S0 - More or less points for speeding...
Posted by: andy c on 24 January 2004
I was watching the news with interest when they were talking about the speeding debate. What the govnt are considering is 2 points instead of three for speeding dependant on time of day etc.
The fors and againsts comments were interesting, one was saying speeding kills and the points should stay as they are, the other was saying that the research into collision hotspots is inconclusive.
I personally think that the points should remain as they are, and if 4 strikes aren't enough (4 x 3=12 therefore ban) to get you to slow down...
so, what d'yall think?
The fors and againsts comments were interesting, one was saying speeding kills and the points should stay as they are, the other was saying that the research into collision hotspots is inconclusive.
I personally think that the points should remain as they are, and if 4 strikes aren't enough (4 x 3=12 therefore ban) to get you to slow down...
so, what d'yall think?
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by MarkEJ
quote:
Originally posted by MichaelC:
A point to contemplate - what is the cause of an accident? Is it bad/dangerous/poor driving or speed?
First, define an "accident" -- I take it as an occurence of some sort of impact.
If that is the case, then "bad/dangerous/poor driving" if executed slowly by all parties involved, is surely less likely to result in an impact as everyone has time to stop and/or steer.
If just one party is going too fast to do this, a "near one" turns into an impact.
Thus (IMHO) it is the element of speed which turns an admittedly imperfect situation into a potentially lethal one.
This is not of course to say that all blame for the above should always be layed entirely on the speeding party -- but it is his contribution of the element of speed which can turn a close-run thing into carnage.
Best;
Mark
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Steve Toy
quote:
I know this may be pedantic but I'd suggest your argument is therefore about speed limits, not about speed cameras.
The two go together; arbitrary limits are only introduced because the technology exists to enforce them. Otherwise they'd be rightfully ignored by most drivers.
Certainly in Staffordshire the new lower limits and cameras to enforce them have arrived at the same time.
Regards,
Steve.
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Rockingdoc
quote:
Originally posted by andy c:
Also, re the road angel - if you are not driving carefully enough to see the signs and the great big gatso on the side of the road, the you should not be driving at all.
.
How we'll laugh when you get your first flashes. Unless you NEVER excede the speed limits (and if you claim so, I don't believe you), a camera will get you one day. Gatsos are only one type of camera in use.
BTW I have a clean licence
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Bruce Woodhouse
Steven
I see your point but that is not quite the situation here. In North Yorks we do not have any fixed cameras but speed limits have changed a great deal, and many for the better. Small towns on A roads have much better 40/30/40 zones to slow through traffic, other urban areas have 20mph sections. We also have flashing advisory signs and better speed limits on dangerous sections of road.
Speed limits are arbitary by definition, the means of enforcemnent has certainly changed but the principle of restriction is unaltered. You just never got caught before.
Bruce
I see your point but that is not quite the situation here. In North Yorks we do not have any fixed cameras but speed limits have changed a great deal, and many for the better. Small towns on A roads have much better 40/30/40 zones to slow through traffic, other urban areas have 20mph sections. We also have flashing advisory signs and better speed limits on dangerous sections of road.
Speed limits are arbitary by definition, the means of enforcemnent has certainly changed but the principle of restriction is unaltered. You just never got caught before.
Bruce
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Steve Toy
quote:
Gatsos are only one type of camera in use.
Indeed. With the other types of camera you won't know you've been caught until the letter comes through the post. At least in the UK we don't hide cameras in bins or under mail boxes on gate posts.
With the best will in the world every law abiding driver is going to slip up at some point and there will be a camera there to witness it.
I can't wait for a rake of do-gooders to be caught out in this way.
quote:
Small towns on A roads have much better 40/30/40 zones to slow through traffic, other urban areas have 20mph sections.
These are appropriate speed limits. What I mean by arbitrary is the limit on open roads and bypasses being cut from 60 to 40 because it means that the cameras will then catch more people. By lowering the limit inappropriately the camera casts its net further.
Regards,
Steve.
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Matthew T
It does appear that the advent of the speed camera does show a correlation to the reduction in pedestrian fatalities and injures but there has been a substantial increase in motorcycle fatralities and no real change in car driver or paseenger fatalities despite the supposedly safer cars. I guess the increased congestion and use of cars results in the this increase. Would of course be interesting to see how many fatalities where caused by the LGVs!
Matthew
Traffic saftey stats
Matthew
Traffic saftey stats
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Berlin Fritz
This geezer down the boozer last night from Swinedon told me that 90% of speeding related accidents involved alcohol, obvious innit, he said knowingly !
Fritz Von Welli'llbebuggered
Piss² More Pub carpark Spies ee reckons ?
Fritz Von Welli'llbebuggered
Piss² More Pub carpark Spies ee reckons ?
