Bikers and speed limit enforcement

Whilst some cameras face the oncoming traffic, others point the other way and so would catch the rear numberplate of a bile. Not an answer to the question, but when I had a (motor)bike I failed to register the fact that speed cameras facing from the front wouldn't identify me (and for clarification, whether on bike or in car I only significantly exceed the speed limit where it is above 40mph and clearly safe to do so).

As an aside, I think the speed cameras facing the oncoming traffic are potential serious hazards to a speeding driver or rider - even the ones not speeding - because if they glance at the camera just as it flashes they could be momentarily blinded.

Do modern cameras still flash? Surely not in the daytime anyway?

Officer at the weekend just had handheld gun. Not clear to me what he'd do if you were speeding; hop on his bike and give chase? Does it record video?

Bruce

Yes they do flash in daylight, or at least some do as I have seen them do so (not triggered by me!). Hazard to motorists is of course much greater at night with pupils more dilated.

Handheld speed gun will tell the officer the bike is speeding, and s/he can turn and observe or possibly photograph the rear numberplate -I'm not sure whether the handheld speed guns include numberplate recognition anyway, but if they do the officer can point at the bike speeding away to 'get' it, and it might give a speed thay way as well. So that is ulikely to fail to identify a rider, unlike the fixed camera facing oncoming traffic which simply won't (other than by manual scrutiny of the photograph and seeking to identify by description, which is likely to be pointless unless the bike and clothing are very distinctive).   

When tackling motor cycle speeding problems,  the norm is to have a marked pursuit vehicle parked up a suitable distance down the road. If the bike fails to stop, the police vehicle can follow (not 'chase') and record video from the rear, capturing index plate details for use in rider I/d and summons issuing.

I don't think the police will bother to give chase unless they think the more serious offence of 'dangerous driving' applies. If you're only speeding, they just fine you.

I guess my point is I think I have reasonable expectation of being caught if I speed in my car. Does that same apply to Bikers with no front plate, microscopic rear plates and the ability to just scoot off into the distance?

I respect a well driven car/bike that is safe and not inside the speed limits all the time. This is generally  the approach of NY Police-ie they police the roads and dangerous behaviour rather than just sticking cameras everywhere. However if there were hundreds of cars racing each other in packs up and down the same country roads every weekend they would act to stop it. How do the bikers get away with it, do they feel immune?

Absolutely not all bikers, but a far higher percentage of them were driving dangerously and illegally than car users.

Bruce

PS I note some have these tiny rear plates. I did wonder if they were legal!

My daughter worked in an ambulance squad for a while. Her co-workers called motorcycles "donorcycles". I suppose Darwin is doing his bit to enforce speed limits.

Quite - i can certainly understand the appeal of 'excercising' a fast bike down a favourite road but with driving standards dropping (mobile phone distracted idiots, less traffic police, more foreign drivers on UK roads) you're asking for trouble. Leave it for the track. 

There's a reason my colleagues and I used to call them 'organ donors'.   Most bikers are law abiding, but there are quite a few who are not.

My younger brother became one of those donors. Corneas and heart valves to be precise.

Motorbikes are lethal things even when ridden safely. 

It's not just bikes that are driven recklessly by a minority. I tend to think that fewer are driven badly as their drivers know they are more vulnerable. A lot of car drivers seem to think that a speed limit is something that's vaguely advisory. There is quite a wide road near us, with a 30 mph limit, and a police officer doing speed checks told me that they regularly get cars doing 60 or 70. It's comple lunacy. 

As for the point about flashing speed cameras being a danger to motorists, well, they wouldn't flash if people weren't speeding. 

About a year ago they instituted a 60 mph speed limit for about a mile on the A35 around the Branston (south) exit to Burton-On-Trent.  This is ignored by most drivers.  Our MP wants them to extend this speed limit.  Personally I don't think it needs to be extended, just enforced.  I regularly find that as I slow down to enter the 60 limit at the correct speed, drivers who I had passed earlier immediately start to pass me.  Always makes me just a little peeved.

Drewy posted:

My younger brother became one of those donors. Corneas and heart valves to be precise.

Motorbikes are lethal things even when ridden safely. 

