Cyclone Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 And of course SCC after performing a review of several roads ignored the fact that they met non of the criteria for having the limit lowered, that they were in fact several times safer than the average for that type of road, and went ahead and lowered them anyway. They also coincidentally immediately started installing average speed cameras on a 5 mile stretch of one of these roads. I don't object to cameras in principle where evidence supports their use. I object to having to drive at 50 mph on a road that is perfectly safe at 60 mph. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rodnreeluk Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 IMO it all depends on your definition of speeding. The legal limits are set arbitrallily with no regard to commom sense but full regard to maximising revenue. At one time the rule, nationally, was you didn't get fined unless you were over the limit by 10% + 2mph (so in a 30 zone you were safe upto 35mph). This was common sense and recognised the fact that your concentration should be on the road and your speed could vary, within sensible limits. Nowadays, dependant on where in the country you are, you can be nicked for going 1mph over the limit. There are 2 points to this: (1) The motorist doesn't know where he stands - there are no signs saying which rule is being applied from location to location and (2) Common sense has gone out of the window - you are deemed to be driving safely if you are watching the speedometer - surely watching the road is more important, with regular glances at the speedo, to check and correct your speed. Another lack of common sense is the way speed limits are applied to a road 24/7. A 20mph limit might be suitable on certain stretches at school times. At midnight 50mph might be safe on the same stretch of road. On motorways, at certain times of the day, 70mph is too much and you can't do it anway because of the sheer volume of traffic. In the early hours, on a virtually empty motorway, 90 to 100mph is perfectly safe. Surely, with today's technology, cameras could be programmed to reflect the time of day, volume of traffic, road conditions, etc and speed limits set and applied accordingly. The only reason I can see for this not happening is money - the motorist is treated as a cash cow by every authority with the power to do so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gym_rat Posted December 29, 2012 Share Posted December 29, 2012 Never touch a drop if im driving, never have ,never will. but there is a massive difference between drink driving and the odd very minor traffic offence ,and being harrassed by Governments and local authority`s using motorists as cash cows. As the previous poster said , as far as motorists are concerned , we have been identified as an easy target simply because they know we need to drive on a daily basis,so its the easiest thing in the world to target motorists. . Councils are no better than the private parking companies when it comes to parking . They are only interested in raising revenue, profit. Going back to speeding , if road safety was the ONLY reason for speed cameras , then the 3 points put on your license would be the only penalty,as we all know its 4 strikes and out ,and we all need our license`s ,so there is the deterrent. As soon as you add a financial penalty, IE, a fine ,it then becomes about raising revenue. I keep asking, how do you decide which laws your not going to comply with what about seatbelts, do you wear yours? ---------- Post added 29-12-2012 at 16:30 ---------- So you support the council lowering limits to well below what would be safe or reasonable on a given road and installing cameras? Not a safety camera at that point is it, it's a revenue camera. Sure it can be avoided by driving at the posted (unreasonably slow limit), but that doesn't make the behaviour of the council anymore moral or honest. Cameras don't contribute very much to road safety, particularly when used cynically by the authorities, but the justification for them is always safety. People who recognise that they are being lied to dislike this and by extension dislike the cameras. could you list your qualification for deciding a limit is too low for a given road, and that you know better than the powers that be Maybe youre able to answer the question - how do you decide which laws to break and where do you draw the line? its a simple question guys. ---------- Post added 29-12-2012 at 16:34 ---------- IMO it all depends on your definition of speeding. The legal limits are set arbitrallily with no regard to commom sense but full regard to maximising revenue. At one time the rule, nationally, was you didn't get fined unless you were over the limit by 10% + 2mph (so in a 30 zone you were safe upto 35mph). This was common sense and recognised the fact that your concentration should be on the road and your speed could vary, within sensible limits. Nowadays, dependant on where in the country you are, you can be nicked for going 1mph over the limit. There are 2 points to this: (1) The motorist doesn't know where he stands - there are no signs saying which rule is being applied from location to location and (2) Common sense has gone out of the window - you are deemed to be driving safely if you are watching the speedometer - surely watching the road is more important, with regular glances at the speedo, to check and correct your speed. Another lack of common sense is the way speed limits are applied to a road 24/7. A 20mph limit might be suitable on certain stretches at school times. At midnight 50mph might be safe on the same stretch of road. On motorways, at certain times of the day, 70mph is too much and you can't do it anway because of the sheer volume of traffic. In the early hours, on a virtually empty motorway, 90 to 100mph is perfectly safe. Surely, with today's technology, cameras could be programmed to reflect the time of day, volume of traffic, road conditions, etc and speed limits set and applied accordingly. The only reason I can see for this not happening is money - the motorist is treated as a cash cow by every authority with the power to do so. thats nice, but irrelevant. Do you consider the drink drive limit to be fluid too? