Speeding offence

StrongWork

Car_54 wrote: »

Can you provide any evidence for that claim?

All the published figures show a REDUCTION in injury accidents almost every year since at least 1980.

Do you think this is more to do with speed limits or progress in terms of safety innovations by manufacturers?

Crash a 1980s car into a new one, see what happens.

StrongWork

PenguinJim wrote: »

Personally, I love driving, and I love the rules. I love the challenge of getting from A to B in the fastest time possible within those rules. Breaking the speed limit, driving through a red light, making an illegal manoeuvre are the equivalent of entering a cheat code on a video game - they just show that you're not very good, that you lack the skills, and need to cheat to "win".

I also don't understand people who slow down for speed cameras. Ashamed of your speed? Grow a pair and own your speed. Take it to court and defend it if you believe your speed was right. If you believe your speed was wrong, then why were you doing that speed in the first place?

:rotfl:

Serious post?

Richard53

StrongWork wrote: »

:rotfl:

Serious post?

He's turning every journey into a sort of private challenge, which is fine. I do the same kind of thing myself, sometimes.


What I don't understand is how other motorists who are not 'in' on the game are regarded as cheating.


If I pulled up alongside someone at some lights, and they would their window down and told me I was not obeying the rules of a game only they knew about, I'd think they were mental.

brat

StrongWork wrote: »

:rotfl:

Serious post?

I understand and approve of the attitude of those who say they never ever break the speed limit.
I do have some concerns about people who take speed limit adherence to be a game, because I think that would demand too much attention to the numerical rather than the appropriate speed, and too much attention would be paid to the speedo rather than the actual or potential hazards on the road.
But more than that, there are many places within a speed limited area where the speed limit is far too fast. A driver must allow themselves the total freedom to adjust speed within those limits, for safety. They must not be encouraged to develop the idea that 30 = safe and can (indeed must) be attained whenever possible, despite actual or potential hazards that might benefit from a slower speed to provide a quicker or shorter react/respond time.
If a person chooses to use the randomly chosen speed limit (30mph) as their primary arbiter of safety, and uses that as the only rule that must not be broken in their attempt to get from A to B as quickly as they can, I would have serious concerns about their attitude to safety in urban areas.


There are so few drivers who don't break any speed limits. How often do you follow someone on a clear road from a 60 limit to a 30 limit who is already at 30 or below as they go past the 30 sign? It doesn't happen.
Similarly, if there's a good clear exit out of town, and hazards reduce as you approach the NSL sign, Hardly any driver I observe will stick precisely to 30mph, even with a marked patrol car behind them!

It's areas like this where speed cameras abound, because this is where there there is the greatest potential for ordinary compliant drivers to exceed the limit. The road safety credentials of such enforcement activity are questionable.

polomints

Out of interest what was the road, is it an obvious 30 or is it something like this?

PenguinJim

Richard53 wrote: »

What I don't understand is how other motorists who are not 'in' on the game are regarded as cheating.


If I pulled up alongside someone at some lights, and they would their window down and told me I was not obeying the rules of a game only they knew about, I'd think they were mental.

DISCLAIMER: I DID NOT WRITE THE HIGHWAY CODE. I'm not sure how I gave the impression that I did! :rotfl: I'm sorry I confused you there. As you haven't got your license, I should probably explain that before you can legally drive in the UK, you have to take two tests: a "theory" test and a "practical" test. These tests are to make sure that you are not only able to drive, but also familiar with the Highway Code, which applies to everyone in the UK - not just to me!

Unless... was my instructor lying to me?

AM I THE ONLY ONE WHO USES THESE RULES!?! :eek:

PenguinJim

brat wrote: »

If a person chooses to use the randomly chosen speed limit (30mph) as their primary arbiter of safety, and uses that as the only rule that must not be broken in their attempt to get from A to B as quickly as they can, I would have serious concerns about their attitude to safety in urban areas.