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Bruce Woodhouse
I'd have no problem with a Police car sat in the pub car park breathalysing every single driver.
Seen too many people mashed in accidents.
Bruce
Seen too many people mashed in accidents.
Bruce
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Steve Toy
quote:
I'd have no problem with a Police car sat in the pub car park breathalysing every single driver.
I agree except for the driver who has ordered a taxi but has gone to his car to get his coat and his bag.
Under our daft laws he will also lose his licence.
Regards,
Steve.
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Trevor Newall
Speed cameras are ok, but I think the 70 mph speed limit on motorways is too slow. we should have it like the autobahns in Germany, but most people would have to learn how to drive properly first.
on another driving point, what are the views on there being too many cars on the road, especially mothers on the school run jamming up the roads unnecessarily? should there be restrictions put in place to control the amount of cars on our roads?
TN
on another driving point, what are the views on there being too many cars on the road, especially mothers on the school run jamming up the roads unnecessarily? should there be restrictions put in place to control the amount of cars on our roads?
TN
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by HTK
Any particular reason for singling out the school run? Do you think children should walk to school? Do you have children?
I'd use public transport if it was availavle, as quick as and cheaper than driving. However, none of these apply in my case - and I've tried all the permutations.
Cheers
Harry
I'd use public transport if it was availavle, as quick as and cheaper than driving. However, none of these apply in my case - and I've tried all the permutations.
Cheers
Harry
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Trevor Newall
Harry.
School runs cause traffic chaos everywhere. i dislike being stuck in traffic jams on a road near a school behind 40-50 cars filled with one parent and a single child all from the local area when it would be much more sensible to car share, or in some cases for the parents to walk their children to school. don't people walk anymore?
add to that the outrageous and inconsiderate attempts at parking whilst waiting for children to come out from school whilst blocking the road in the process and you have an absolute nightmare.
yes, I have two kids and I walk them to school. i realise that in your case you've tried all the permutations so I don't blame you personally. there should be more school buses available, and therefore less cars needed.
roads are such a joy to use during school holidays!
TN
School runs cause traffic chaos everywhere. i dislike being stuck in traffic jams on a road near a school behind 40-50 cars filled with one parent and a single child all from the local area when it would be much more sensible to car share, or in some cases for the parents to walk their children to school. don't people walk anymore?
add to that the outrageous and inconsiderate attempts at parking whilst waiting for children to come out from school whilst blocking the road in the process and you have an absolute nightmare.
yes, I have two kids and I walk them to school. i realise that in your case you've tried all the permutations so I don't blame you personally. there should be more school buses available, and therefore less cars needed.
roads are such a joy to use during school holidays!
TN
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by HTK
quote:
Originally posted by Trevor Newall:
roads are such a joy to use during school holidays!
TN
Yeah. i always look forward to the holidays. It can knock an hour of my total round trip time.
People should share - but I woundn't confine that to the school run mob. Trouble is, people don't seem to like it. When I worked in one place and commuted every day, four of us shared a car up to London. It was amazingly cheap and convienient compared to walking, trains and tubes. And it took about 45 min less each way, even in London traffic. Nowadays I drive all over the place at all times of the day. I can't share, which makes me one of those selfish bastards with three empty seats. Sorry about that.
Cheers
Harry
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Steve Toy
Why do so many women insist on driving around in bloody great big off-road 4x4s? I suppose they are a fashion accessory like Burberry handbags.
They clog up the bottom of the road on which I live every day as there is a primary school opposite the end of the road where it joins the main road.
As for the public transport protagonists, they tend to live in big cities like London where not only is public transport readily available to go where ever they want, but traffic congestion is a real issue. In more rural areas the reverse is true.
If I lived in London I'd probably leave my car in Staffordshire.
Regards,
Steve.
They clog up the bottom of the road on which I live every day as there is a primary school opposite the end of the road where it joins the main road.
As for the public transport protagonists, they tend to live in big cities like London where not only is public transport readily available to go where ever they want, but traffic congestion is a real issue. In more rural areas the reverse is true.
If I lived in London I'd probably leave my car in Staffordshire.
Regards,
Steve.
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by HTK
I lived in SW9 and drove to work in WC1 every day. This was at the time when Ken was heading up the GLC. When he did the tube fare cut thing it became a no brainer. At times when I HAD to drive to work there was noticalby less traffic about.
I'm rural now. If I have to go from here (near Wells) to WC1, driving is the only sane option. It's an hour less than public transport and about a half to a third of the cost. Put one passenger in my car and it drops accordigly. This includes 22p a mile for wear tear and petrol, and the cost of parking at the other end. Oh yeah, and the congestion tax.
