Farneyman
Tour Winner
With full concentration when you are driving someone elses speed can kill you with their lack of concentration if you want to get arsey about it.
Speed camera rant!!!!
- Thread starter JustOne
- Start date
With full concentration when you are driving someone elses speed can kill you with their lack of concentration if you want to get arsey about it.
User20205
Money List Winner
he's right speed doesn't kill, inappropriate speed kills, that's what they taught me on my speed awareness course:thup:
It's a tough pill to swallow but the gantry signs are there for a reason, there probably was workforce in the road earlier, but they aren't updated often enough. I'm not sure it's a defence though.
palindromicbob
Tour Winner
Maybe if you had been exceeding 83 mile per hour (as that is what you slowed down to) you might have had more time to notice the signs and react to them. Don't worry what others were doing on the road you were exceeding the national speed limit regardless of temporary speed restrictions in place.
Andy808
Tour Winner
No I just had to contest it and it automatically went to court. I also requested for the hearing to be in Cornwall as I couldn't afford to travel to the midlands for it so it was done in Liskeard.
Andy808
Tour Winner
So you actually set your cars cruise control to 'Speeding' mode?
Cruise control has no idea what speed your allowed to do it just does what you set it to do. 85 isn't really that fast anymore with modern cars and one of the reasons most motorway traffic officers want the speed limit raised to 80.
My next door neighbour got done for doing 125 on the M4 but only got a 2 week ban as the traffic officer said the average speed on the outside lane of the motorway that day was 95!
Mungoscorner
Journeyman Pro
Well said.
Ian_S
Challenge Tour Pro
Ahh, the 'speed kills' argument. The only logical conclusion to that argument is banning all cars and cutting road traffic deaths to zero, unless someone will specify an acceptable number of road deaths so that we can set speed limits in a scientific risk-based way.
For those that have seen me limping, groaning and moaning around the golf course this last 7.5yrs you probably know my views on speeding in a built up area. No one sets out to have an accident but around town speeding is just plain selfish. Get caught in town and I honestly hope you get well and truly rogered...
Farneyman
Tour Winner
No just ban speeding, not cars that would be just silly... You haven't really thought about that response.
USER1999
Grand Slam Winner
There is potential for an accident what ever the speed. The rod is right, it is inappropriate speed that kills.
The op is about speeding on an empty motorway, not about speeding in a 30 limit. Totally different circumstances.
The op is about speeding on an empty motorway, not about speeding in a 30 limit. Totally different circumstances.
Farneyman
Tour Winner
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
The basic premise of the Speed Kills argument is this..
Try driving into a brick wall at 30 mph
Then try driving into a brick wall at 80 mph.
Then try and walk away.
You probably won't.
Excess speed is the problem and it doesn't matter how good a driver you are, if you're going too fast you have less time to react to anything that could happen in front of you.
Speed limits are also set for a dry, bright day. So on your National Limit road on a nice Summer afternoon it's quite feasible to go 60. But add in a bit of rain, poor light or a dodgy road surface and you should drop your speed - most don't.
Speed limits are being dropped all over Britain for one reason - to reduce the number of those killed or seriously injured.
If you crash at 30 you will almost certainly walk away and probably not need Hospital treatment. Crash at 50+ and you'll need the attendance of Police, Ambulance and possibly Fire Brigade as well to cut you out. You will then need Hospital treatment, possibly for a few days - all of which costs the Taxpayer.
Cut the impact speeds and you cut the costs associated with it.
Speed costs........
Try driving into a brick wall at 30 mph
Then try driving into a brick wall at 80 mph.
Then try and walk away.
You probably won't.
Excess speed is the problem and it doesn't matter how good a driver you are, if you're going too fast you have less time to react to anything that could happen in front of you.
Speed limits are also set for a dry, bright day. So on your National Limit road on a nice Summer afternoon it's quite feasible to go 60. But add in a bit of rain, poor light or a dodgy road surface and you should drop your speed - most don't.
Speed limits are being dropped all over Britain for one reason - to reduce the number of those killed or seriously injured.
