Why Do People Hate Stealth Speed Cameras?

wiltsguy_2

Strider590 wrote: »

OR in situations where drivers are deliberately blocking/abusing motorcyclists for the "crime" of filtering.

i get this on a daily basis, when it is to a point where i have to swerve or feel like my it was dangerous out of spite i pull over and confront the driver and inform them of their errors! normally i get an apology but sometimes the cocky ones chirp up with comments such as 'why should i sit in traffic and you don't' ???

Iceweasel

My gripe is that these stealth cameras seem to ignore speeding tractors.

Even at the new increased speed limit of 25mph a tractor and trailer can be relatively easily overtaken when the opportunity arises.

However many tractor drivers have the misguided idea that they should go faster in order to avoid holding other traffic up so much.

The contrary is true - a tractor and trailer at around 40mph needs a much longer clear space for a safe overtaking manoeuvre.

This would seem to be an overlooked problem on 60mph limit rural roads, where we can encounter agricultural tractors being used as haulage vehicles towing ex-HGV style trailers.

Having attended a public meeting regarding the high accident rate on the A947 in NE Scotland I know that many/most farmers think this way. They were apparently genuinely surprised that many of us at the meeting wanted them to drive slower so as to be easier overtaken.

This is a huge can of worms which is going to become worse as agricultural rules fall into line with EU permissions/requirements regards MOTs, speed limits, tachographs and inappropriate use of 'red diesel' for tractor 'haulage'.

Imagine coming up behind a 31 tonne combination of a farm tractor and high loaded trailer doing 40mph when it should be 25mph.

Car_54

oscarward wrote: »

I've been driving for 45 years now and suggest it would be helpful if people were forced to undertake refresher courses to cover what had changed since taking the test/last refresher day. e.g. every 10 years?

I agree about refreshers to cover what's changed, but so far as speed is concerned nothing has.

You see the signs, or the street lights, and obey. Simple.

Strider590

Car_54 wrote: »

I agree about refreshers to cover what's changed, but so far as speed is concerned nothing has.

You see the signs, or the street lights, and obey. Simple.

The difference is educating people to stop them speeding, versus profiting from their naivety.

Who is really at fault, if people genuinely believe that their "my way code", is the way everyone should drive?
Who's letting them believe this?

The govt should be educating, not praying on the intellectually challenged.

If more people knew what this:



Means, we'd half traffic congestion and driver frustration over night.

I read an article some years back, where 60% of people questioned in a survey, didn't know what that sign actually meant..... It's NO WONDER people don't drive to the speed limits!!!

They drive around at 40mph in 30 zones, because they feel 30 is too slow, then when they reach a 60 zone, they don't know what the p1ssing sign means, so they carry on at 40!!!!! :mad:
9 times in 10, if it's a 50 limit, they'll do 50.........

wiltsguy_2

how many of us would actually pass? I have been driving cars and motorcycles for 26 years, currently teaching my 17yr old daughter to drive and I took the online practice theory test-FAILED, not by a lot but failed.

Give it a go, it opened my eyes

Herzlos

Iceweasel wrote: »

My gripe is that these stealth cameras seem to ignore speeding tractors.

Or anything else with a non-standard limit (trailers, vans, HGV), or anything that's dangerously loaded, or badly driven, no tax, mot, insurance or otherwise dangerous, that a traffic officer would spot and deal with.

I think part of the resentment is that it's a serious penalty for going over an arbitrary number on an inaccurate gauge, that has very little to do with safety.

Weyoun

Strider590 wrote: »

That's just the excuse that incompetent drivers use to justify their lack of skill, confidence and awareness.

I offered no excuse. I simply implied that a frustrated driver, sufficiently desperate to get past someone (s)he considers too slow is more liable to cause an accident by way of overtaking dangerously while a slower driver is more likely to be able to take evasive action given his/her lower speed.

Strider590 wrote: »

Often what they do is they deliberately create a situation where they cause another driver to act or behave badly, or create a situation where they try to make you feel as though you did something wrong, because this makes them feel morally superior and distracts from their obvious lack of driving skill.

...

These are "passive-aggressive" drivers, people who drive about looking to cause trouble, looking to wind people up, so they can claim a moral victory over their victim before he/she drives off in a fit of rage and ploughs through a bus stop full of school children.

You're conflating slower drivers with, as you call them, "passive-aggressive" drivers. The two are not necessarily the same.

motorguy wrote: »

They can be. People should aim to keep up with the flow of traffic and not slow other traffic down unnecessarily.

Different classes of vehicle have different speed limits on the same roads. Are you suggesting that lorries break their speed limits to keep up with cars so as to avoid being dangerous by way of causing frustration?

wiltsguy wrote: »

not at all, when you are commuting to work and you are in a long line of traffic behind a car pottering along at 35mph in a 50 or 60 mph zone it causes frustration, people want to get to their destination.

I don't dispute that. But when one of these frustrated drivers can't take it anymore and performs a dangerous overtake resulting in him/her smashing into an oncoming vehicle, it's not really on for him/her to point at the slow driver and say "(s)he made me do it". If your temperament is such that you'd overtake dangerously just because you're frustrated, I'd be inclined to believe that you're delusional about your own skill and ability.

dunroving

wiltsguy wrote: »

how many of us would actually pass? I have been driving cars and motorcycles for 26 years, currently teaching my 17yr old daughter to drive and I took the online practice theory test-FAILED, not by a lot but failed.

Give it a go, it opened my eyes

I passed (just!), not bad after 35 years (including 20 years driving in other countries with different rules).

I'm not too worried about the ones I failed - I can't remember if the lollipop lady puts her hand out first or waves the stick first - all I know is that I stop when she waves something in front of me. I also never drive with a trailer but if I did, I'd check the speed restrictions first. And I mis-read another one (national speed limit *with a trailer* - missed the "with a trailer" part).

robbies_gal

my driving instructor told me 7 years ago when i took lessons that he hates mummy or daddy teaching their kids to drive-he said os much has change din fourty years that theyre were teaching them wrong and giving them bad habits

wiltsguy_2

robbies_gal wrote: »

my driving instructor told me 7 years ago when i took lessons that he hates mummy or daddy teaching their kids to drive-he said os much has change din fourty years that theyre were teaching them wrong and giving them bad habits

Yeah i bet most driving instructors hate it, loses them £25 per hour!