Speeding on the M1 in England:

Better keep it going then, this letter to The Courier was very good indeed:

Police speeding—not guilty decision a travesty


Sir,—As a result of the judicial decision that a police officer was not guilty of dangerous driving or speeding whilst driving at 159 mph, whilst NOT in the execution of his duty, can the justice system or the police forces of this country retain any form of credibility or respect, when most motorists feel they are treated as a soft target for collecting revenue with regard to speeding?

Police officers attend colleges such as Tulliallan specifically to learn how to drive ANY capable car competently and to find someone NOT GUILTY for this offence is a travesty, regardless of the excuses given by the judge or that officer’s chief constable. Shame on them!

And if they have any doubts why they receive so little support or respect from the public at large in the pursuit of their motoring duties, then they only have to consider occasions such as this and all their questions will be answered.

Gordon W. Dunsmuir.
20 Bankton Park,
Kingskettle.

I hear 'Happy Slapping' will soon be a Degree Course at the main Chav Unis, as well as part of basic police training, a subject of which I've mentioned often on here afore, innit.



Fritz Von If you show me your mobile, I'll show you mine

Fritz,
U is a wind up merchant par excellence, innit!

andy c!

quote:

Originally posted by andy c:
Fritz,
U is a wind up merchant par excellence, innit!

andy c!

Thanken you JOhn, and have a nice weekend, and dinnee forget t' CLUNK CLICK EVERY TRIP

FRITZ

ROFL


andy c!

Ps I have seen what not wearing a seatbelt does to a rear seat passenger in a crash when the car was doing 'only' 20 mph!

Airport metal detectors are now being set off, if you get my drift...!

Andy,

I believe in strict enforcement of seatbelt laws.

As a taxi driver if I'm carrying children under 14, I insist that seatbelts are worn as a issue of the journey actually commencing, i.e: no seatbelt for your child = no journey.

For adults I simply advise them that wearing a seatbelt would be a good idea.

Thus as a driver I am in compliance with the law on this issue.

However, in the event of a driver being prosecuted for a child passenger not wearing a seatbelt, I believe the parent or guardian in the car with the child should also be prosecuted.

This would make my job a lot easier in some instances.

I do agree that the driver should still be responsible though.

quote:

Ps I have seen what not wearing a seatbelt does to a rear seat passenger in a crash when the car was doing 'only' 20 mph!

It's not just the damage they do to themselves, if they happen to be sat behind the driver when they're hurled forward, it's also the damage to the driver. I always insist any passenger in my car wear a seatbelt... otherwise they don't get in.

Regards
Clive

What this speed argument needs is for some realistic idea of what speed actually means.

60 or 70mph on a speedo is meaningless. So it would take you an hour to do 60 miles? What does that mean in real terms? Bugger all really. The human mind has little concept of anything much beyond a few hundred yards at best. You can't even imagine the entire length of the road between your house and the town centre or the next village.

What if your speedo was calibrated in free fall height instead of mph?

Would you let your child stand up in the back seat on the motorway to make faces at the following cars if your speedo read:

Child free falls from 138feet onto its bare head into the windscreen? Owch!

And you were only crawling along at 60mph on your usual speedo!

You're driving a bit slowly for a motorway aren't you?

Bloody slowcoaches!!

Nime,

The reality is that transport kills.

The only truly safe mode of transport is walking.

With a 3mph speed limit.

quote:

Originally posted by Nime:
What this speed argument needs is for some realistic idea of what speed actually means.

FUN.

quote:

Originally posted by GrizzlyHippo:

FUN.

Well yes..... but are you feeling lucky?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Toy:
Nime,

The reality is that transport kills.

The only truly safe mode of transport is walking.

With a 3mph speed limit.

Nope! Herman Bull, one of the finest climbers who ever lived, tripped while walking on an easy path and was killed when he struck his head on a rock.

quote:

Originally posted by Nime:
Herman Bull, one of the finest climbers who ever lived, tripped while walking on an easy path and was killed when he struck his head on a rock.

proof that it should be compulsory to wear a helmet while walking!

or maybe:

dang fool, if only he'd given some consideration to how fast he was travelling. Didn't he realise that at 3mph he just wouldn't have enough time to react to that obstacle in his path?

Maybe he was speeding ?

Just watched "The Rookie" with Charlie Sheen and Clint for the first time, now there's some serious Police driving with the red lights on, Wotta Great Müwie/filum even, innit.



Fritz Von I wonder if watching that is part of police Class A driving school ?

quote:

Originally posted by John Sheridan:

quote:

Originally posted by Nime:
Herman Bull, one of the finest climbers who ever lived, tripped while walking on an easy path and was killed when he struck his head on a rock.

proof that it should be compulsory to wear a helmet while walking!

or maybe:

dang fool, if only he'd given some consideration to how fast he was travelling. Didn't he realise that at 3mph he just wouldn't have enough time to react to that obstacle in his path?

Sounds rather like Viz to me !!!

Ha bloody ha big time:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005230510,00.html

quote:

She said the only traffic calming method found to have a significant impact on fatal and serious accidents on urban roads was speed humps.

Well there you go... but this did not take into account non-injury crashes tho - this is relevant becasue for every crash where there is an injury or fatality, there is one where it's damage only.

Notwithstanding that its still down to cost - it costs a lot to employ a traffic cop, and is the public prepaired to pay for this, or would they just sooner keep paying higher and higher car insurance.

Swings and roundabouts so to speak...

Still, even this won't get rid of speed camera's...

andy c!

quote:

Originally posted by Martin D:
Ha bloody ha big time:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005230510,00.html

So finally, the truth is out and there's no denying it! Martin reads The Sun online.
It's odd though, I don't remember seeing anything about speed cameras on that link?

quote:

Originally posted by Martin D:
Ha bloody ha big time:
http://www.thesun.co.uk/article/0,,2-2005230510,00.html

Well there we have it - speed cameras do not reduce serious or fatal accidents.

Maybe Mick and his masonic friends in blue will now accept this fact instead of trotting out the standard police line that the cameras are "working well".

Matt.

A long time ago in the 'M4' thread I posted a link to a British Medical Journal review of the evidence for speed cameras. Accumulated research, of varying methodological quality, appears to suggest a positive effect. This I feel has more validity than a single report in the Sun.

The 'fact' is that we do not know for certain because cameras have been introduced first, and the research was not built in (in either this or other countries).

Stop repeating that 'cameras don't work'. It is at best unproven, at worst it is wrong.

Bruce

But we must also -

Stop repeating that 'cameras DO work'. 'It is at best unproven, at worst it is wrong'.

In most of the places where cameras have been installed, other measures such as better signage, reductions in posted limits, and better lane markings have been implemented, and could easily account for all casualty reduction.
Cameras definitely work for their main revenue generation purpose ...

Keith

I've just witnessed a teenage lad flying out of my local supermarket doing a Carl Lewis hugging onto some freshly nicked fags. He was well lucky he didn't crash into anybody when leaving, some staff gave chase, who'd shouted and obviously scared the wits out of the little sod, but he was well speedin, lucky he didn't bump into the Chief or myself, as I fear we'd give instant braking a new meaning, innit

KJ

I've no problem with any of that. I did not say that 'they do work' anywhere. One reason that makes the research so hard to perform is isolating the effect of one part of the intervention.

Perhaps the revenue generated is paying for the better signage etc etc. Actually, that is far too good an idea to be true!

Bruce

The presence of cameras often prevents me from speeding. I have a clean licence. So, they do work.