Sorry for your loss.  I agree that motorbikes are lethal, but to ride them irresponsibly endangers the riders and others on the road/pavement.   When I get stuck in a traffic jam (usually happens on the A14 when visiting daughter #1 in Cambridge), I always have to remind myself to watch for bikers threading their way through stationary traffic.  Not illegal on their part (AFAIK), but I wonder how many of them realise that all it takes is for a car driver to forget to watch their rearview mirror even though they (the car driver, not the biker!) may not be changing lanes.

Moorbikes are no more lethal than cars, they are simply machines. What can be lethal is misuse of them, riding beyond the rider's capability or riding wothout care for the road and other toad users. Cars are exactly the same, except the occupiers of a car have a protective cage around them that is better than the protection available to motorcyclists, so they can get away to a greater extent with their mistakes or bad behaviour or the mistakes or bad behaviour oth others on the road, than can motorcyclists.

Pity the poor push-cyclist, with very much less protection, for example confronted by a dangerously driven car going far too fast on a narrow road with blind bends (in this instance a dangerously riden motorbike is more likely to be able to miss the cyclist)

Bikers traditionally have a bit of a reputation for lawlessness, primarily historic, however there is a much greater tendency for them to ride around in groups, if only because they can't all pile into two or three vehicles, and maybe that sometimes leads to a tendency to race or show off. However, I don't know the statistics for speeding amongst motorcyclists compared to car drivers, or indeed dangerous riding/driving, which really is the question here.

I have seen many occasions that lone or pairs of M/Cs ( and cars too) are doing stupid miles an hour, racing  and driving without any thought for other road users. I would say that large groups of bikers seem to me to just go " crusin' ". 

We recently had a lad killed on the service road to the Gatwick Staff car park, 2 M/Cs were racing and a car pulled out of a car park and collected speeding bike. I can't imagine how the driver feels, but he had an expectation of no vehicle travelling at excessive MPH on this road. 

Every road user, whether driving/riding a car, bike, bus, lorry or anything else, should drive no faster than their and their vehicle's ability to react and stop or be sure of being able to avoid hazards, including what is just around the bend etc. Regardless of what the legal speed limit might be, anything faster is dangerous driving, and sometimes that can be a lower spead than the prescribed limit, especially at times of poor visibility or road adhesion (e.g water, ice etc). But whilst illegal, going faster than the prescribed speed limit, even much faster, is not of itself dangerous driving/riding per se. 

And a problem sometimes arises in the form of road rage when someone is overtaken by someone else, which of course may be the case when the someone else is speeding. This most commonly seems to be the driver of an expensive car when overtaken when he (it is usually a male driver) is overtaken by what he percieves as an inferior vehicle, and it happens when I overtake on my pushbike, even though I do it on the outside, when there is enough room, and I don't affect them, it is surprising how many times at the first opportunity a car will accererate hard to overtake me on the next open bit even if it is only 30yards, then pull straight in front of me.

The worst case was many years ago in the Lake District when there was a slow moving vehicle pulling a trailer in front of me, going between what I guess was about 20 and 30mph on a moderate downward stretch of road with nothing in front of him. After we entered a stretch with clear visibility for a good 1/4 mile ahead and he was still too slow for me I pulled out and started to overtake, probably  doing well over 40mph. As I drew alongside the car he started to speed up and then proceeded to match my speed as I was going flat out, and maintained that. In the end as we started we started to approach the next bend and a vehicle appeared going in the opposite direction I was forced to brake and drop in behind him -whereupon he slowed down. If the behaviour of drivers like these wasn't sodownright dangerous and stupid it would be funny - a driver having such an inferiority complex that he feels threatened by a push-bike overtaking him.

It's as true today as it's always been : big car, small dick. 

My contribution to this grump-fest is why so many murder-sickles have extremely noisy and illegal exhaust systems... it' not like one can't hear them coming with a OEM street legal system.

Last summer whilst i rode [or struggled?] up a steep hill on my pedal-bicycle, i was overtaken by a large capacity motorbike, probably a old V twin like a Harley, but it's exhaust so ear bleeding LOUD caused me tinnitus for next three hours. I had lots of time to read and remember his number plate but it was an obviously illegally small size and completed illegible. Even when i got home and was sat in the bubble bath my ears were still ringing....

