'Hypocrisy' of speeding middle-class motorists

[Cyclone]

If speed is not the only answer then why the disproportionate focus on enforcing speed limits. It's not a straw man when all other aspects of road safety are ignored by the DoT and speed is constantly and erroneously made out to be the only problem worth addressing.

[Cyclone]

The point is that it is not an "obvious" extension. It is a totally illogical extension.

 

You, with others, claim that those arguing differently to you have a view such as "speed as the only possible way to reduce (accidents)". You are claiming that they do, because it is then easier to discredit them if you try and show them to have an unreasonable view. In reality people are not using speed as the only factor.

 

Using illogical extensions such as "a zero speed limit" or "reducing speed is the only way..." is disingenuous, and does your argument no good at all.

 

If you don't believe that speed is the only problem, then extend your logical thought a little bit more and address why some arbitrary limits set 50+ years ago are sacrosanct and cannot be questioned?

[DT Ralge]

It's the obvious extension of any argument that argues for a target of zero casualties and tries to link that with speed as the only possible way to reduce them.

If we were all stationary, cars wouldn't kill anyone.

 

Sweden has a zero target, the UK has not been as bold.

Neither country focuses on speed alone.

Can we break new ground here and agree on something?

- there are those who suggest the authorities do nothing other than try to stop us speeding

- there are those who suggest speeding is the root of all evil and that anyone who does is bound to end up a child-killer.

Neither is right.

Can we agree?

If so, can we also agree that a zero target is a worthy but probably unachievable aim and it is definitely not achievable if speed is seen as the only or chief factor.

Otherwise, Volvos designed NEVER to break a speed limit would be on the road right now.

[spindrift]

If speed is not the only answer then why the disproportionate focus on enforcing speed limits. It's not a straw man when all other aspects of road safety are ignored by the DoT and speed is constantly and erroneously made out to be the only problem worth addressing.

 

Really?

 

All other aspects are ignored are they?

 

Only speed is concentrated on?

 

People are never nicked for drunk driving, driving on a mobile , without a seatbelt, without insurance, adverts never target driving whilst tired, adverts never alert drivers to motorbikes on the roads?

 

 

Don't pretend you're not posting silly straw men arguments like

 

 

NEXT THEY'LL BRING BACK THE MAN WITH THE RED FLAG LOL!!!!!11111ELEVEN

[Gordonb]

I have just read all 20 pages of this thread and my head hurts. To the original point of the thread the policewoman is probably telling the truth. The chances are there are more "Middle class drivers" being caught and moaning about it. If you have travelled on the A14 and A1 in the county as I have done most days for many years most of those drivers in their Mercs, BMW's and Audis (to name a few) probably feel agrieved that the lorry drivers don't seem to get pulled for breaking the speed limit whereas car drivers seem to be pulled non stop even for slightly exceeding the limit. This is amply demonstrated by the 14 miles of average speed limit cameras that will trigger if a car goes over 70 but not if a lorry breaks its speed limit. Also most of the mobile cameras start work after the rush hour so maybe fewer "Working class" people get caught

[DT Ralge]

I have just read all 20 pages of this thread and my head hurts. To the original point of the thread the policewoman is probably telling the truth. The chances are there are more "Middle class drivers" being caught and moaning about it. If you have travelled on the A14 and A1 in the county as I have done most days for many years most of those drivers in their Mercs, BMW's and Audis (to name a few) probably feel agrieved that the lorry drivers don't seem to get pulled for breaking the speed limit whereas car drivers seem to be pulled non stop even for slightly exceeding the limit. This is amply demonstrated by the 14 miles of average speed limit cameras that will trigger if a car goes over 70 but not if a lorry breaks its speed limit. Also most of the mobile cameras start work after the rush hour so maybe fewer "Working class" people get caught

 

I meant to post a while ago on the actual OP.

I think she meant "mainstream" rather than "middle class" and I'd agree with her if that's what she meant.

[DT Ralge]

If speed is not the only answer then why the disproportionate focus on enforcing speed limits. It's not a straw man when all other aspects of road safety are ignored by the DoT and speed is constantly and erroneously made out to be the only problem worth addressing.

 

It truly infuriates me when it is suggested by anyone that speed is the one and only factor concentrated on by the authorities.

Drivers must be driving around with their eyes shut if they believe that. (minds closed too, perhaps - it wasn't so long ago that we had a debate about the merits or otherwise, of the battleship grey boards at Bowshaw r/bout. Nothing at all to do with drivers breaking the speed limit.

Tabloid journalism in both printed and broadcast media add to it by sinking to the lowest common, populist level. And people believe it because the authorities are simply crap at getting across the whole story.

And it starts and finishes at the DfT.

If you are of a certain age you will remember Jim Hacker at the DfT finding out that NOTHING ever gets done there and that ministers move on without ever having bottomed anything?

Fiction mirroring real life again.

[DT Ralge]

If you don't believe that speed is the only problem, then extend your logical thought a little bit more and address why some arbitrary limits set 50+ years ago are sacrosanct and cannot be questioned?

 

Maybe the admittedly arbitrary limits set all those years ago were set too high?

Loads of countries copied us in setting theirs and I don't see them changing their limits in a hurry.

The reason for that is really easy to understand. Life and driving will never be perfect. The crashes that happen tomorrow at whatever given impact speed would in all probability have poorer, more expensive outcomes than the same crashes today if the limit is increased overnight.

Speed itself does not necessarily make a crash more likely but higher speeds can mean higher impact speeds which are more costly to our society. So an increase in limits is not on the cards - but you know that.

[Xt500]

According to a poll released last week by the Liverpool Victoria Insurance Company, UK motorists drive more erratically in the presence of speed cameras. The firm, which insures 3.8 million in England and Wales, commissioned ICM Research to survey how the driving public responds when automated ticketing machines are present. The firm concluded that, since 2001, photo enforcement may have contributed to thousands of accidents that would not have otherwise occurred.

 

The survey showed that 81 percent of drivers take their eyes off the road to watch the speedometer as soon as a camera comes into view. Another five percent admitted to slamming on the brakes when approaching a camera. Nearly a third, 31 percent, said they have witnessed an accident or near accident first-hand as a result of a driver's reaction to the presence of a camera.

 

http://thenewspaper.com/news/32/3229.asp

[mj.scuba]

Been away to the South West for a few days. On average I'd say I did approx 80mph most of the journey there and back. Both journeys were incident free, left plenty of space between my car and those in front, used the lanes correctly (unlike some of the slower cars I passed which were displaying incorrect use of the lanes), moved across for merging traffic, and slowed down where necessary. All in all, fairly non-descript journeys, that impacted not one bit on any other road user despite technically being in breach of the law. There was plenty of other traffic going much faster, as long as they're not tailgating me, they don't bother me.

 

Just a couple of weeks back, I barely did 50mph on the way back from The Lakes because of heavy rain, it's all down to making a sensible judgement to the conditions at the time. Bad drivers suffer the consequesnces of their bad driving, as others may suffer it too. Educating those bad drivers makes more sense than restricting good drivers.

 

Going back to the theme of the OP, I'll gladly critiscise chavs breaking peoples windows and setting fire to property, folk being beaten up just going to their local shop etc. Does that make me a hypocrit? I don't think so, because those things cause a real impact, whereas my 80mph didn't.

 

Basically, these top brass coppers have had free reign to witch hunt motorists for over a decade, now the transport minister has pledged to end the war on motorists, they are having to conceed some of that power, and they don't like it, simple.