Speed traps

agrinnall

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

So could this website!

And does. From the Forum Rules:

All info is the opinion of posters – it’s not our view. We have an amazing forum with a huge wealth of helpful info. Yet remember it's open to all, and sometimes messages are posted that are misleading or downright wrong. Most users are helpful but there are always a few bad apples. Don't rely on information being accurate or complete. If you do, it's at your own risk. Please do your own research before acting.

deaston

poppasmurf_bewdley wrote: »

"The regulations decree that:

speed camera housings must be coloured yellow
camera housings cannot be obscured, e.g. by trees, bushes or signs
cameras must be visible from 60m away in 40mph or less zones and 100m for all other speed limit zones
signs must only be placed in areas where camera housings are located or where mobile cameras are in operation
in order to make them visible, mobile speed camera operators must wearing fluorescent clothing, and their vehicles should be marked with reflective strips
camera sites are to be reviewed at least every six months in order to ensure that cameras are adequately visible and signed."

I've never understood the rules that speed cameras need to be visible. It'd be like the police having to phone in advance to warn they're about to do a drugs bust. In my opinion, speed cameras don't catch people who speed, but people who drive without due care and attention. It's impossible to miss speed cameras if you're paying the slightest attention to the road.

I get overtaken almost daily because I do 20 in a 20, 30 in a 30 etc. Speeding has become socially acceptable and speed awareness courses are seen as a joke.

And the punishments for speeding are minor. My understanding is that points don't really have much affect on insurance prices and fines are minimal. A friend of mine got caught doing 120mph on the M6 and got off with an £800 fine - less than two days work for him. He kept his licence.

Sometimes I wonder who is the idiot - them for speeding or me for not.

BeenThroughItAll

deaston wrote: »

I've never understood the rules that speed cameras need to be visible. It'd be like the police having to phone in advance to warn they're about to do a drugs bust. In my opinion, speed cameras don't catch people who speed, but people who drive without due care and attention. It's impossible to miss speed cameras if you're paying the slightest attention to the road.

I get overtaken almost daily because I do 20 in a 20, 30 in a 30 etc. Speeding has become socially acceptable and speed awareness courses are seen as a joke.

And the punishments for speeding are minor. My understanding is that points don't really have much affect on insurance prices and fines are minimal. A friend of mine got caught doing 120mph on the M6 and got off with an £800 fine - less than two days work for him. He kept his licence.

Sometimes I wonder who is the idiot - them for speeding or me for not.

Slightly bizarrely, several of the insurers quoting for my motorcycle insurance this year actually reduced their premiums when I added my 3 point/£100 FPN conviction to the quote.

agrinnall

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

Slightly bizarrely, several of the insurers quoting for my motorcycle insurance this year actually reduced their premiums when I added my 3 point/£100 FPN conviction to the quote.

Perhaps (and this is only a guess) they think that having been caught once you will be more careful in future.

DoaM

Ironically, someone with only 3 points is probably seen as a safer driver/rider because they've had their "scare/warning".

BeenThroughItAll

DoaM wrote: »

Ironically, someone with only 3 points is probably seen as a safer driver/rider because they've had their "scare/warning".

agrinnall wrote: »

Perhaps (and this is only a guess) they think that having been caught once you will be more careful in future.

Only reason I could come up with too!


Mind you, they're right. I'm a lot more careful.

BeenThroughItAll

GothicStirling wrote: »

I live in a town near the Northumbrian coast, and its exactly on hot days like yesterday, where people seem to leave common sense at home, and accidents ensue down to carelessness. Yesterday (I work at a hospital with an A&E, we had one motorcycle fatality, and another fatality when a transit van decided to overtake on a single lane stretch of the A1, and collided with an oncoming car.

I know the roads in Whitby, they're 30 mph for a reason.

So not necessarily speeding then?


Not all motorcyclists die because they're speeding.


Not all overtaking accidents happen because of speeding.

deaston

BeenThroughItAll wrote: »

Slightly bizarrely, several of the insurers quoting for my motorcycle insurance this year actually reduced their premiums when I added my 3 point/£100 FPN conviction to the quote.

That's great for you, but not really fair for all us law-abiding citizens. That sounds like a reward/incentive for breaking the law.

Like people who use their mobile at the wheel or hog the middle lane. The chances of being caught and fined are miniscule, so why do I bother using motorway lanes correctly and waiting until I've finished my journey before sending a text?

I recently saw one of those police shows where a guy was pulled over for having an illegal plate. The voiceover informed the audience that he could receive a £5k fine and have the plate confiscated.

The driver admitted he had altered it, knew it was illegal, said he'd been stopped before and had no intention of changing it. The PC argued with him for ages and in the end let him go with the warning that she'd inform the DVLA.

So much for punishment.

ElefantEd

Personally I don't use a mobile phone when driving, don't hog the middle lane and don't speed (and obey all the other traffic laws) not because I want to avoid the miniscule prospect of a fine but because it's safer for me and everyone else. Focusing on the legal consequences rather than on the reason for the laws seems to have the whole thing backwards.

Aylesbury_Duck

ElefantEd wrote: »

Personally I don't use a mobile phone when driving, don't hog the middle lane and don't speed (and obey all the other traffic laws) not because I want to avoid the miniscule prospect of a fine but because it's safer for me and everyone else. Focusing on the legal consequences rather than on the reason for the laws seems to have the whole thing backwards.

Absolutely. Some people spend thousands ensuring they have cars with all the safety gear, a good crash safety rating and in the case of some parents, a car that is completely oversized for the school run or pop to the shops, on the misunderstanding that bigger is always safer. Then they get behind the wheel, speed, selectively ignore some signs and bits of the Highway Code, fiddle with their phones and so on. I suppose their thinking is that because they drive like tools, they need to be in the best mobile padded cell they can buy.