I ride my bicycle several times a week on a portion of road with two lanes plus a bike lane running in each direction seperated by a median with trees. Walls run along the outside of the road. The road itself has gentle curves and runs for about 3 1/2 miles. Over the past few years there has probably been at least one fatal motorcycle accident per year on this stretch. All young and all on sportbikes. You can  see why when they pass you by. They're going over the speed limit and they don't know how to countersteer. Quicker than they realize they run wide and run out of road. Most of the time they slow in time but sadly every once in awhile they drift into the median or out against the wall. You read about it the next day or notice the little cross and candle memorials. It's painful to see at anytime but when they're so young! The police try but they can't be everywhere all the time.

Modern bikes are incredibly powerful (circa 200bhp) and amazingly light.  If my memory serves correctly (tales from a biker friend), the top bikes these days can exceed the national speed limit in first gear! They have at least super car performance without the constraint of physical size which probably imposes some constraint on the car drivers.  I cannot imagine how difficult it must be to ride these bikes at anything like sensible ie appropriate speeds - they are completely configured for going fast.  I suspect that's in part why so many get into such difficulty - incredible performance with a relatively tiny tyre contact footprint to enable stopping and grip when different surfaces are encountered.  Very little room for error.  I don't know what the answer is, but I doubt the police have any chance of enforcing limits.  All they can do is make themselves visible to try and remind the bikers to back off.  Perhaps they can target known hot spots on bank holiday weekends, etc.  But with dwindling resources, the probability of catching many bikers is very low.  Slightly off topic - I live and work in London and it's the motor scooters which freak me out more often than not - dem yoof dem clearly enjoy light hearted games such as russian roulette.....

Peter

Hungryhalibut posted:

It's as true today as it's always been : big car, small dick. 

Have you still got the Nissan Micra Mr Ravenous Pleuronectiforma?

naim_nymph posted:

My contribution to this grump-fest is why so many murder-sickles have extremely noisy and illegal exhaust systems... it' not like one can't hear them coming with a OEM street legal system.

Last summer whilst i rode [or struggled?] up a steep hill on my pedal-bicycle, i was overtaken by a large capacity motorbike, probably a old V twin like a Harley, but it's exhaust so ear bleeding LOUD caused me tinnitus for next three hours. I had lots of time to read and remember his number plate but it was an obviously illegally small size and completed illegible. Even when i got home and was sat in the bubble bath my ears were still ringing....

That is something I've never understood either  - though with souped-up boy-racer cars as well: If I was using the road as a race-track, the last thing I would want to do would be to draw attention to the fact of me going at high speed in case PC plod is lurking near... 

Dungassin posted:

There's a reason my colleagues and I used to call them 'organ donors'.   Most bikers are law abiding, but there are quite a few who are not.

An independant enquiry found that 80% of accidents involving motorcycles were caused by other parties. Even the goverment official figures have accidents as 50% caused by other parties. Usually a car driver failing to look before turning. Whilst I agree there are a lot of idiots with bikes driven badly, the fact remains that most motorcyclists are injured by other road users. Maybe instead of focussing primarily on the idiot minority the police forces should spend some time educating other road users to pay more attention.

It was deliberately not my intention to have a 'biker bad, car good' thread but to wonder how the Police can enforce specific routes and times when large numbers of bikes take to the roads and a fair number do break the law. They seem to me to have less tools than against car drivers, and frankly are overwhelmed by sheer numbers on these occasions.

As for fatalities and causation, I do wonder if it matters so much who is considered at fault (surely rarely a black and white decision). Am I at fault if a bike sits 6 foot from my bumper in my blind spot and is not seen when I move out to overtake? Could have happened this weekend. Luckily with the roof off I can see him and hear him. Might not have been the case. 

The fact is that bikers die or are seriously injured in disproportionate numbers on these roads. Fault or not they tend to come off badly in incidents. Anything that cuts from every angle this has to be good, with interventions on all sides of the debate.

Bruce

tonym posted:

Hungryhalibut posted:

It's as true today as it's always been : big car, small dick. 

Have you still got the Nissan Micra Mr Ravenous Pleuronectiforma?

We have a VW Up. Smaller than the Micra I believe.