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 I keep asking, how do you decide which laws your not going to comply with what about seatbelts, do you wear yours? ---------- Post added 29-12-2012 at 16:30 ---------- could you list your qualification for deciding a limit is too low for a given road, and that you know better than the powers that be For example, I read the report about the A57. It said that there was no reason or basis for lowering the speed limit. The limit has in fact been 60 mph for longer than you or I have been alive. I think that gives me a pretty strong claim to argue that 50 is lower than it should be. Perhaps you might also question how the powers that be decide on it... You don't implicitly trust every decision made by a political body do you? Perhaps you can tell me how it was safe to drive at 60mph on the A57 one day, and on the next it had somehow become unsafe? Maybe youre able to answer the question - how do you decide which laws to break and where do you draw the line? I didn't say that I speed. You're leaping to unsupported assumptions. I wonder if you drive though? Because I've never seen a driver who doesn't break the speed limit. I've seen quite a few that claimed that, but when you ride with them it turns out that they're wrong. thats nice, but irrelevant. Do you consider the drink drive limit to be fluid too? Are the two things equivalent? I don't think they are, but you're trying to draw that equivalence in the hope that it makes breaking the speed limit seem as irresponsible as drinking then driving. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Penistone999 Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 I wonder if you drive though? Because I've never seen a driver who doesn't break the speed limit. I've seen quite a few that claimed that, but when you ride with them it turns out that they're wrong. . We all do it from time to time ,and most of us , myself included admit we speed , its just a few will lie till they are blue in the face and try to claim they are perfect . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JFKvsNixon Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 We all do it from time to time ,and most of us , myself included admit we speed , its just a few will lie till they are blue in the face and try to claim they are perfect . Maybe the difference is that some will hold their hands up when they are caught speeding and admit that they were in the wrong, and others will bleat about how the speed limit was wrong, and that the only reason that they were fined was to raise revenue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 Don't speed. Debate over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gym_rat Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 I wonder if you drive though? Because I've never seen a driver who doesn't break the speed limiit. of course I drive, what a silly question you and yours always struggle with this point - speeding is not "going over the speed limit" as understood and allowed for in the highway code (IIRC) for example passing a hazard it is consistently driving at a speed higher than the posted limit - you admit to it several times every time the topic comes up. usually waffling on about how you are a safer driver on the A57 than somone not speeding. it doesn`t matter if I trust political bodies or not, a law has been passed and you deliberately break it because you know better, so again, can you share your qualifications to decide a speed limit is incorrect? ---------- Post added 30-12-2012 at 17:25 ---------- We all do it from time to time ,and most of us , myself included admit we speed , its just a few will lie till they are blue in the face and try to claim they are perfect . I dont speed neither do I claim to be perfect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 Don't speed. Debate over. If only that were true...:-( In thirty odd years of driving I've never found it difficult to keep the speed on the circle thingy in front of me lower than the circle thingy's on the side of the road. Why others seem to apparently have so much trouble is beyond me... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Prime Posted December 30, 2012 Share Posted December 30, 2012 If only that were true...:-( In thirty odd years of driving I've never found it difficult to keep the speed on the circle thingy in front of me lower than the circle thingy's on the side of the road. Why others seem to apparently have so much trouble is beyond me... I knew we'd agree on something. I've never found it difficult either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.