Mr_Squirrel Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Not true. It applies to me, for example, and I was breaking it entirely without intention. It was more this sentence that i was referring to.. If speeding drivers know where the cameras are, they can slow down at those places and carry on speeding everywhere else That implies some degree of 'intention'.... Every time i have been caught, i too was unintentionally speeding and is why i didnt slow down for the camera or speed up again after. I have no problem with speeders (including myself) being prosecuted for it but i disagree with 'Cash Cow' cameras as they simply cannot differentiate between a clear disregard for the law plus dangerous driving and whats clearly an unintentional infringement. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 i disagree with 'Cash Cow' cameras as they simply cannot differentiate between a clear disregard for the law plus dangerous driving and whats clearly an unintentional infringement. I don't care whether you disapprove of the method used to catch criminals, whether deliberate or unintentional speeding increases danger. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Squirrel Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I don't care whether you disapprove of the method used to catch criminals, whether deliberate or unintentional speeding increases danger. Speeding does increase danger, on that you are absolutely correct. But so does driving with your eyes glued the speedometer as opposed to glued to the road. I would rather see the child that runs into the road and avoid hitting him/her rather than mitigating my actions by confirming that i was 'watching my speed'. As for you 'not caring' of my opinion..... why did you respond to it then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 But so does driving with your eyes glued the speedometer as opposed to glued to the road. I would rather see the child that runs into the road and avoid hitting him/her rather than mitigating my actions by confirming that i was 'watching my speed'. D Are we to take this as an admission that you are unable to drive whilst paying attention to the road? Obeying the speed limit is a rudimentary part of basic driving skills, why are you troubled by it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Ralge Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 my hubby received his first speeding fine yesterday..£85 and 3 points. he has the option to go on a driver awareness course which he will have to pay the same amount for but he wont get the 3 points.not sure what option he will go for..its a bit steep for a first fine for speeding.my hubby says that the police were prob hid up somewhere as they were no speed cameras in the place he was driving. on another note im really concerned myself at the amount of speed cameras,as i observed when out with my husband,im not a driver myself. I'm concerned about the number of clues as to prevailing speed limits - there's far more of these than cameras! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr_Squirrel Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Are we to take this as an admission that you are unable to drive whilst paying attention to the road? Obeying the speed limit is a rudimentary part of basic driving skills, why are you troubled by it? I think if that were the case, i would have had trouble holding down a professional driving career for the last 20 years as well as passing several vocational driving tests first time, dont you? What troubles me is the amount of outstandingly bad driving i see on a daily basis where excessive speed plays no part whatsoever, yet whenever the subject of speed is raised, the self righteous rule book wavers come crawling out of the woodwork quoting chapter and verse about 'the rules'. I have never condoned the breaking of the law but i am realistic enough to recognise that where driving is concerned, even the most proficient of drivers can inadvertently break the law on occasion. That fact aside, the 'rule book' crew still insist on harping on about how speed kills....as an example.... Speeds above 30 mean you are far more likely to kill someone, the human body cannot withstand collisions with metal boxes travelling above 30mph, people die. Too much emphasis is placed on speed rather than observation and avoidance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I have no problem with speeders (including myself) being prosecuted for it but i disagree with 'Cash Cow' cameras as they simply cannot differentiate between a clear disregard for the law plus dangerous driving and whats clearly an unintentional infringement. You've entirely missed the point. There is no differentiation. Anyone caught speeding, on any occasion, whether they did it purposefully or not, is entirely at fault and deserves to be fined. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeadingNorth Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 Too much emphasis is placed on speed rather than observation and avoidance. Observing your own speed and avoiding exceeding the limit, in fact. Precisely so; it's all about observation and avoidance. Anyone caught speeding was failing the required standard in both of those areas. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spindrift Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 I think if that were the case, i would have had trouble holding down a professional driving career for the last 20 years as well as passing several vocational driving tests first time, dont you? So, you don't actually have any evidence that speed cameras cause drivers to run children over? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DT Ralge Posted March 15, 2011 Share Posted March 15, 2011 An ill-informed and simplistic view of the authorities' activities may see an over-emphasis on speed for no good reason other than it satisfies a delicious persecution complex. - traffic calming doesn't always impact on speed, sometimes it impacts on road position, road-user segregation - red light cameras don't target speed, just inappropriate progress - ANPR activity targets tax, insurance, MOT non-compliance, theft, drugs, terrorism - drink/drug driving sample tugs targets anything but speed - seatbelt, unroadworthy vehicle tugs target anything but speed. It would be a breath of fresh air if drivers sought help here on how to avoid collisions in advance of having them rather than discuss where the mobile cameras are and how to get off the "I was only 7mph over the limit" fines/points. It would be a breath of fresh air if drivers sought help on here on concentration at the steering wheel, on observational and anticipation skills and on retaining space and time for themselves - in short, on making driving an enjoyable and highly skilled task in which speed limits are only the framework. Without broadening any of the many "driving" threads into these areas, drivers are bound to be continually shunted into the normal, simplistic, one-dimensional speed/limits/cameras cul-de-sac. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.