These costs are just plain bloody stupid. When you consider the mysery and discomfort of going public, it should cost less, not more. The argument that I should pay more to run my car doesn't wash. In Europe I always take trains. Fast, comfortable and cheap. Our public transport infrastructure is screwed - yet as a car driver I always seem to get the blame for this!
I didn't break your damn trains. I don't use 'em!
/rant
Sorry.
I'm rural now. If I have to go from here (near Wells) to WC1, driving is the only sane option. It's an hour less than public transport and about a half to a third of the cost. Put one passenger in my car and it drops accordigly. This includes 22p a mile for wear tear and petrol, and the cost of parking at the other end. Oh yeah, and the congestion tax.
These costs are just plain bloody stupid. When you consider the mysery and discomfort of going public, it should cost less, not more. The argument that I should pay more to run my car doesn't wash. In Europe I always take trains. Fast, comfortable and cheap. Our public transport infrastructure is screwed - yet as a car driver I always seem to get the blame for this!
I didn't break your damn trains. I don't use 'em!
/rant
Sorry.
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Tony Lockhart
Trevor,
Sorry, but in my limited experience autobahns are scary places to drive. The Germans seem to have received no warnings about the dangers of tailgating....or do they call it drafting?
Tony
Sorry, but in my limited experience autobahns are scary places to drive. The Germans seem to have received no warnings about the dangers of tailgating....or do they call it drafting?
Tony
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Trevor Newall
Tony.
Driving on Autobahns can indeed be scary but whenever I've driven on them the vast majority of drivers respect speed and judge distances accordingly. if you dilly dally too long on the fast lane and don't pull over in time to allow a faster moving car to pass, they'll go right up your arse to let you know, and rightly so!
the Germans, in general, use the fast lane for its intended purpose, and that's to overtake quickly and safely and then move over to the middle or inside lane.
here in this country the outside lane on motorways is usually hogged by trucks doing 58 mph overtaking a car in the middle lane doing 55 mph, frequently uphill, and taking two hours in the process. or idiots who think they own the outside lane and refuse to pull over for you when the inside lanes are clear just because they're doing 70mph!!
TN
Driving on Autobahns can indeed be scary but whenever I've driven on them the vast majority of drivers respect speed and judge distances accordingly. if you dilly dally too long on the fast lane and don't pull over in time to allow a faster moving car to pass, they'll go right up your arse to let you know, and rightly so!
the Germans, in general, use the fast lane for its intended purpose, and that's to overtake quickly and safely and then move over to the middle or inside lane.
here in this country the outside lane on motorways is usually hogged by trucks doing 58 mph overtaking a car in the middle lane doing 55 mph, frequently uphill, and taking two hours in the process. or idiots who think they own the outside lane and refuse to pull over for you when the inside lanes are clear just because they're doing 70mph!!
TN
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Bruce Woodhouse
quote:
In Europe I always take trains. Fast, comfortable and cheap.
Thats because they are subsidised by their respective governments. The French railway to a huge extent IIRC. You can pay for it via tax or tickets-your choice! I'm not defending our public transport but I'm not sure you can hold it against other nations for direct comparison.
Public transport in rural areas need not be irrelevant, lost of simple schemes for relatively low cost (such as the post bus). Still people do not use them. Taxis are now so cheap they have effectively become the transport of choice for those who do not drive here.
Bruce
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by HTK
Yes. Many (all?) european rail networks have a huge government subsidy behind them. Unlike here, where money goes to pay off winging shareholders who don't understand that trading in shares is another form of betting on horses, or awarding productivity bonuses to senior management because 50% of the toilets on the network flush correctly. Is tax in the UK the lowest in the EU? It's not the highest, and we pay less VAT but is it like 30-50% of what other countries pay? This is the only reason I can think of, because ticket prices here are amoung the highest I've seen anywhehe.
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by Tony Lockhart
Trevor,
Naa, I've been in the outside of the measly 2 lanes at high speed overtaking along lines of cars on the inside and suddenly WOOSH! mirror filled with Merc or whatever, 2 feet off my bumper. And it doesn't happen just the once.
That isn't good driving, never will be. And the safety record of autobahns is nothing to cheer about.
Tony
Naa, I've been in the outside of the measly 2 lanes at high speed overtaking along lines of cars on the inside and suddenly WOOSH! mirror filled with Merc or whatever, 2 feet off my bumper. And it doesn't happen just the once.
That isn't good driving, never will be. And the safety record of autobahns is nothing to cheer about.
Tony
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by andy c
posted by Steve,
Not true, the law has just changed so the prosecution have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had likleyhood of driving, as opposed to what it used to say that the defence had to prove beyond the balance of probability that he would not have any likleyhood of doing so.
posted by rockingdoc,
Quite right. funny how tho the gatso's and the like don't get everyone! If I get pinged I'll pay up. I was breaking the law and deserve the points/fine. Any I can hardly whinge about it if I know what the speed limit is, and then break it, can I?
