggesting here.
In which case, where would you put the limit change? If you would keep the limit where it is, how much leeway are motorists allowed? Can everyone decide their own leeway? Perhaps 100m - might sound fair to most people? I might like to assume 1km as my leeway - is that reasonable?
If we allow a set amount of leeway, say 100m, how do people judge that? Can you judge 100m accurately when driving at 30mph +? Would it then be fair for the Police to do you for speeding if you sped up 110m away, or are you allowed leeway on the leeway? Perhaps we could put up a sign marking where the leeway starts so every limit has two signs? Good use of public money?
See how difficult it is?
Alternatively we could perhaps come up with a system that will make all this easier. My idea is that once we have picked an arbitrary point (but based on a series of logical evaluations of the prevailing road and traffic conditions) where the speed limit changes we will put up a marker. I think I will call it a speed limit sign. That way people will know exactly where they need to be doing the new speed slowing down, and where they can start to accelerate entering a new zone. For some reason that system begins to sound familiar...
Everyone thinks that writing laws is easy - it isn't! Making a law which says what it needs to, covers every situation, and is unambiguous is very hard.
The Police frequently conduct speed checks from just inside a higher speed limit, catching people speeding up early. Likewise, another favourite trick is to sit just inside a lowered speed limit catching people slowing down late. And yes - they will have guidelines about how much leeway to allow, probably several hundred metres before they typically prosecute.
Your last paragraph of the post says it all really. If you're caught speeding just before/after a limit, a police officer could use their discretion. A speed camera doesn't have any discretion. Leave such infractions to a human and don't put a speed camera there just to earn revenue.
There doesn't need to be any changes to the current law, just some common sense and decency in upholding it. Speeding up early when you're going from a 50 to an NSL zone is not a situation that needs to be targeted by speed cameras, unless for some reason there is a high number of accidents in that area, which would usually call for a reduction in the speed limit anyway.
Some police forces don't monitor speed within 200 metres of the sign. Someone on the Pepipoo forums said the ACPO guidance is not to act on people accelerating within 200 metres of the sign but, despite my best efforts, I've been unable to find the guidance.What will your verse be?
R.I.P Robin Williams.0 -
Your last paragraph of the post says it all really. If you're caught speeding just before/after a limit, a police officer could use their discretion. A speed camera doesn't have any discretion. Leave such infractions to a human and don't put a speed camera there just to earn revenue.
What is wrong with earning revenue?
As a source of government funding, collecting fines from criminals is preferable to raising taxes for the law-abiding.0 -
essentially you feel you can judge what is safe...
Well here's the thing - if everyone was good at judging what was safe and what wasn't on the road, there wouldn't be any collisions...
Trouble with that logic is that if we CAN'T inherently assume all drivers are competent at deciding what is and what isn't a safe and appropriate speed for any given stretch of road, then we have to assume that all speed limits are safe and appropriate in all weather and traffic conditions.
If you're seriously trying to claim that's true, then I'd actually quite like to see you try to drive past my front gate at the speed limit. I'm not quite sure whether you'd land after the blind crest before the sharp bend and the trees or not, but it'd be entertaining to see - and I'm sure I could make good money from the YouTube video.0 -
Shayboy786 wrote: »It is important to note, this particular stretch of 3mile road is littered with Speed & traffic light cameras..
So one should really be careful if it's an area known for cameras.Once the road users clear that miserably congested zone after sitting in unnecessary staggered traffic / lights..the end quarter mile road widens up into two lanes, downhill with no residential area.. Several motorists fly down that stretch..including Police vehicles with varying speeds I have observed. The only purpose to deploy a dweeb in a Smart car on that stretch of road with speed traps is to generate revenue.
Sounds like it's a notorious bad spot for people racing to make up time / get ahead of the queue, so I can see why there's cameras.
Yet he's already had 2 red-light offences and a speeding offence, and accumulated another one in a notorious camera area. I always say this; If he didn't spot the camera van, which tends to be hi-vis, then what else didn't he spot? Especially if his reason for the speed was because he was focusing on the road and not the speedo.The old man has been a safe driver and still is.. Speed is only a contributing factor sometimes in an accident.. It's the reckless, dangerous & inconsiderate drivers, the system should really be targeting.
We've all let our speed creep up above where we should have done; it happens. Just go into the court and apologise, don't try to justify the incident, and explain that he drives people to doctors appointments. He should still be expecting a short ban though.
He'd need to consult with a lawyer to minimise it though, and drive like a nun in the interim period - he'll have no chance if he gets another offence in the mean time and the exceptional hardship claim will only work once.0 -
Ebe_Scrooge wrote: »To anyone that knows the A68 between Edinburgh and Jedburgh - admittedly a fairly twisty, potentially dangerous road. But all the speed cameras are sited on the only clear straight bits where you have an opportunity for overtaking the Sunday afternoon drivers pootling along at 45 mph. To safely overtake someone doing 45mph you're probably going to be doing slightly more than 60 mph for a short period, just where the speed camera is. The result is that you daren't overtake where it's otherwise safe to do so, then frustration creeps in after half an hour and you try to overtake where it's not safe, but where you know there are no cameras.
"Safety Cameras" my !!!!!.
< rant over >
I know exactly the road you're talking about.
It should be noted that the majority of Gatsos on this stretch have actually been decommissioned so there is scope for overtaking on the straights.
I'm staggered that some common sense has been shown in this regard.0 -
What is wrong with earning revenue?
As a source of government funding, collecting fines from criminals is preferable to raising taxes for the law-abiding.
The issue is when earning revenue becomes a priority over the alleged 'safety' aspect.
Scamera vans on the motorway catching those at 79mph (have you ever noticed they only seem to show up on dry/non rainy days). Scamera vans at the END of villages trying to catch those during the 30/NSL transition.
These kind of examples cause resentment and a feeling of 'there for the cash'.0 -
StrongWork wrote: »The issue is when earning revenue becomes a priority over the alleged 'safety' aspect.
Scamera vans on the motorway catching those at 79mph (have you ever noticed they only seem to show up on dry/non rainy days). Scamera vans at the END of villages trying to catch those during the 30/NSL transition.
These kind of examples cause resentment and a feeling of 'there for the cash'.
Only by people who want to ignore the speed limits and blame others when they get caught.
Tip: beat the "scameras" by sticking to the posted speed limits. They can't get a penny out of you!0 -
Tip: beat the "scameras" by sticking to the posted speed limits. They can't get a penny out of you!
Too much attention to the posted limits or too much rigid adherence to them is not the safest way to drive. And drivers are at risk of concentrating too much on speed imits and their speed through fear of getting points on their licence.
This is one reason why, in my view, the expansion of the safety camera industry coincided with the worst trend of accident figures ever.Make everything as simple as possible, but not simpler.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.5K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards