Why is speeding socially acceptable?

Mercdriver

martinthebandit wrote: »

The money from fines goes to central revenue, the money from 'speed awareness courses' goes to the local county council who, coincidentally pay for speed cameras.

No the money from courses goes to the police force/safety partnership, not the council. Many limits are set by councils but there is no financial benefit for them from enforcement. Not. One. Penny.


Too many people getting their info down the pub.

Cornucopia

I don't think you will see the same level of opprobrium applied to Speeding as applies to Drink/Drug Driving.

Several reasons:-

- A lot of people speed. Presumably if they thought it was wrong, they wouldn't do it, and therefore they think it's acceptable.

- When Drunk/Drugged, drivers are clearly not in control. Speeding is a lot more nuanced than that.

- I suspect that people are resistant to an absolute speed limit i.e. a single posted number. I imagine that people think that the dangers do not drastically increase in the change from 69mph to 71mph.

I am not particularly enthusiastic about speed enforcement, certainly not in the way we do it in the UK. However, I travel regularly on the A2/M2 in Kent which is 40 miles of motorway that is largely unpoliced for reasons I do not understand. It definitely needs something.

martinthebandit

Mercdriver wrote: »

No the money from courses goes to the police force/safety partnership, not the council. Many limits are set by councils but there is no financial benefit for them from enforcement. Not. One. Penny.


Too many people getting their info down the pub.

....and the funding for the police force/safety partnership comes from........



.......the local authority and any income that a police force/safety partnership generates reduces £ for £ the funding the local authority provides the following year.

So yes the money does not go directly to the local authority, but it gets there in the end.

motorguy

consumers_revenge wrote: »

Speeding wrecks life’s. Simples.

No. It doesnt.

Inappropriate speed can wreck lives.

I could do 100MPH on an empty motorway at night and no lives would be wrecked, yet i am speeding.

55MPH in torrential rain on the same stretch of motorway during rush hour could be catastrophic though.

motorguy

Herzlos wrote: »

Almost everyone thinks that they are a better than average driver so can drive a bit faster safely. They also generally feel that speeding is a victimless crime, because they haven't had an accident yet. They've probably had a few misses due to other drivers pulling out in front of them / speeding / being reckless.

Arent the vast bulk of accidents caused by carelessness, not speeding?

motorguy

Norman_Castle wrote: »

I expect most motorists would be happy to drive faster but speed limits are set for the safety of everyone, not just motorists. Its easy to feel safe inside an air bagged safety cage contentedly ignoring the risk you are to others.
What would be the benefit of increasing speed limits? Sensibly higher speeds would make very little difference to journey times.

I think on most roads the speed limits are fine. I think on motorways they could be higher. I dont think 80MPH would be unreasonable.

I think on some roads speed limits should be lowered.

The sort of speeders i have most issue with are the "45MPH Freddys". Does 45MPH in a 60, does the same 45MPH in a 40 and then the same 45MPH in a 30. :eek:

Aylesbury_Duck

Flipping the question on its head, why is it that sticking to the stated limit is so obviously unacceptable to many drivers? Drive at bang on 30mph (satnav speed) on a road with that limit and more often than not I end up with an obviously impatient driver weaving about behind and looking to overtake. There's a temporary 30mph stretch for a mile along an otherwise 50mph road near me whilst they repair some serious junction damage. I'm regularly overtaken through there, almost daily, because I drive at 30mph as the signs dictate.

Gloomendoom

consumers_revenge wrote: »

Speeding wrecks life’s. Simples.

The DJ is a dickh@@d. Simples.

Radioland keyboard warrior.

I wouldn't be surprised if speed limits are broken a million times a day in the UK, probably more.

What proportion of those offences result in anything bad happening?

Dean000000

In other Archaic laws - no potatoes from Poland!

https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/uk-strangest-weird-laws-enforced-christopher-sargeant-sturgeon-armour-a7232586.html%3famp

Bloody polish potato’s stealing the jobs of English potatoes when the Irish potatoes were good enough anyway!

Grrrt

Carrot007

forgotmyname wrote: »

How many twisty narrow lanes are there with a national speed limit of 60mph yet many dual carriageways with a 40mph or 50mph limit?

The issue is that NSL is not what you think.


You are probably younger than me and I should be to young to know this but.


It used to mean not assessed for speed limits. Yes no maximum specified. But as cars got faster and were still not safe they introduced a maximum limit and the definition was changed. Now you know why the sign is like it is.



It could have been reverted when cars got better at safety but given the way things have gone it is probably for the best not to! Now many idiots overtake of blind corners?


Anyway regardless of the road the going speed limit can be dangerous for many reasons. However with no polive funding and such cases being hard anyway we are left to be idiots if we like.


Everybody on the road is either to cautious or too stupid. Bring on the self driving cars please.