Are those speed limits randomly chosen? Really? I don't see any built-up areas with the speed limit set to the National Speed Limit because it's arbitrary, or dual carriageways set to 30 because it's chosen at random. There must surely be reasons behind every speed limit beyond rolling a dice. (Some speed limits may now be out-of-date since they were set, but that's still not random)

But you're implying that the only rule that is adhered to is the speed limit. I learned how to drive, studied the Highway Code, and passed the theory and the practical test. I know how to observe for hazards like parked cars, blind corners, residential areas, inclement weather, and ****ing idiot drivers, and temper my speed accordingly, as instructed by the rules. It should go without saying that if I cannot see a hazard, I still do not break the speed limit, because there may be some reason for the limit that is not immediately apparent to an average driver. Sure, in this thread about speeding I've been complaining about lazy, selfish people speeding. But saying that I don't break the speeding rule doesn't automatically imply that I do this at the expense of all of the other rules.

brat

PenguinJim wrote: »

Are those speed limits randomly chosen? Really? I don't see any built-up areas with the speed limit set to the National Speed Limit because it's arbitrary, or dual carriageways set to 30 because it's chosen at random. There must surely be reasons behind every speed limit beyond rolling a dice. (Some speed limits may now be out-of-date since they were set, but that's still not random)

But you're implying that the only rule that is adhered to is the speed limit. I learned how to drive, studied the Highway Code, and passed the theory and the practical test. I know how to observe for hazards like parked cars, blind corners, residential areas, inclement weather, and ****ing idiot drivers, and temper my speed accordingly, as instructed by the rules. It should go without saying that if I cannot see a hazard, I still do not break the speed limit, because there may be some reason for the limit that is not immediately apparent to an average driver. Sure, in this thread about speeding I've been complaining about lazy, selfish people speeding. But saying that I don't break the speeding rule doesn't automatically imply that I do this at the expense of all of the other rules.

When I chose the word random, I had intended to use the word arbitrary, but that would have meant using the word twice in the same sentence.

The speed limit is random or arbitrary, because it is not necessary relevant to the most appropriate maximum speed for the given circumstance. It is a proxy for a safe speed, but mustn't be assumed to be the safe speed to drive.

My concern, as I expressed already, is that, with the overemphasis of the safety credentials of a speed limit, motorists will be conditioned to believe that +30 = dangerous while <30 = safe.

The game that you describe, (Getting from A to B as quickly as you can within posted limits) is always going to instil an attitude that compromises safety. You could find yourself on a residential street that has a 30mph limit, but which shouldn't be driven through at any more than 20mph because there is the remote possibility that an as yet unseen child might do something unpredictable. Indeed 15mph may be the 'optimum safe speed' on that bit of road.
There would be an added temptation for you to compromise optimum speed, because your game introduces an alternative 'non-driving' goal, ie to get from A to B as quickly as you can.

Doing 29mph through such a residential road would (in terms of speed) be legal while 35mph on a quiet wide exit out of town would be illegal. I'm sure you know what is likely to be more dangerous. My concern is that your game would introduce other non-road safety parameters, that may seriously compromise road safety.
I'd much rather motorists drove with no alternative agenda, drove entirely to the conditions; with a healthy respect for the speed limit, but not fearful of it, or conditioned into believing it is a safe speed.

DirectDebacle

The game that you describe, (Getting from A to B as quickly as you can within
posted limits) is always going to instil an attitude that compromises safety

I don't see why. Isn't the described game also known as Advanced Driving?

matttye

DirectDebacle wrote: »

I don't see why. Isn't the described game also known as Advanced Driving?

Well no, for the reasons brat described in the post you quoted.

The fastest way to get from A to B within posted limits would be to drive at the speed limit the whole time, when sometimes the speed limit is not appropriate.

Eg I live in a cul de sac where kids are often out playing and I wouldn't dream of driving 30 here, but that's what the limit is.