Speed is a factor in collisions, just as alot of other area's are (distraction from within/outside the vehicle, not concentrating/following too close etc).
We have to drive within a system. There is one standard of driving legally that is applicable to all. That is referred to in the highway code. It doesn't need to mention speed camera's. The speed limit is just that, the limit. If you exceed it then provided its legally done if you get caught what really do you expect.?
Some people don't like that because of several reasons. So they exceed the limit/drive w'out due care and then when they do get caught they whinge. And its always the way they are caught that is at fault: camera's, plain police cars, cop behind a tree. and yet if the camera's are in view, people slow down... strange that...
[This message was edited by andy c on TUESDAY 27 January 2004 at 21:00.]
quote:
I agree except for the driver who has ordered a taxi but has gone to his car to get his coat and his bag.
Under our daft laws he will also lose his licence.
Not true, the law has just changed so the prosecution have to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that he had likleyhood of driving, as opposed to what it used to say that the defence had to prove beyond the balance of probability that he would not have any likleyhood of doing so.
posted by rockingdoc,
quote:
How we'll laugh when you get your first flashes. Unless you NEVER excede the speed limits (and if you claim so, I don't believe you), a camera will get you one day. Gatsos are only one type of camera in use.
Quite right. funny how tho the gatso's and the like don't get everyone! If I get pinged I'll pay up. I was breaking the law and deserve the points/fine. Any I can hardly whinge about it if I know what the speed limit is, and then break it, can I?
Speed is a factor in collisions, just as alot of other area's are (distraction from within/outside the vehicle, not concentrating/following too close etc).
We have to drive within a system. There is one standard of driving legally that is applicable to all. That is referred to in the highway code. It doesn't need to mention speed camera's. The speed limit is just that, the limit. If you exceed it then provided its legally done if you get caught what really do you expect.?
Some people don't like that because of several reasons. So they exceed the limit/drive w'out due care and then when they do get caught they whinge. And its always the way they are caught that is at fault: camera's, plain police cars, cop behind a tree. and yet if the camera's are in view, people slow down... strange that...
[This message was edited by andy c on TUESDAY 27 January 2004 at 21:00.]
Posted on: 27 January 2004 by MichaelC
quote:
Originally posted by Steven Toy:
At least in the UK we don't hide cameras in bins or under mail boxes on gate posts.
Steve.
Steve
I don't know about The Heart of England but over my way there are a number of cunningly placed (read hidden) cameras. The radar police also have a prediliction for hiding in hedges - they maybe looking for badgers?
Mike
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Berlin Fritz
Very similar to an old GDR Vopo line, been caught many a time, innit.
Fritz Von Shabbynazitrick
Fritz Von Shabbynazitrick
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by Trevor Newall
Tony.
Basically, autobahns are as safe as your experience of them.
i travel all around Europe in my particular line of work, quite often by car, and when in Germany travel on the Autobahns. I have yet to see an accident or the lengthy hold ups caused by accidents/break downs that we get on our motorways here. why are our motorways nearly always full of bloody road works and cones?
I'm not saying there are no accidents or road works on Autobahns, but in Germany they seem to be able to deal with it all so much more efficiently.
Another thing I notice is how few break downs there are on motorways compared to here. it seems the Germans must maintain their cars better, make sure they're full with petrol before setting off, or perhaps just drive better cars than we do!
The amount of times i've sat in a motorway traffic jam because some arse has ran out of petrol, or broken down on the outside lane because their car isn't roadworthy, is ridiculous. who should pay for my lost time and earnings?
If I were transport minister I'd introduce an on the spot £500 fine for anyone who falls into either of those previous categories. maybe that would teach them?
Sorry, rant over.
TN
Basically, autobahns are as safe as your experience of them.
i travel all around Europe in my particular line of work, quite often by car, and when in Germany travel on the Autobahns. I have yet to see an accident or the lengthy hold ups caused by accidents/break downs that we get on our motorways here. why are our motorways nearly always full of bloody road works and cones?
I'm not saying there are no accidents or road works on Autobahns, but in Germany they seem to be able to deal with it all so much more efficiently.
Another thing I notice is how few break downs there are on motorways compared to here. it seems the Germans must maintain their cars better, make sure they're full with petrol before setting off, or perhaps just drive better cars than we do!
The amount of times i've sat in a motorway traffic jam because some arse has ran out of petrol, or broken down on the outside lane because their car isn't roadworthy, is ridiculous. who should pay for my lost time and earnings?
If I were transport minister I'd introduce an on the spot £500 fine for anyone who falls into either of those previous categories. maybe that would teach them?
Sorry, rant over.
TN
Posted on: 28 January 2004 by HTK
Good rant Trevor