If you crash at 30 you will almost certainly walk away and probably not need Hospital treatment. Crash at 50+ and you'll need the attendance of Police, Ambulance and possibly Fire Brigade as well to cut you out. You will then need Hospital treatment, possibly for a few days - all of which costs the Taxpayer.
Cut the impact speeds and you cut the costs associated with it.
Speed costs........
USER1999
Grand Slam Winner
But most of these speed limits were set when the Morris minor was current. Ok, most cars now have the potential to be faster, but most also stop way quicker. Limits that were ok then are obsolete? Why? Is it because we have a lower tolerance for casualties? A quota that needs reducing for political reasons?
Limit all travel, trains, airplanes, cars, motor bikes, cycles, invalid buggies, etc to walking pace, and you'll still get casualties. What is acceptable? None? Not going to happen. 100? 1000? 100000? 1000000? Who sets these targets?
Ok, all deaths are sad. But we live in 2013, we need to get places. Empty motorways should be more forgiving, in terms of risk, than 20 mph limits out side schools, where the vulnerable are likely to be.
Oh, and driving into a wall only affects the driver (and any occupants), you reap what you sow.
Limit all travel, trains, airplanes, cars, motor bikes, cycles, invalid buggies, etc to walking pace, and you'll still get casualties. What is acceptable? None? Not going to happen. 100? 1000? 100000? 1000000? Who sets these targets?
Ok, all deaths are sad. But we live in 2013, we need to get places. Empty motorways should be more forgiving, in terms of risk, than 20 mph limits out side schools, where the vulnerable are likely to be.
Oh, and driving into a wall only affects the driver (and any occupants), you reap what you sow.
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Oy, Mr Thinks-he-knows-it-all........I know it can do 145mph as I've been in it when it has been...
It looks a little like this.....
[video=youtube;t4vs2LyT0kE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t4vs2LyT0kE[/video]
Nowadays I prefer a car with a calendar for a speedo (43yrs old with 2 young kids).
Farneyman
Tour Winner
To read how people are trying to justify speeding is quite interesting. What other laws are you happy to break that can endanger other innocent people or do you just break laws on the golf course when no one is around too?
B
birdieman
Guest
Speed limits were set in and before the age of Allegros, Anglias, Marinas and such like. Vehicle technology has moved on miles and whilst I fully agree with the limits in built up areas I think motorway limits should be higher.
WRT speed they have shown that on the autobahn accident rates in speed controlled areas are the same as in uncontrolled speed areas so that would suggest its volume of traffic that creates the risk.
We know the limits and we take our chances but for me doing 85 on an empty motorway in dry conditions should not be subject to prosecution. With modern technology you'd think they could create variable maximum speeds according to time of day and volume of traffic.
I have a naff 1600 diesel so staying to the speed limit is quite easy but I think speed cameras are often in ridiculous spots i.e. the only overtaking straight in miles of turns. They are there for revenue collection and nothing more.
WRT speed they have shown that on the autobahn accident rates in speed controlled areas are the same as in uncontrolled speed areas so that would suggest its volume of traffic that creates the risk.
We know the limits and we take our chances but for me doing 85 on an empty motorway in dry conditions should not be subject to prosecution. With modern technology you'd think they could create variable maximum speeds according to time of day and volume of traffic.
I have a naff 1600 diesel so staying to the speed limit is quite easy but I think speed cameras are often in ridiculous spots i.e. the only overtaking straight in miles of turns. They are there for revenue collection and nothing more.
JustOne
Ryder Cup Winner
Exactly, and the manner in which it's applied (ie, speed TRAP) rather than blanket coverage.
I'm all for making the speed limit on motorways 50mph.... and enforce it..... for EVERYONE.
Andy
Tour Winner
145mph measured by what?
Imurg
The Grinder Of Pars (Semi Crocked)
Just like Speed Bumps - if everyone drove properly cameras wouldn't be needed.
Farneyman
Tour Winner
Now that's just another silly idea.
The current limit is fine. You just need to stick to it and not cry like a girl when you get caught.
