Speeding fine- im shocked.

[jimboin]

Spoken like a true one

 

Sweet

[Maxxy]

As i said previously, climbing on the pedestal and quoting the rule book is not only pointless (as we know what the rules state) but is also boorish and avoids the wider issue that i have been trying to make that the over emphasis on 'speed' ignores the bigger issue of poor driving standards that actually are a bigger problem on our roads.

I agree with the pendants that continually repeat the phrase of "speeding is speeding and if you get caught etc etc etc"... my complaint about speed cameras are that they do nothing in the combat against poor driving and focus entirely on speed. Less cameras and more patrols would combat the bigger problem but that would mean less revenue for the authorities, hence why cameras are everywhere, patrols are not and bad driving is escalating.

If you saw the examples of poor driving that go 'unnoticed' by the authorities that i see on a daily basis, you would understand more why i hold this view of cameras and why i feel they do little to actually improve road safety.

 

I agree with you. Day in day out I have to make my way on roads hindered by poor drivers, often achieving no more than 15 mph below speed limit. I deem them to be incompetent and as dangerous, if not more so, than someone going above the speed limits, which in many cases are too low.

[spindrift]

 

Incidentally, your claim that safety cameras are proven to save lives is only supported by organizations with vested interests in their use. Many other motoring organizations disagree and the mainstream media is very much 'out' on the issue.

 

 

Name them. Cite the research.

 

 

 

Like this:

 

Typically within Hull, 20 mph zones have achieved reductions[106] in injury accidents of:

 

— Total accidents -56 per cent

 

— Killed & seriously injured accidents -90 per cent

 

— Accidents involving child casualties -64 per cent

 

— All pedestrian accidents -54 per cent

 

— Child pedestrian accidents -74 per cent.

 

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200102/cmselect/cmtlgr/557/557ap80.htm

[spindrift]

I agree with you. Day in day out I have to make my way on roads hindered by poor drivers, often achieving no more than 15 mph below speed limit. I deem them to be incompetent and as dangerous, if not more so, than someone going above the speed limits, which in many cases are too low.

 

 

Then you are a speedophile, who is happy to increase child fatalities because you cannot be bothered to leave the house 5 minutes earlier.

 

Speeding drivers pose a significantly higher risk to children than paedophiles do. Speeding drivers kill more children than paedophiles do.

[Mr_Squirrel]

I agree with you. Day in day out I have to make my way on roads hindered by poor drivers, often achieving no more than 15 mph below speed limit. I deem them to be incompetent and as dangerous, if not more so, than someone going above the speed limits, which in many cases are too low.

 

Its an extreme example, but the driver of the car traveling at 40mph on a 60mph road is probably looking at the pretty scenery, chatting to their passenger or worse still, talking/texting on their phone and usually causing a tailback of frustrated motorists behind who often go on to take risks in order to pass.

The driver of the car traveling at 60mph (or possibly more) on the same stretch is less likely to be doing any of the above and more likely to be concentrating on their driving/road ahead, seldom creating a tailback of frustrated motorists behind who would go on to take a risk at passing.

 

Thats not to condone speeding, just to illustrate reasons why the obsession for vilifying speeders and placing 'non speeders' as somehow 'safer' is a very flawed argument.

[spindrift]

Its an extreme example, but the driver of the car traveling at 40mph on a 60mph road is probably looking at the pretty scenery, chatting to their passenger or worse still, talking/texting on their phone and usually causing a tailback of frustrated motorists behind who often go on to take risks in order to pass.

The driver of the car traveling at 60mph (or possibly more) on the same stretch is less likely to be doing any of the above and more likely to be concentrating on their driving/road ahead, seldom creating a tailback of frustrated motorists behind who would go on to take a risk at passing.

 

Thats not to condone speeding, just to illustrate reasons why the obsession for vilifying speeders and placing 'non speeders' as somehow 'safer' is a very flawed argument.

 

Unmitigated generalised hypothetical illusory speculative bum gravy from start to finish.

 

Got that evidence that safety cameras don't work yet?

[Mr_Squirrel]

Name them. Cite the research.

 

Google is your friend

 

There are plenty of reports both supporting and opposing your claim on the first 2 pages of results alone and is exactly why posting such 'Proof' is a futile waste of time.

 

For every 'supporting' report you post, i could post one opposing.. and so it would go on...

 

Ner ner na ner nerrr, my dads bigger than your dad etc.

[Mr_Squirrel]

Unmitigated generalised hypothetical illusory speculative bum gravy from start to finish.

 

Got that evidence that safety cameras don't work yet?

 

Quoting Stephen Fry in your remarks does not make your case any stronger... In fact, it makes you look a bit silly.

 

First report off page 1 of the results of 68,100 results found.

 

http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camera-news-article.php?id=98

 

 

Now, do what i expect you to do and dismiss anything i post as something along the line of "Unmitigated generalised hypothetical illusory speculative bum gravy from start to finish." and claim that your report is unequivocal.

[spindrift]

Quoting Stephen Fry in your remarks does not make your case any stronger... In fact, it makes you look a bit silly.

 

First report off page 1 of the results of 68,100 results found.

 

http://www.speedcameras.org/speed-camera-news-article.php?id=98

 

That is a perverted mistranslation of Dr Mountain's work from a pressure group.

 

I asked if you had evidence, not propaganda.

[spindrift]

Google is your friend

.

 

 

I know.

 

And I've shown you that lower speeds save lives.

 

You disagree, and have posted nothing of substance to support your view.